My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11312
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
11000-11999
>
WSP11312
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2009 7:21:08 AM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:53:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
7630.275
Description
Wild and Scenic-Flat Tops Wilderness Area
State
CO
Date
1/1/3000
Author
USFS
Title
Flat Tops Wilderness Area-A Proposal Flat Tops Wilderness-White River and Routt National Forests-Colorado
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />additional choice hunting and fishing areas. This proposal also stipulated that. if <br />the nonconforming uses of a motor boat and a cabin by the Commission for <br />spawn-taking on Trappers Lake (Forest Service Area M) could not be continued <br />under the Wilderness regulations, the boundary should be changed to exclude <br />these uses. <br /> <br />5. Verbal and written testimony by groups and individuals who thought that only <br />the original Primitive Area, without additions, should be classified as Wilderness. <br /> <br />Of the statements by individuals, <br /> <br />28 percent favored the Forest Service proposal <br /> <br />59 percent favored the COSCC proposal <br /> <br />1 percent favored the Colorado G F&P proposal <br /> <br />12 percent favored no enlargement of the Primitive Area <br /> <br />Of the statements by groups, clubs. and associations, <br /> <br />46 percent favored the Forest Service proposal <br /> <br />42 percent favored the COSCC proposal <br /> <br />9 percent favored the Colorado GF&P proposal <br /> <br />3 percent favored no enlargement of the Primitive Area <br /> <br />All Federal Department and agency statements favored the Forest Service proposal, <br />except that the Bureau of Reclamation questioned the addition of the South Fork White <br />River, until the investigations of the need of water resources of this area for develop- <br />ment of other valuable resources are further advanced. <br /> <br />The statement of the Rio Blanco County Commissioners favors the Forest Service <br />proposal but questions the need to exclude Area 2, Dry Sweetwater and Area 3, <br />Nichols Creek, <br /> <br />The statement of Representative John D. Vanderhoof, who represents Garfield, <br />Eagle, Pitkin, and Rio Blanco Counties in the State Legislature, favored the Forest <br />Service proposal. <br /> <br />Citizen organizations favoring the Forest Service proposal included: <br /> <br />Aiken Ornithological Society of Colorado Springs <br /> <br />Burns Livestock Association <br /> <br />City of Glenwood Springs <br /> <br />Colorado Cattlemen's Association <br /> <br />Colorado Farm Bureau <br /> <br />Colorado River Water Conservation District <br /> <br />Colorado Springs Mineralogical Society <br /> <br />Glenwood Springs Chamber of Commerce <br /> <br />Glenwood Springs Kiwanis Club <br /> <br />Izaak Walton League of America, Colorado Division <br />and Front Range Chapter <br /> <br />Lions Club of Eagle <br /> <br />Moffat County Cattle Association <br /> <br />Rio Blanco Stockgrowers Association <br /> <br />Rio Blanco Woolgrowers Association <br /> <br />Routt County Stockgrowers Association <br /> <br />16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.