OCR Text |
Show v Ji2: Community (gjXJ Comments . . . Gov. Scott Matheson this week commented, in a letter to Canyonlands Superintendent Pete Parry, on the final Draft Management Plan for Canyonlands National Park, and his letter brought out a very important point. While in general agreement with the compromises reached after a stormy year of debate, Gov. Matheson stressed his concern over a timetable for construction of development in the Park that is authorized by the plan. The Governor called strongly for full development of all things covered in the plan by the mid-1980's, and that was the real meat of his letter, as far as I am concerned. It's one thing to agree on a course of action. It's an entirely different thing to actually get after it. And that is what the Governor was trying to say. I hope the Park Service is listening. Congress, of course, actually appropriates development funding. But it does so, except in extraordinary cases, only after requests have been made by federal agencies involved. And . so Canyonlands development must first be requested by the National Park Service to be included in the Department of Interior budget. Congress will then have a chance to Ell those requests, in balance with other budget requests. It is hoped that all the thousands of pages of correspondence and testimony generated following the release of the Canyonlands Draft Management Plan j last year will convince the National Park Service at the Regional and National levels that a compromise has been reached, and now development must proceed as a priority item. i N ' j As I have stated before, Canyonlands is too 1 precious a national asset to spend the first quarter-century of its life as a political whipping boy. ; sjt ' : I'm not sure the Utah State Land Board expected a full house at their meeting Wednesday in Moab, but they got it nonetheless. And had there not been a large crowd of citizens on hand, I am afraid the questions under consideration would not have been as fully understood by board members as they were. It is great when state agency boards take their formal meetings to outlying areas. And those areas whose people don't take advantage of j the opportunity for personal appearance are really j missing the boat. sjt There has been a silent controversy going on in s town for nearly a year now over whether a community and convention center or a senior citizens' facility s should be Number 1 Priority in fund-raising efforts. j Both have had groups actively engaged in working j to see the realization of their individual priority project, namely: the Hang Gliding Tournament Committee and ;. supporters working for a community center, and the '; Community Council for Senior Citizens' Building and ' Women's Literary Club working for a senior center. It doesn't appear likely that either project will receive a substantial amount of local government ; funding, what with a new addition to the courthouse ' and a new indoor swimming pool now emerging as ; priority items at least on the part of some city and county officials. And, efforts on the part of the j organizations working for both the public buildings under discussion to gain needed funds have, to date, been in vain. 1 . Perhaps it's time to stop and take stock. To this end, the Community Council, meeting Tuesday ! morning, decided to undertake a fresh community poll f to find out how local residents feel. This will appear in j the Times sometime in the near future. It is to be hoped that a concensus of opinions will be found so that some E sort of united front can be presented to the world and possible funding sources, whether the priority turns F out to be community or senior center. |