- 2- 
 
 
20,000 acres out of human occupancy, and still to encourage free- 
range grazing---well, I think there will be only one result: Stock 
owners will come in from the outside to graze their stock on this 
land, which certainly isn't any benefit to the people living on the 
forest lands themselves. 
           I think Blakey is right in saying that the need for free- 
range grazing is over-emphasized, but I don't think it is non- 
existent.    It is bound up with the whole social-economic structure 
of the Ozark region, and the practice will disappear only Y     as 
fast as the factors that make it necessary.    The point at issue, 
however, is that in a wilderness refuge which is uninhabited there 
is no need for it at any time. 
 
      (3) A 1700-acre recreational unit in the middle of the area. 
I don't know enough about what is proposed to comment, though I am 
suspicious of these "recreational units" and I think that a wilder-

ness with a recreational area in the middle ceases to be a wilderness. 
 
      (4) In some ways the most serious point is the alleged doubt 
of the Forest Service concerning the value of encouraging species 
that do not "readily thrive in proximity to human occupation."

Blakey spoke with much feeling about this, and if he spoke correctly 
I must say I agree with him.   If we are to let go any species that 
cannot thrive under more or less artificial conditions, where shall 
we be in the end?   That is such an insane and indefensible view that 
I find it very difficult to believe that a rational man like Mr,. Hill 
would hold it. 
     Summarizing:-  I think Blakey is right in saying that there are 
still some good-quality turkeys there; that this is about the pest 
place in Missouri where a really good wilderness-game-management 
project would be set up; that the introduction of livestock would 
be ruinous; that the area ought to be 25,000 acres if ýossible 
(though I do not regard this as the most important item); and, by 
all means, that wild turkeys are worth saving, even if they don't 
get along in proximity to human occupation. 
     I take it that Regulation T.9(I) provides for the setting apart 
of areas where vanishing species might be preserved; it must there- 
fore be an exception to the multLple-land-use policy of the Forest 
Service.   I should regard the Irish Wilderness as such an area. 
The wild turkey isn't vanishing, but it will in Missouri if present 
conditions continue; of that I en sure.    The ruffed grouse is 
another species, 0 which is vanishing in Missouri, that will be 
helped by this project.   !? the project takes in any of the Eleven- 
Points River, the otter may be added to this list; and the beaver. 
 
     If the Forest Service really threatenis to do what Blakey says 
(and you had better check this up first), by all means do what you 
can for this project through the Technical Advisory Committee of the 
Institute; let me know, also, if I can help. 
 
     With best wishes, 
                                      ""Sinctrely yours, 
                                    S~/ 
 
 
 
                                         s caterdolfBenn itt Z 
                                 Associate Professor of Zoology