Desolation Canyon could be considered wilderness
Desolation Canyon, part of which is in southern Uintah County, is one of 18 Bureau of Land Management areas newly suggested for wilderness consideration by Congress. On Thursday, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar published his preliminary list of BLM lands in nine states that he would like to be designated as wilderness. "From President Theodore Roosevelt's bold steps to establish national parks, wildlife refuges and forests to President Obama signing the 2009 Public Lands bill into law in his first days in office, America has a proud bipartisan tradition of protecting the backcountry that matters most to hunters, fishermen, and our families," Salazar said. The Wilderness Study Area for Desolation Canyon also includes Carbon and Grand counties, and according to the BLM Grand County supports the designation. Carbon or Uintah county were not available for comment at press time. Although Salazar, and Deputy Secretary David J. Hayes and BLM Director Bob Abbey, who both came up with the list based on input from Congress, state and county officials, tribes, and other interested parties, are hopeful about the project, Utah’s Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) are concerned about it. “I am deeply disappointed that Interior Secretary Salazar continues to be tone deaf about public lands issues in Utah,” Matheson said. “As our success in Washington County shows, wilderness proposals must be the result of a grassroots, stakeholder-driven process, rather than a top-down decree. This is not the way to make progress on public lands decisions and it only ensures that we won’t see a successful outcome on the ground here.” Hatch said determining and designating wilderness is the job of Congress and he takes this “responsibility seriously.” “I am in constant contact with the communities across the state who have a stake in wilderness designations,” Hatch said. “This is a process that is very difficult and it doesn’t help to have unsolicited input coming from the administration. Any change in the designation of Utah lands should be made through a collaborative process with those closest to the lands. I don’t believe the administration wants to hear that most Utahns aren’t interested in any more restrictive land-use designations. Utahns deserve better than this.” In Utah the BLM currently manages: 23 million acres of land, 18 wilderness areas, and three BLM national conservation areas. Two other backcountry areas in Utah under consideration for wilderness designation include Mill Creek Canyon in southeast Utah and Westwater Canyon located northeast of Moab. The designation of wilderness areas come from Congress and, according to the Department of the Interior, the listing is tailored to specific landscapes and often protect a wide-range of traditional and local uses. Salazar said he is “hopeful that these areas can help form a strong foundation for a bipartisan conservation agenda for this Congress."
|
Soon to be former (one can hope) Rep. Matheson is totally (not just tone) deaf to Uintah County's commissioners, who have repeated, early and often, that their official stance is "NOT ONE ACRE OF WILDERNESS IN UINTAH COUNTY". Not one acre, regardless of its highest use and purpose! I thank God that more reasonable minds prevail in Grand County!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And maybe if Uintah County's commissioners had shown even just a modicum of courtesy and respect to Mr. Salazar when he was here last month for the dedication of the Visitor's Center at Dinosaur National Monument, he would have considered them to be somewhat reasonable and somewhat amenable to discourse. As it is, the commissioners' actions showed they tow the hard line and aren't interested in reaching a compromise on anything. To them, it's all "drill, baby, drill"; "spill, baby, spill" on EVERY ACRE of Uintah County!
And, Mr. Hatch and Mr. Matheson: I also thank God that Ken Salazar represents the voice of reasonable Utahns who want to preserve our most special canyons as areas that present and future generations may enjoy in the natural state that they were created by God/Heavenly Father/the Creator. We sure don't have any representation in Uintah County.
Desolation is indeed worthy of special status. Every summer day, and in spring and fall, there are hundreds of people camped out the length of Desolation and Gray Canyons, enjoying one of the highest-quality river experiences possible. Many of them - I'd guess half - hire local river companies to make the trip. The eat food, stay in motels, gas up, see the sights. It ranks up there with the Middle Fork of the Salmon and the Grand Canyon of the Colorado. Do we truly WANT to protect a diverse economy, including adventure tourism, or do we just give lip service to it? Designate away!
Having made many spring summer and fall trips through Desolation Canyon I can't think of a more appropriate designation for this incredible area. The "not one acre" group needs to be replaced with people who can be reasonable and recognize that some areas are so special they need to be protected from development. This is one of those areas and this staunch conservative will do all that can be done to ensure its protection. No matter how much you love drilling, it can't happen on every parcel of creation.
Area seems to have been doing fine without wilderness designation. Does this do away with motorized boats now. This area was one of the last whitewater stretches that allowed motors-even though most didn't use them. Sad day, but expect more land grabs as this current administration exits.
Dirty Johnny;
You could have said the same things about Yellowstone in 1872, or Grand Canyon a century ago, or Dinosaur National Monument in 1938. Visionary people, looking ahead, seek to PRESERVE an area that is worthy. It is one of the things America has been good at, and one of the things I'm most proud of. And there are threats to Desolation, such as illegal ATV use.
The motors won't be affected. "Land grab"; it's entertaining how quickly people throw that term around, when protection for an area is proposed. It's federal land now, it will remain federal land. Who, exactly, is "grabbing" what?????????
