BOARD02139

• Board Meeting Date: 6/21/1974
• Description: Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

Mr. Jones: When it can be.

~~. Burr, When it can be. When it. can be condemned?

!-Jr. Jones:
This means
2000.

Grazing would be permitted for the lifetime of the permitee.
that grazing from 1985 on will be limited up to the year

I

Mr. Burr: There will be nothing to prevent you from cutting down the
grazing to one-half by declaring that it is overgrazed.

~~. Jones: It would have to be surveyed.

~~. Burr: I understand it has to be surveyed, but at the same time you
can cut the grazing off if you wanted.

Mr. Jones: Not without reason.

!-Jr. Burr: Well, if we had a dry year and it was overgrazed, do you
think it is a lot easier to cut it off?

11r. Jones: That could be.

!-Jr. Burr: I understand that.

~~. Stapleton: John, do you have a question?

Mr. Fetcher: I think to eliminate some confusion which is in my mind
and maybe in the minds of others, that we should understand that the
original proposal was completely incompatible with the water interests
above the park and what changes have been made which !-Jr. Ten Eyck
referred to so that we know what the new ball game. is. In other words,
I think the Park Service should tell us how they revised their original
proposal so that we can understand what we are talking about here.
In the original proposal, as I understood it, it would practically
exclude any water developments above the park. Now apparently we missed
the revisions to this and I would like to hear exactly what they are.

I

Mr. Reid: I don't think the wilderness proposal would exclude water
development above the park. The objection was that we expressed an
opposition to water development above the park that would modify the
wilderness habitat. We have relaxed our expression of opposition. We
still don't want to see something built that will destroy the integrity
of the wilderness areas of the river. But we are willing to be reason-
able.

-14-