OCR Text |
Show LIZ THOMAS (continued) DICK CARTER (continued) We don’t buy either one of these arguments. With respect to #1-Look at who is proposing the little, inadequate wilderness bills: Rep: Jim Hansen, Utah’s self-professed anti-wilderness congressman. His wilderness proposals exclude areas that are at high risk for mineral development or out-of-control ORV abuse; they provide wilderness protection where it is least needed. The purpose behind this type of bill is to rob the wilderness movement of its momentum and to triumphantly claim that the wilderness issue in Utah has been settled once and for all, making additional wilderness bills all but impossible. Although a comprehensive, regional wilderness bill that protects all the wilderness within a distinct and significant geographic area might warrant serious consideration, the "regional" bills proposed thus far by the Utah delegation fall far short. For instance, the recent West Desert bill excluded more than half of the wilderness lands in Utah’s West Desert; similarly, the recent San Rafael Swell bill would have designated zero wilderness within the bills geographic boundaries. With respect to #2--Wild places are indeed being nibbled away. But these losses, while significant, are small compared to what would be lost through a failed political strategy. The first version of America’s Redrock Wilderness Act was completed in the mid-1980"s. When this por! was see ae comre 12 years later, less than 3% had to be dropped b t. This impressive record required - and strenuous efforts on the part of SUWA, other environmental groups, and thousands of passionate volunteer activists. Working together, we fight like from losing any of it. When we do lose something, we fight harder the next coordinated importantly, hell to keep time. > CAN A GOOD WILDERNESS BILL GET PASSED? The citizens’ proposal for Utah wilderness, formally known as America’s Redrock Wilderness Act, continues to gain sponsorship in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. With overwhelming support from citizens nationwide and our increasing success in winning support from moderate Republican legislators, the bill’s chances for eventual passage are good. Consider these analogies: clean indoor air laws; civil rights; women’s rights. All were long, hard-fought struggles. All ended in clear victories, but the exact dates of these victories were not predictable in advance. Yet in all of these cases, fundamental forces favored the winning side, so it could have been (and was) predicted in advance that eventual victory was likely. It is understandable that those who have worked long and hard on the wilderness issue would want a final resolution or significant accomplishment to feel good about. But the personal and cultural changes that must occur if wilderness is to have any value, So long as BLM wilderness is pursued as the final statement on environmental quality, Right vs. Wrong, Purity vs. Impurity we guarantee islands of wilderness surrounded by masses of development. If we can't solve wilderness issues with some degree of consensus, success, respect, ' dignity, then the other larger issues we are facing will not be solved either. We treat wilderness as an end even though we know that threatened, watersheds are still hammered by too denuded by off road vehicles. That is because some of the most crucial wildlife habitat and some of the after its designation, wildlife is still many cattle and sheep and hillsides of the most critical watersheds, some most sensitive ecosystems don't even qualify as wilderness. We treat wilderness as an end even though we know that after its designation, wildlife is still threatened, watersheds are still hammered...That is because some of the most critical watersheds, some of the most crucial wildlife habitat and some of the most sensitive ecosystems don't even qualify as wilderness. If we are to achieve fundamental change in our collective view of the land, we must recognize that it is not an “us versus them” matter. It should be obvious by now that coercing others to alter their value system doesn't work. I realize this sounds like to talk when the opponents of wilderness and environmental integrity continue on with, ‘no, no, no’ ad nauseam. But this isn't a matter of who will blink first. We are may past that. Collectively we seem to have said ‘we will wait until somebody does it for us.’ Some 25 years ago the BLM wilderness process was set in motion, yet both sides still can only claim a hollow victory of ene stopped BLM wilderness. Dick Carter founded the High Uintas Preservation Council and has been active in Utah environmental issues for more than 30 years. wilderness dispute isn’t about personal accomplishments or touchy-feely compromises. As Brant Calkin, a preeminent defender of Utah wilderness, has reminded us before, "those of us in the environmental movement don’t have the right to be impatient just because we’ve worked long and hard.” The goal for wilderness advocates is to protect as much of this spectacular country for the enjoyment of future generations, and for the myriad life forms that depend on it. If waiting five years or more to pass a good comprehensive wilderness bill means getting millions more acres of wilderness protected, then we just have to be patient, buckle down, and work hard to protect these lands in the interim. What's important is to hold all the pieces together while support for the whole continues to grow. Liz Thomas is SUWA’‘s field representative in Cedar City, Utah. Dinner nightly at 5:30 Call for reservations 92 E. CENTER STREET 435.259- 4295 state liquor license "Are you equipped for this year's boating season?" GREAT IMPRESSIONS... Paul McCarroll does HIS impression of the character in Papillion portrayed by Dustin Hoffman, doing HIS impression of Steve McQueen in the title role when Papillion looks to the heavens and shakes his fist _and yells defiantly: "WE'RE STILL HERE!” 211 N. Main St. 259.6007 800.733.6007 www.canyonvoyages.com “THE BEST RESTAURANT IN SOUTHERN Salt Lake Magazine UTAH" |