If this makes your day "sad", I suggest a therapist.
The reasons motors are permitted on that stretch is when the temperature are in the triple digits and the water level is so low there is little current then motors are used. but sure when the water is high no one uses a motor.
I have floated Deso at high and extremely low water, and never used a motor. However, I could have, and anyone can, at any time.Preserve it!
Hatch is incorrect as far as I can tell on who makes the designation of wilderness.
The wilderness Act says that Sec of Agriculture shall review as it's suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as wilderness and reports his findings to the President. His findings are the identification of possible sites from the agencies he oversees.
The President then recommends wilderness designation to congress.
This recommendation only becomes wilderness by an Act of Congress.
This is what the hoopla is about. Hatch does not want fed agencies to identify areas. He claims that he is supposed to do that. Salazar has reinstated mandate of fed agencies "identifying" possible wilderness designation. Bush and Levitt did away with this mandate taking away fed agencies job of identifying possible sites, this is what Salazar has overturned.
http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/documents//publiclaws/PDF/16_USC_1131-1136.pdf
Classification. (b) The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten years after September 3,
1964, review, as to its suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as wilderness, each area in
the national forests classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary of Agriculture or the
Chief of the Forest Service as ''primitive'' and report his findings to the President.
Presidential recommendation to Congress. The President shall advise the United States
Senate and House of Representatives of his recommendations with respect to the designation
as ''wilderness'' or other reclassification of each area on which review has been completed,
together with maps and a definition of boundaries. Such advice shall be given with respect to
not less than one-third of all the areas now classified as ''primitive'' within three years after
September 3, 1964, not less than two-thirds within seven years after September 3, 1964, and
the remaining areas within ten years after September 3, 1964.
Congressional approval. Each recommendation of the President for designation as
''wilderness'' shall become effective only if so provided by an Act of Congress.
@whitman - The section of law that you are citing is applicable to national forest lands, which are managed by the Forest Service which is under the auspices of the Secretary of Agriculture. Thus, he is responsible for identifying wilderness-suitable lands located in national forests. The majority of public lands are managed by the Bureau of Land Management which is part of the Department of the Interior. There is an identical section of the Wilderness Act that you quoted above that imposes the same obligations on the Secretary of the Interior with respect to lands managed by his department. That is, he (or his designee) is responsible for identifying wilderness-suitable lands that are located on BLM (and National Park Service)-managed lands.
Pursuant to the authority imposed upon the Secretary of the Interior, former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt identified 290,000+ acres in and around Desolation Canyon as being suitable for wilderness designation. In June 1992, CONGRESS designated those lands as a Wilderness Study Area, which is a prelude to the lands being designated as Wilderness. In presenting his report, Sec. Salazar did not "designate" Desolation Canyon as wilderness. He designated Deso and the other 17 other Wilderness Study Areas (2 of which are in Utah, 15 of which are in other states) as "suitable for preservation as wilderness". It is now up to Congress, including Mssrs. Hatch and Mathison, to decide whether to preserve Deso in perpetuity as part of the National Wilderness System.
By claiming that Secretary Salazar's recommendations are "unsolicited input", Mr. Hatch demonstrates a lack of understanding of the Wilderness Act that is unbecoming a man who will start his 36th year of service in the United States Senate beginning on Jan. 3, 2012, and who claims to take his responsibilities under that Act "very seriously".
sphenodon, Wild Lands policy=Land Grab. Crown Jewles plan=Land Grab. Crown Jewles plan should have been submitted to Congress 10-15-11. You don't suppose our Sec. of Interior is waiting to submit the list to Congress just before they recess for the year?
Whle I don't question the beauty of Grey and Desolation Canyons, I firmly believe that this and some other Wilderness Designations are not necessary and politically motivated.
BTW I think it would be safe to say that I have spent more years in the tourism business and have more river miles than you. Just thought I would throw that out to you so when you label me an uneducated redneck, Think twice.
Perhaps you should seek some therapy to realize that not everyone eats from the same bowl of granaola as you.
whitman, Motors were used whenever possible throughout the 40's, 50's, 60's on the western rivers. High and low water, with and without oars for support. They have been used to power crafts through Grey and Desolation Canyons in recent times. Motors remain to be the safest, quickest, and most inexpensive means to allow people to experience some rivers. No offense to you. Just wanted to shed some light. Contact U of U's Marriot Library for Historical info. I think Roy Webb the curator.
Dirty Johnny;
You are the only one to use the words uneducated redneck. I merely suggest that you over-react, if this issue makes for a "sad day" for you.Therapy is good for anyone, you should seek it. Anger in these issues sheds heat without light. You seeing "land grabs" everywhere sounds a little paranoid. Currently, the travel plans for the BLM restrict the area in question from ATV use. To f ormally designate it a wilderness will not close a single road.
