"(We) ask you to direct the U.S. Forest Service to forego a final decision on the current rule-making underway for management of inventoried roadless areas in Colorado until the Obama administration has clarified its direction for roadless area management nationwide," a letter released Thursday stated.
Representatives of Colorado Wild, the High Country Citizens’ Alliance, Wilderness Workshop, Western Slope Environmental Resource, The Wilderness Society, Colorado Mountain Club, Western Colorado Congress and the Natural Resources Defense Council signed the letter.
 The Currant Creek roadless area, shown from the slopes of Green Mountain looking southward, with the Fruit Growers Reservoir is in the distance. Several conservation groups are worried that Currant Creek, along with other swaths of forest land, will be at risk if the proposed Colorado Rule for inventoried roadless areas goes forward. They have asked U.S. Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack to intervene. (PHOTO: COURTESY WESTERN COLORADO CONGRESS) Advertisement |
The 2001 rule was rolled back by the Bush administration in 2005 and replaced with a process that allowed states to petition for certain types of management within roadless areas, Mark Schofield of Western Colorado Congress said.
Colorado initiated such a petition, but there have since been conflicting legal rulings on the 2001 rule. According to WCC, Gov. Bill Ritter continued the rulemaking process begun by his predecessor, with modifications, citing the uncertainties of the national rule and the court rulings.
Vilsack's recent directive makes that a moot point, the WCC said. It and the other groups say the proposed Colorado Rule's protections are weaker than those afforded by the 2001 national rule.
"We have very strong concerns the current Colorado Rule, as proposed, falls well short of protections afforded in 2001 rules. These aren't just semantic differences," Colorado Wild Executive Director Ryan Bidwell said Thursday in a press teleconference.
Areas of concern include the Currant Creek Roadless Area. Special exemptions under the Colorado Rule would allow for coal mining and road construction in certain areas on the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison national forests, including Currant Creek.
"It would totally destroy that section of roadless area, which is wintering grounds for elk," Delta County outfitter Jim Bryce said Thursday.
"That's also a calving ground. With that kind of activity in there, less elk will be reproducing. It would be a bad deal all around," Bryce said.
Bryce said it would also sound the death knell for Bryce Outfitting. "It would totally destroy my business," he said.
Tony Prendergast of WCC said the public hasn't had the chance to look at the Currant Creek situation. The groups in their letter called the exception allowed under the Colorado Rule an "inappropriate artifact of the Bush administration's improper manipulation of this process."
The groups were also concerned with "gap" leases issued after the 2001 rule. They say the Colorado Rule would allow roads to be built in association with the 100 or so leases, which would impact thousands of acres.
And, though the groups supported fuels reduction for wildfire management, Bidwell said the Colorado Rule allows logging for that purpose far from where such reduction is needed.
Thomas D. wrote on Jun 15, 2009 5:29 AM:
yahoo wrote on Jun 12, 2009 11:03 AM:
Bob wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:47 AM:
Whatever "mess" is here you helped create and when you decry "special interests" involvement in the process, I hope you realize that most of us common sense westerners see radical environmentalists like yourself as the most dangerous special interest group to our way of life. "
Bob wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:47 AM:
The original bi-partisan group that formulated the Colorado rule spent more than 18 months gathering data and public input, consisted of more democrats than Republicans, and came up with a balanced approach to long term management of our roadless areas. "
David Petersen wrote on Jun 12, 2009 8:50 AM:
David Petersen
Durango "