< PREVIOUS ] [ 2008 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
On May 22, U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO) introduced yet another Browns Canyon Wilderness Bill. A similar bill looked ready to pass two years ago, but got derailed at the last minute on account of opposition from, of all groups, the National Rifle Association.
Since one enjoys the right to keep and bear arms inside a wilderness area, it seems odd that the NRA would oppose a wilderness designation. But the NRA's logic went something like this:
1) Wilderness designation would mean closing about four
miles of a rough route known locally as the Turret
Road.
2) Some hunters (whether on account of physical
condition or mere sloth) rely on ATVs, ORVs, etc., to get
to their hunting camps and to retrieve big game once it is
harvested.
3) Wilderness designation therefore deprives these sportsmen of the opportunity to hunt in their preferred way.
4) This somehow equates to an infringement on their rights, even though hunting is allowed in wilderness areas.
Preposterous as the NRA's stance was in the fall of 2006, no politician in a Western state wants to run afoul of the NRA, even on an issue that has nothing to do with the rights of gun owners. So the 2006 Browns Canyon bill died, even though it had the support of Colorado's entire congressional delegation, including Rep. Joel Hefley -- a Colorado Springs Republican who represented the congressional district that included Browns Canyon.
Naming the proposed wilderness area after Browns Canyon is something of a misnomer. Browns Canyon itself is a stretch of the Arkansas River between Buena Vista and Salida in Chaffee County, Colorado. The canyon is step-walled and scenic -- I've floated through it a few times on a raft, and thousands of other people do so every summer.
But it's hardly pristine,
since a railroad has
run through the canyon since 1880. The p
roposed wilderness area is about 20,000 acres of BLM
and Forest Service land east of the railroad tracks,
extending several miles to Aspen Ridge.
It was by that name, Aspen Ridge, that it was first proposed for wilderness designation when I moved to Salida about 30 years ago. The BLM had said its acreage deserved wilderness protection, but the Forest Service didn't agree on its portion, and so the issue hibernated until some activists revived it under the Browns Canyon name.
Why the name change? Likely because river outfitters --
they haul more than 100,000 people a year through Browns
Canyon -- would like to be able to market their trips as
through the wilderness,
even though the river isn't
included in the proposed wilderness area.
There are some good questions as to whether the proposed
acreage really meets the definition under the 1964 Wilderness Act as an area where the earth and
its community of life are untrammeled by man,
and
with the imprint of man's work substantially
unnoticeable.
That acreage has those old roads, as well
as prospect holes and logging remnants.
But on the other hand, the last time I was up there, the
territory generally appears to have been affected
primarily by the forces of nature,
and it offers
outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive
and unconfined type of recreation.
In other words, its suitability as a wilderness is judgment call, and we elect people to make those decisions as to whether its natural attributes substantially outweigh the fading marks of human activity.
And none of this has anything to do with anybody's right to keep and bear arms. This time around, the NRA ought to stick its knitting, instead of shilling for the motorized recreation lobby.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 2008 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >