Laserfiche WebLink
<br />! .'_. ~~i cr ~ ~ l ~. ~ <br /> <br />multiple use and preservation of wilderness characteristics by BLM, to one based on <br />preservation by NPS, which excludes some uses. <br /> <br />Unless specifically provided for by Congress through enabling legislation, the NPS would <br />preclude uses inconsistent with the preservation of natural and cultural resources or those <br />which would conflict with visitor use and enjoyment of the area. Based on the <br />preservation concept, uses such as grazing, hunting. mining and mineral developments, <br />wood cutting, ORY use, etc., would be eliminated. The Federal Government would be <br />required to make just or fair compensation for all mineral or grazing rights acquired. <br /> <br />Should the lands included in this alternative eventually be added to the monument and <br />Congress initiate action to change the status of the monument to that of national park, <br />there would be no difference in the manner in which the area would be managed. This <br />is also basically true with regard to NPS lands established as wilderness. The primary <br />emphasis placed on lands designated as wilderness is to preserve the resources of an <br />area in their natural condition. Lands designated as wilderness are primarily more <br />restrictive with regard to certain types of developments and uses. Appendix B provides <br />further clarification on restrictions associated with lands designated as wilderness. <br /> <br />Water Resources. The issue concerning water rights implications related to expanding <br />the monument boundary to include the Gunnison River are secondary in that the decision <br />to embrace or reject such rights rests with elected representatives who introduce the <br />enabling legislation that would address such rights (refer to Appendix C). It does not <br />appear as though this alternative would have any effect on in-place upstream water <br />developments. <br /> <br />Development Needs. Considering the primitive character and scenic values recognized <br />in the area, facility development (i.e., roads, visitor and administrative facilities) would be <br />very minimal. Considering the lands north and adjacent to the confluence of the North <br />Fork and Gunnison Rivers as an exceptionally important visitor use area, it would be <br />worthwhile to provide adequate facilities for visitor use and administration of the area, <br />Decisions, however, on the need, type, extent, and specific location of any supporting <br />visitor/administrative facilities would be addressed in a General Management <br />Plan/Development Concept Plan for the added lands. Such planning would commence <br />only after the United States Congress authorized expansion of the monument boundaries, <br />All Federal, State, and county Agencies as well as interested individuals and special <br />interest groups would be encouraged to participate fully in the preparation of such <br />planning documents, during the public meetings held to discuss these issues, <br /> <br />Interpretation. BLCA is currently isolated from those resources determined not only to <br />be nationally significant, but also a missing element in the interpretation of the geologic <br />process associated with the monument. This alternative would permit adjustments of the <br />monument boundaries to include such resources, thus affording enhanced opportunity <br />for direct interpretation of the total geologic process associated with BLCA. <br /> <br />Wilderness/Scenic River Values. Those lands recommended for wilderness as well as <br />the 13,5-mile Gunnison River Corridor recommended for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic <br /> <br />21 <br />