WSPC04707 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

O:iJ8j3 Colorado Wildlife rfla..;./~ lqq\ lJ~l~ q) ~ :1 Conservation Community Opposes Senate Wilderness Bill A broad spectrum of Colorado's conservation community announced its opposition to the wilderness bill recemly introduced by SenalOf'1'i Hank Brown and Tim Winh. Environmenlal groups from across the stale maintain thai the senators' so-called compromise seriously jeopardizes the prolection of wilderness water thai nows naturally through these lands and omits sig- nificant amounts of ecologically imponam lands. "Sponsmen's groups. recreation interests. whilew.ner enthusiasts. and local, citizens concerned about the fatc of theirl local wilderness areas all have strong con- cerns about the Sena!Ors' proposal:' S;Jid Todd Robemon. Public Lands Coordinator for (he Colorado Environmenlal Coalition. "These groups do nO( -.ec the Senators' bill as a compromise Ihal we can live wilh." The Brown/Wirth bill would desig- nale M 1.000 acres of nalional foreslland as wilderness wilh an e~pre\\ed denial of fed- aa] reserve wilderness "aiel' rights. "They have nOI answered Ihe queslion of ho" Coloradan,\ "ill prole-cllhe slale's wilder, ness resource. Inslead. they"ve fabricaled a so]ulion lhal salisfies developmenl and com- modilY imeresh. pUlling Ihe \'ery mlcgnly oflhe 1"ational Wildemcss Preservalion Sys- tem al risk:' said Darrell Knuffke. Regional director of The Wilderness SocielY. "Since 19S";. when lhe "i]de-mcss water righlS lS..Ue- tlegan. Congress has passed a ,>erie,> of weSl- em wilderness Ieglslallon 111 Wa,>hll1glOn ,Iale, Sevada. Se" \te-\ico. and mosl re- cently Arizona. all mcludmg fedcra] rescne ....aler righb, Why should Colorado wilder- ness receive anything less than our western neighbors?" The !>enalOrs said thai "virtually all areas are- headwaters" where imminent threat to waleI' developmem projeCls in wilderness is non- e~islenl. Yet headwalers areas could be lhreatened if the quantily or ~ason of diversion were- to change. Funhermore.lhe senalors induded language specifically addressing Ihe Piedra Area. a downslream area northeast of Durango. The formula the senators have for prolecHilg Ihe Plcdra is for the Foresl Service to purchase- water righ'is from the ColoradoWalerConservation Bo;u:;r- (' CWCS) and have Ihem assign 110.....s for the area, .'The CW€S:sin...tre-am l10w pro- gr3m IS madequare..at best. prolectingconly fish nows. 11-,,10(:-;- nothmg for wetlands. riparian areas. scasonal now cy-des. or "'e- ~nic water falls:' said Kelly Drake. C\\;F Executi~e Director. "The re;l~un consen-'a~ .ion groups ft.'el a re-~crve waleI' ril,!.hl for . Mitigation Banking wi]demess is imponani"h because lhe Slate (ewCS) has done such an inadequale job of prolecling needed flows in the pasl;' ,If thit' appiorth prevai Is.il cou ld establish fue prece- denl for all future Colorado wikkmess pro- posals, mosl particularly those for Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands. while sel- ling a panem for wilderness designations everywhere in the west. Glenn Porzak. of the Colorado Mounuin Club. said. "The legislation omilS I a number of areas which are important [0 Colorado. The senator!> complelely leave oUlthe Spanish Peaks in Huerfano coulll)". They propose to ..eve-rely gUI me Williams Fork area which would provide much needed wi]demess access to fronl range communi- ties". Porzak wem on [0 say the bill fur. ther excludes portiom of Ihe easlem and \\est~m nank<; as wt"1I as IWO founeen thou. ,and-foot peak-. in Ihe Sangre de Crislo mounlalll range. Our efforts 10 killlhe miligation banling bill in the Slale Legislature, Senate Bill 120. were half....a~ satisfied. The House sponsor Rep. Dan Williams. a Republican from Ea~]e. Colorado. accepled an amcndmt"nt from conservationists to mal..c lhe bill a study ralh....r Ihan a slatulO!)' program. \1illgation banking b a v<;'l"~ misunderslood concepl lhat certainly needs further stud}. Cont.'eptually. mlligation banking ....auld provide a Iisl of areas that may be used 10 ll(f~el una~oidat'lle los..cs of nalural and CUll ural resources. The key word is "unavoidable." The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Ihe U.S. Environmenlal Protection Agency have agreed Ihallhe be" .....a~ to ..tem {he conllnued loss of \\eltand habilat in lhis counlry IS b~ avoiding the ]0'" altogether. If Ihe loss cannlolt be avoided then e...ery effort muSl be made 10 minimile the impacts loll' de~e]opmenL Those impat."b lhat cannot be minimized must be compensaled for in an adequale manner. Compensation can be in the form of restoralion of degraded reSlolun:es, crealion of nc.... rcsoun::e, or pre..e-rvalion of lruly unique re-.t.lurces lhat are undcr imminentthreal. The Corp' and EPA both agree thaI m!ligalion bankin~ may play a role- In compensaling for re..ourcc lo"..es. But. lhese miligaliloln banb will only be uscd on a projcct specific basil. \\ here II is clear thaI the ]o'..cs arc una""oidable. Thc besl eumplc ....ould be- a highway corridor Ihal must be .... idened 10 accommo. datc increa,ed tr.lflic nO\\. \\he-re putting in a ne.... road "ould cau,~ grealer harm Ihan .... id~ning thc c\I'ling one. In Ihi, C;be a miligallOn bank could I:'t" developed 10 compensate h'r tht' I"h' of nalUral re..ourn.'s and en,ure [hill lhi.. i.. d.lRt' rroperl~. The hill will no.... re4ulre- ,000\Cril] 'Iale- age-I1l:les In ....orl. 10 a ....uordinalcd fa,hion In t'\aluale the- ....0'" and bene-fi" of a re\llur....c mlllgalinn bankmg '~'Iem In Colorado.