OCR Text |
Show Western Counties Seek Congressional Oversight Hearings On Wilderness WASHINGTON, D.C. Garfield Gar-field County Commissioner Louise Liston, Moffat County, (Colo.) Commissioner T. Wright Dickinson, Dickin-son, and Jackson County (Colo.) Commissioner Dennis Brinker asked members of Congress to review re-view the way the federal government gov-ernment designates wilderness lands because the current process is hurting hurt-ing many of the nation's counties, particularly in the West. While in Washington in May, the commissioners commis-sioners asked ranking members of Congress for a Congressional oversight over-sight hearing because they argue the federal government is improperly interpreting the 1964 Wilderness Act. It is the county officials' view that federal agencies have not been following the original intent of the 1964 Wilderness Act in the identification identi-fication and recommendation of lands to be included in the wilderness wilder-ness system. This failure has significantly sig-nificantly affected county economies econo-mies and traditional livelihoods, including ranching, mining and timber harvesting. Congress has designated wilderness wilder-ness areas that do not conform to the provisions of the Act. Wilderness, Wilder-ness, in the 1964 Act, is defined as lands "untrammeled by man", "retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements im-provements or human habitation..." where "man's work is substantially unnoticeable..." A number of wilderness wil-derness designations have included lands with roads, fences, cabins, radio transmitters, water troughs and other permanent features. The officials collectively believe it is time for Congress to review the Act, the original Congressional intent, federal land agencies' actions and determine the future of wilderness wil-derness designations in America. The purpose of oversight hearings hear-ings would be for Congress to review re-view the process for identification and designation of wilderness, and answer a number of significant issues is-sues that have arisen with the rein-ventory rein-ventory of lands in Colorado and Utah for possible inclusion in wilderness. wil-derness. The county officials believe be-lieve these issues have implication for counties nationwide. "As a result of these federal lands," testified Liston in Washington, Washing-ton, "there are existing federal statutes stat-utes which restrict development of not only the federal and but the nearby private land as well. More important is the fact that as Congress Con-gress acts to designate wilderness in the future in these counties, the economic viability and vitality of these same rural counties is placed in serious jeopardy. "Whether it be through development develop-ment or use, restrictions placed on the land, clean air impacts, water impacts, buffer zones, or changing county revenue schemes, Western counties will be seriously impacted by wilderness designations. "Indeed," Liston continued, "the future economic development of an entire region may be forever hampered ham-pered or lost because of such legis- latively mandated wilderness. The taxes generated from natural resources re-sources revenues used to run our counties, state and nation may be permanently altered. "The question that follows then is obviously a serious one ... not 'How much wilderness do we want? But, how much wilderness can we afford?' "... Wilderness is a very romantic, roman-tic, exciting word to all those who do not have to live in its shadow and deal with the impacts it creates ... Some of us have just recendy attended Wilderness Reinventory Open Houses. . We've heard the agencies' explanations and have carefully reviewed their claims of authority, but we're still here today to question those authorities and whether they are following Congressional Con-gressional intent," she concluded. |