OCR Text |
Show Ifcs'Gbjecfs to Mew Pork Pita Senator Frank E. Moss, original or-iginal sponsor of the Canyon-lands Canyon-lands National Park bill, last week objected violently lo proposed changes in the master mas-ter development plan for the southeastern Utah national ipark. The Senator stated his objections ob-jections in a letter to Commissioner Com-missioner Marion W. Ilazle-ton, Ilazle-ton, chairman of the San Juan County Commission. The San Juan officials had written the Senator protesting the proposed pro-posed changes, which principally princi-pally called for the abandonment abandon-ment of a short route into the interior of the park via Elephant Hill. Sen. Moss wrote: "I have your letter of October 16th signed by the other members of the San Juan County Commission. What you put forth in the letter let-ter raises the hackles on my neck, and I could not agree with you more. As you know, I was the author and sponsor of the Canyonlands National Park Bill and succeeded in guiding it through the Congress Con-gress in face of a good deal of local opposition. It is true that along the way we had to make some compromises in order to get a bill, but finally fin-ally we did establish Canyonlands Canyon-lands National Park in the area surrounding the confluence con-fluence of the rivers. In my opinion it is to be one of the greatest of our national parks when it is fully developed. "As you point out, the bill provided authority for the Secretary of the Interior not only to build roads within the park; but to build acgess roads, and this was considered consid-ered a great step forward." It was also agreed that the local lo-cal people would be involved in the planning, or consulted at east; and that the park would be so developed that the people of our country as well as citizens of Utah, would be able to fully observe ob-serve and enjoy the beauties of Canyonlands. The disappointments disap-pointments that you detail are indeed bitter ones, and I assure you that I am going to exert every influence that I have to see that they are corrected. Early Explanation "Earlier this year the Superintendent Su-perintendent of the Park and members of the National Park Service came to my office of-fice to explain to me the reasons for not building the road from Squaw Flat to the confluence. They stated that it would scar the formations and therefore do damage to the park. This I refused to accept and vigorously protested pro-tested against any such decisions. de-cisions. I did succeed in getting get-ting agreement from them that such a road would not be ruled out; but that it would receive lower priority after the construction of a road in from Beef Basin and up to Chesler Park, with a looproad from Chesler Park north to the confluence and back. I recognize that roads must be built in some system of priority, and felt that we, could accept this rearrangement rearrange-ment of priorities while we put together our information on building the road from Squaw Flat into the confluence. conflu-ence. I have not given up for a moment this idea. I believe that a road could be surveyed survey-ed and placed in there without with-out appreciable damage to the formations. Of course, there will have to be places where there are small cuts and fills; it's inevitable in rough country of this sort, but this can be done without ( damaging the vast acres and acres of marvelous scenery that will be exposed. If there is a deep ravine to cross, we could even have a structure, built in there that would not toe offensive but would carry the traffic across the ravine without filling it. A Senate Speech "I felt so strongly on this point that I made a speech in the U. S. Senate on the subject, and I am enclosing a copy of that speech entitled entit-led "Parks Are For People." As to be expected, I received a lot of critical mail from the conservation snobs who want to lock up every bit of land from the people and keep it only for those who have the wealth and the time to get into remote country. I do no stand aside for any person in my devotion lo the principal that we must preserve pre-serve our scene and heritage, but if we preserve are heritage heri-tage by keeping it inaccessible inacces-sible to the average citizen we have failed to make any advance at all. As you point out, we might as well have left it 'locked up.' I insist, with you, that parks are for people, and they have to be made available to people. They belong to all people, and not just a few who can afford horseback riding or hiring of jeeps, or otherwis have a ot of time to get into the wild parts of our area. Moreover, we have preserved some wilderness areas in this country for the wilderness buffs. National parks are not of a wilderness type, necessarily. neces-sarily. National parks are unique areas of beauty that are to be preserved for all time for the benefit of the people of the United States." Senator Moss went on to tell Commissioner Hazelton that he planned to be in the area soon to discuss the mat-e mat-e ter more fully. |