Laserfiche WebLink
<br />l/;J <br /> <br />1)88129 <br /> <br />..~~~.............- <br /> <br />lI'lUU.."[)f.A.~SISGlEJ'Os.a..rm." <br />llOnUlF_Hl-!\'T.~ <br /> <br />rn-.-\....lotdUIIIIE... <br />b"""'....I.""'I"-*nIMJdGtntr.J~ <br />IIKlUIlDJMntIS <br />s.-r.....~~~..J~ <br />ru."-KlIIJ:OS.YJ>~ <br />IiWiIl1otOO~W.I1'~ m1THESSE,I1'~ <br />flUT'ZA-'1It:RS(I!'(I7'nr-.. I[[!\:CAUtol~l'P~ <br /> <br />OItUCI!lD; <br />laoororwu-..;,.. <br />hUL.C!>i'UG.V.aD <br />_.- <br />CAlCOOli. <br />......- <br /> <br />1lUUUl.lt.tIOll.'lIl' <br />-... <br /> <br />Save our wilderness <br /> <br />Irs TAKEN nearly a decade ror <br />a bill to designate new wilder- <br />ness areas in Colorado to pass <br />musler in the U.S. Senate _ a <br />frustrating wail for people who <br />believe our state's wild lands de- <br />serve special protection. So when <br />a measure to set aside new wi!- <br />dE'rness areas pasS('(! the Senate <br />lasl wl'l;'k - thanks to a compro- <br />mIse between Colorado $ens. Tim <br />Wirth and Hank Brown - conser- <br />vationists should have been ap- <br />plauding. <br />Instead, some national environ- <br />mental groups appear ready to <br />lake such a hard-line position on <br />one Darrow issue that they could <br />more effectively prevent Colora. <br />do from getting any new wilder- <br />ness designations than aU the pro- <br />development interests C<lmbined. <br />The Wirth. Brown measure <br />would set aside almost 1,000 <br />square miles of new wilderness <br />areas in Colorado, including <br />many exceptionally spectacular <br />parcels. But the genius of their <br />plan - in fact, the reason the <br />measure got through the Senate <br />al 'all - is a compromise on the <br />t'rucial water-rights question. <br />Their proposal would prevent <br />any new dams or w..ter projects <br />from be-ing constructed in thl"Se <br />pri'1tine areas. But it further safe- <br />guards their value by authorizing <br />the U.S. Forest. Service to buy wa. <br />ler rights for the areas. The Forest <br />Service will rarely have to make <br />lhese purchases, tbough, because <br />most of the proposed wilderness <br />~as are located in the extreme <br />l"Nches of Colorado's high country <br />~tho.>rearenoupstreamusers <br />to claim the water anyway. <br />The bill to S<'t aside new Colo- <br />rado wilderness lands is now in <br />the U.S. Iiouse, where it will be <br />carried by Rep. Ben Nigbthorse <br />Campbell. But because they are <br />!<i adamant that wilderness areas <br />neE-d a federal watertight. some <br />big elH'ironmental groups won't <br /><i.xept the Wirth.Bro.....n compro- <br />mise. In the HouSf', these Rroups <br />ma)' try to force nUffil'rous <br />3T1'.endml'Dls onto thl' propmal to <br /> <br />undo the agreement. Since the bill <br />won't survive in the Senate wHir <br />out the compromise. the environ- <br />mentalists themselves ma)' cause <br />the entire wilderness measure to <br />be defeated. Coloradans who be. <br />10llg to Lbese groups are furious. <br />Meantime, the proposed .....i1. <br />derness areas can't be held forev. <br />er In their Currellt limbo between <br />wild saDctuary and development. <br />In future years, Colorado could <br />~ these now-pristine parcels <br />opened to miniog, clear-cutting, <br />dam.building and all ffiaMer of <br />ofl.road vehicle driving. They <br />eventually may be so scarred by <br />human use that the)' no longer <br />qualify for wilderness designa. <br />tion. A great opportunity to pre- <br />serve wild places from humlln <br />degradation may be lost. <br />This threat is very real. For <br />one thing, there is 110 guarantee <br />that Wirtb - a liberal Democrat <br />from an increasingly conserva. <br />tive Republican state - will be <br />re-elecled next year. II a conser. <br />vative Republican wins his seat <br />in 1992, environmentalists may <br />prove as impotent in getting any <br />new wilderness legislation passed <br />in coming years as they have <br />been during the past decade. <br />Additionally, if the ('tIrrent wil. <br />derness proposal dies alter hav. <br />ing passed the Senate, the odds <br />are that no one in Colorado's Cap- <br />itol Hill delegation could move <br />the issue forward for many years. <br />Long tenn, Congress will bne <br />to settle the question of wilder. <br />oess water rights. But this is nei. <br />Iher the time nor place 10 fight <br />tbat battle. Colorado's wild lands <br />need to be protected - now. <br />The Wirth. Brown hill is a rea- <br />sonable, achievable compromise. <br />Each or Colorado's U.S. represen- <br />tati\'es ought to rail)' behind <br />Campbell's eHorts to get il ap- <br />proved by the HOUse. And envi. <br />ronmentalists in tbis state should <br />refuse to 1('1 the concerns of their <br />national organizations turn ColI}- <br />rado's irreplac('able wild lands <br />into a war tone over an irrele- <br />vant ~'atf'r'ri"ht~ <li~n"l.. <br /> <br />O'R I <br />, <br />SC I <br /> , <br />ASC , <br />, <br /> , <br />F I <br />I <br />l <br />E <br /> <br />AUG 1 9 19i11 <br /> <br />~~~'I:"""~~"~~..ftI <br />