WSP01093 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

000551 Add 5 --- citizens of the state, and they just make more sense. congress said in the original wilderness Act only pristine areas, untrammeled by man, are appropriate to consider for wilderness. We've already created tremendous problems and the specter of endless litigation by including private inholdings in wilderness areas. We can't ignore the problem any longer, and we should avoid creating new legal nightmares wherever possible." Armstrong explained his maps of each wilderness and national recreation area to community leaders. He cited the case of Buffalo Peaks as an example of the difference between his boundaries and those of Sen. wirth. Armstrong drew his boundaries to protect Homestake, an established water supply with proposed expansions for Colorado springs, and to allow habitat management for bighorn sheep and elk which would be prohibited under wilderness designation. The Armstrong boundary also avoids conflicts created by several mining claims in an area cited by the U.S. Bureau of Mines as having high potential for leasable minerals. "In almost every proposed wilderness area, Sen. wirth has gone beyond the Forest Service and BLM recommendations, which I've largely observed," Armstrong said. In many cases, the wirth proposals exceed the outer boundaries of the study areas under consideration since the last wilderness bill in 1980. The wirth bill includes some lands previously released to multiple-use management. In the Davis Peak area, another example Armstrong cited, the wirth boundary line exceeds the study area and includes more than three times the acreage recommended by the Forest service, for the purpose of prohibiting timber harvest in the forest near the Wyoming -MORE-