WSP00813 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

lrn!5'TJ ~ VII. EVA~iliATION OF ALTERNATIVES , -, ! . A. Gonformity with the Congressional Mandate (page 44) :Oelete for the reason discussed above. D. Oelete for the reason discussed above. G. Cbnsid~r the comments received on the Draft EIS and the c: r~ents entered into the record at the ublic hearin . a d to page 47 Res.idents of the area have historically supported a wilderness; ... ~~signation. Comments received in RARE II and prior to publica~ t'on of the Draft EIS favored wilderness designation for Spruc~ Cteek. Local residents also expressed strong support for including the Spruce Creek Area as a part of the Hunter- Fry;ngpan Wilderness when it was designated by the Endangered American Wilderness Act in 1978. . of the 74 comments received on the DEIS and at the September 9, 1980, public hearing held in Glenwood Springs, Colorado, 72 . ~~pport wilderness designation for Spruce Creek. Of; the two negative comments received, one was from the Gq16rado State Division of Planning and one was from a Woody Qrieek resident. Six persons who are not Colorado residents S;upported ~ilderness designation. The timber industry was ridtrepresented at the hearing and did not submit written c'dmnlen ts . . In th:~ chart '''Alternative Evaluation Summary" on page 48,delete 1 ines:"A" and "D" and add: . 1 2 6 5 3 G. Consider the comments received on. t~e oraft EIS and the cOfuments entered into the r~tord at the public hearing. VIII. IDENTIFICATION OF THE FOREST SERVICE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE {page 48)1 o.oo~ Altern~tive 2 is the Forest Service preferred alternative for the fo 11 OWl n9 reasQns: Both the Spruce Creek Area and the Deadman Projection are s41table for wilderness designation, based upon the Wilderness Attribute Rating System, (see pages 14-15). This designation would maintain the wilderness values of naturalness, solitude, and provide unconfined recreation opportunities. It would also .. 6 I. ,."-li 1,-