Round 2 of Desert Preservation Battle to Begin : Cranston Reintroduces His Proposal to Protect 7.5 Million Acres of Land

Rekindling an environmental controversy, Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) reintroduced legislation Wednesday that would protect up to 7.5 million acres in the Southern California desert as wilderness and parkland.

The proposal, which died in Congress last year, would establish three national parks east of Los Angeles and double the amount of state land set aside as wilderness, restricting access to tourists and automobiles as well as mining and development.

“It’s clear that the time has come to protect the California desert,” Cranston said. “This is legislation that will preserve one of the more unique environmental assets in our state. . . . It is long overdue.”

The areas covered by Cranston’s bill stretch across the southeastern corner of California, from Inyo County south 240 miles to the Mexican border. Most of the land is currently administered by the Bureau of Land Management and is open to mining, ranching and off-road vehicle use.

As it did last year, the legislation is expected to trigger a battle between conservationists, who believe the desert ecosystem needs protection, and a coalition of business and recreation interests who oppose restrictions on the land.

The measure may also create political friction between Cranston and the state’s other U.S. senator, Republican Pete Wilson, who did not support the bill last year. Wilson had reservations about the amount of land affected by the measure, and his refusal to back the bill was a key reason for its failure.

Cranston said he is now prepared to make significant concessions to win Wilson’s support. Although he vowed to fight for the bill, he conceded that it could be “politically difficult” to win approval if the state’s senators are not in accord.

A spokesman for Wilson said Wednesday he had not seen Cranston’s new proposal, an identical version of which will be introduced in the House by Rep. Mel Levine (D-Santa Monica). Wilson “hasn’t indicated how he’s going to approach the issue this year . . . there’s been no decision made yet,” the spokesman added.

The bill has been criticized by some residents and thousands of off-road-vehicle users who fear Cranston’s bill would reduce access to desert areas. They have organized strong opposition and have won the support of congressmen who represent parts of the area, including Reps. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands), Alfred A. McCandless (R-Bermuda Dunes) and Duncan Hunter (R-San Diego).

To win over critics, Cranston outlined several changes in the original bill. First, he said, it would specifically guarantee the military the right to continue air flights over desert areas, and would not impede the operations of facilities such as China Lake Naval Weapons Center and the Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range. Military officials had expressed concern that the original proposal could have blocked such activities.

Cranston also agreed to remove about 82,000 acres from the original proposal, bowing to concerns that it would have jeopardized access to specific utility easements, pipelines and mining claims, as well as grazing and agricultural uses.

Finally, he stressed that the measure would give off-road-vehicle users access to more than 37,000 miles of unmaintained dirt routes, plus paved and maintained dirt roads.

It is not clear whether any of this will sway Wilson. Last year, Wilson’s refusal to endorse the desert bill triggered sharp criticism from environmentalists and became an issue in his reelection campaign. Wilson, who is reportedly deciding whether to seek the governor’s office next year, can expect the same tough scrutiny again, said Debbie Sease, a Washington representative of the Sierra Club.

“This (desert bill) is a popular issue in California,” she said. “It’s going to remain very much on our front burner, and to the extent that it remains out there and he (Wilson) doesn’t take a position, it may come back to haunt him.”