LEXIS-NEXIS® Academic Universe-Document

Search Terms: Roadless Areas

Document 83 of 110.

October 18, 1999, Monday

SECTION: Local; Ed. Final; Pg. 7A

LENGTH: 407 words

HEADLINE: FOES SLAM CLINTON'S PLAN FOR SETTING ASIDE LAND IN STATE
CRITICS SAY IT SUBVERTS PUBLIC PROCESS; BACKERS DISPUTE ALLEGATIONS

BYLINE: By Deborah Frazier, News Staff Writer

BODY:
President Clinton's set-aside of almost 5 million acres of roadless areas in the state subverted the public process, said Colorado's Republican senators, the timber industry and off-road vehicle enthusiasts.

Environmentalists and the Forest Service countered that nothing could be further from the truth because Clinton's initiative last week specifically sets up a process of public meetings and other means by which citizens will decide what lands will be protected.

''He could have done this by executive order, but instead he is seeking national public participation,'' said Suzanne Jones of the Wilderness Society. ''He specifically wanted to include the public.'' No one knows exactly which areas in Colorado would be included because the public will set the selection criteria, said Lynn Young of the Forest Service's regional office in Lakewood.

Under consideration will be 1.2 million acres in the Gunnison, Uncompahgre and Grand Mesa national forests; 1 million acres in the White River; 600,000 in the San Juan; 800,000 in the Pike-San Isabel; and 500,000 acres each in the Routt and Rio Grande forests.

The public input process wasn't enough for the critics.

''Sen. (Wayne) Allard is disappointed that the president didn't come to Congress and say 'Let's put together a plan,' '' said Sean Conway, Allard's Colorado spokesman.

Existing uses, such as grazing, could continue. Mining permits would remain valid with reasonable access allowed. However, new timber sales would be banned as would new road construction.

The areas were inventoried in the 1980s and may have roads now, which would disqualify the tracts, Young said.

''This is part of shutting down the national forests to all management and all users,'' said Tom Troxel of the Intermountain Forest Association. ''Once these areas get into that category, we'll all feel the noose tightening.''

Jack Welch of the Colorado Off Highway Vehicle Coalition said he doesn't trust the public input process.

''I'm a skeptic, '' Welch said. ''In the past, when we've had direction like this from Washington, the people in the motorized community suffer. The president's agenda is to remove people from the backcountry.''

At the Outdoor Recreation Coalition of America, Myrna Johnson said the tracts are important for hiking, mountain climbing and camping, too.

''We endorse reducing the rhetoric and supporting the process,'' she said.

LIB2

LOAD-DATE: October 21, 1999

Document 83 of 110.


Search Terms: Roadless Areas
To narrow your search, please enter a word or phrase: