Hoosiers who love our forests, trails, and public lands have a range of views on the proposed expansion of the Deam Wilderness Area and creation of a National Recreation Area. We’ve been listening to these conversations because this conversation matters.

Some worry about changes to access or land use rules. Others see the expansion as a critical step toward protecting Indiana’s most valuable natural areas. At the Hoosier Environmental Council, we’ve weighed both sides—and we support the expansion. Here’s why.

Why We Support the Expansion

HEC believes expanding the Deam Wilderness and creating a National Recreation Area is an important investment in Indiana’s future. The proposal would provide:

  • Lasting protection for valuable public forests
  • Safeguards for critical wildlife habitat
  • Watershed protection for the Monroe Reservoir, which supplies drinking water to more than 150,000 Hoosiers

While management details will continue to be discussed, we believe permanently conserving these lands while maintaining recreation opportunities is essential for generations to come.

The Facts That Should Ground This Conversation

This conversation needs context. Several facts are clear:

  • Indiana has the lowest percentage of public lands of all Midwestern states. The Midwest ranks at the bottom overall among U.S. regions for protected areas. (1)
  • 71 of 92 counties in Indiana lack adequate public outdoor recreation acres. (2)
  • Hoosiers consistently support increased recreational land for activities like hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, boating, wildlife viewing, and time outdoors. (3)
  • Preserved outdoor spaces improve health and economic vitality for nearby communities. (4)
  • Because of the unique history of Indiana’s current public forest and wild lands, any preservation measures will include mixed uses and land management techniques.  Indiana does not have true “wilderness” as that word is often used; that is, an area “untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain”. (5)

These data points that should inform how we make land decisions together.

The Bigger Picture

We hear passionate arguments about wilderness expansion. Yet other land-use decisions—urban sprawl, speculative warehouses, data center construction, loss of productive farmland to subdivisions, damage to water quality from poor waste management—often generate less debate.

All development involves trade-offs. But there’s a difference we need to acknowledge: many kinds of development can be adjusted, relocated, or mitigated. Once wild land is gone, it doesn’t come back.

Once the land is gone, however, there is no debate to be had.

HEC’s Senior Policy & Legal Advisor, David Van Gilder, spoke with WFIU about the expansion proposal in this recent article: Local effort to double area of Deam Wilderness gaining steam

Sources

Wilderness Act of 1964.


Categories: Water & Wilderness Protection