Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Governor John A. Love supported in behalf of the State of Colorado Proposal <br />~ He indicated a concern for both existing and presently planned water devel- <br />opments, which might be accommodated by minor boundary adjustments. He <br />recommended minor boundary adjustments so that access roads might be pro- <br />vided on public, non-wilderness land. This would prevent private land holdings <br />from controlling and perhaps limiting access to the Wilderness. (The Governor's <br />letter is included in Appendix D.) <br /> <br />Additional reasoning given for this proposal hinged on two main points, the <br />need for protection of the wilderness ecology and wildlife. <br /> <br />A larger area is desired to accommodate additional wilderness seekers. An <br />expanded area would include lower elevation zones more capable of withstanding <br />the impact of human use because the longer growing season would permit faster <br />vegetative recovery. <br /> <br />More people-free area is needed for people-shy wildlife on summer ranges, <br />lambing and calving areas and winter range. <br /> <br />Two organizations submitted individually prepared statements in support of . <br />this Proposal. <br /> <br />Citizens Groups which generally favored Proposal #4 (124,785 acres) are <br />listed below. <br /> <br />1. Blue Valley Sportsmen Club <br />2. Metropolitan Wildlife Association. Incorporated <br /> <br />5. Proposal (#5) included the 71.785 acres of Proposal # 1 plus an unspecified acre- <br />age identified as the East Meadow Creek Drainage. This area is the southeast <br />part of the Piney River. <br /> <br />Twenty one individuals submitted individually written testimony in support of <br />this Proposal. <br /> <br />6. Proposal (#6) included the 71.785 acres of Proposal i!'l plus an unidentified acre- <br />age identified as the East Meadow Creek and the upper portion of the Piney <br />River Drainages. <br /> <br />Twelve individuals submitted individually prepared written and oral testimony <br />in favor of this Proposal. <br /> <br />7. Proposal (#7) consisted of a desire to reduce the size of the exisiting Primitive <br />Area by an unspecified acreage. <br /> <br />Two people submitted written testimony in support of Proposal #7. <br /> <br />8. Proposal (#8) consisted of a desire to retain the existing Primitive Area, of <br />62,125 acres without a change in classification. <br /> <br />., <br /> <br />26 <br />