I suipport the drilling that's been going on for decades in the basin, with only a f ew objedtions. To turn it around, since you don't think Deso deserves wilderness desgination, is there ANYWHERE you would support wilderness designation? Name names, if so. I'd be interested. If, in fact, you can't come up with any places that are worthy, such as Deso, then by definition you are an extremist. You can't get any more extreme on the wilderness issue than that.
I am not extremist, because I recognize the value of the extractive industries of the Basin.Can you say the same thing for yourself, but about the wilderness issue? I can't for the life of m e see how.
It is interesting that you claim vaster experience, without knowing anything about ME. I could be John Wesley Powell, for all you know. Whatever, it has nothing to do with the issue at hand, which is - would Desolation Canyon being designated a wilderness be a good thing for the Basin, or not. I say it would be, preserving another source of revenue, adventure tourism.
That's the only "political motivation" I have.
@ DirtyJ: How is it a "land grab" for the Secretary of the Interior to do his job in the manner prescribed by law - a law that has been in existence for almost half a century? A "land grab" is defined as "an aggressive taking of land in order to expand territorial holdings." By definition, then, a person (or government) that already owns land cannot "grab" land that it already owns and over which it already exercises dominion. As sphenodon noted several posts ago, the federal government owns and administers Desolation Canyon; ergo, by definition it cannot effect a "land grab" of Desolation Canyon. (By contrast, Rob Bishop's and Orrin Hatch's APPLE Acts ARE attempted land grabs - they are attempting to take public lands from the American people and reserve them for the exclusive use of Utah. Where's your outrage at that?)
BTW, just because you MAY have more years in the tourism industry and/or more river miles than someone doesn't mean that you have more respect for the rivers and landscapes that make Utah the unique place that it is.
I must admit this discussion has prompted me to research what "wilderness designation" actually means. I am originally from the east coast and in the 19 years that i lived there this never came up. Still on the fence...
John Wesley Powell (sphenodon),
JWP, They should have listened when you warned them that the west could not sustain population.
sphenodon, I was refering to motors(outboard engines) when I first commented on the article. I stated "safe to say". I am willing change that to sure bet. No, my experience does not allow my voice, vote, etc. to have any more say in this matter. It does represent the same as you, though.
I understand that using numerous CAPITOLS, exclamation points, and ????????????????? shows anger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SandyVernal, Although very one-sided, you are sincere and knowledgable on land issues. If you believe that Federal land remains the same when it is designated a National Park, Monument, or Wilderness, Please study more. Yes. I believe that I should have more say in the way Utah lands are managed. Not because of my experience. Because I live in Utah. I realize that you do not share my opinion. Most of the people of Utah do, though.
I am somewhat suprised that you didn't comment on the Department of Intreior missing the Oct. 15, 2011 deadline for submitting list of Crown Jewles. Is this a conspiracy?
BTW, I just may repect the rivers and landscapes of the world more than you do. I may want my grandchildren, and their grandchildren, and so on, to be able to experience our great land. Or should we lock it up for a few special interests?
Dirty Johnny,
Powell did NOT say that the West could not sustain population; he said that the laws such as the Homestead Act, and particularly the water laws, would not work out here as they had in the East. Because of the scarcity of water. He was impressed by the way LDS culture had cooperatively developed and shared the scanty amount of water and arable land.
I still have not answer from you as to ANY area that you would support as wilderness. If Desolation and Gray Canyons don't meet your criteria, then how in the world can any place. Suggestions?
DJ - You have the same "say" as I do in the "way Utah lands are managed." Your say, like mine, is "spoken" at the ballot box and in correspondence with our elected leaders. Although some are located within the exterior boundaries of Utah, federal lands are NOT Utah lands; they PUBLIC lands owned by the federal government for the benefit of ALL Americans. Therefore, ALL Americans have a "say" in how federal lands are managed.
You write that, because you live in Utah, you don't share my opinion about how Utah lands should be managed. Your comment suggests that all of the people in Utah have an opinion and speak with one mind about public lands.
I feel compelled to dispel your suggestion. I live in Utah. I, and most of my friends who live in or out of Utah, believe that some lands and waterways in Utah should be protected in order to preserve their natural splendor. Thus, despite efforts to the contrary, there is no unanimity of opinion on the subject of public lands management - or 99.9% of any other subject, I'd guess - among people who live in Utah.
Finally, on this site, there is no traditional way (e.g., underscoring, italicizing or bold facing) to indicate that a poster intends to emphasize a word. I type some words in all caps because I intend to emphasize those words; I'm guessing sphen does, as well. It's my understanding that anger and/or shouting are indicated only when all or a majority of words in a post are typed in all caps.
Correct me if I am wrong. I thought that Levitt and Bush did away with the mandate for the Sec of Interior to designate possible wilderness areas. Salazar has just reinstated it. This is what the fuss is all about.
.
Correct me if I am wrong. I thought that Levitt and Bush did away with the mandate for the Sec of Interior to designate possible wilderness areas. Salazar has just reinstated it. This is what the fuss is all about.
.