Ritter Continues to Burn the Roadless Rule

6 thoughts on “Ritter Continues to Burn the Roadless Rule”

1. Who will benefit from preserving our wild places?

   Log in to Reply

2. of Colorado is in excess of 3 miles from a road.
   
   See Map 4.12 p. 57.
   
   Most of this is alpine tundra (See Figure 4.6 p. 56).

   How much roadless is too much?

   Log in to Reply

3. that there are a whole lot more people, policies, and lawsuits involved than just Ritter, as your diary (scant on details) would suggest.

   As diaries go, this one just plain sucks.

   Log in to Reply

4. to spend sufficient funds on ‘issue’ work so his 501c4 (and just what is B.O.B’s connection, ‘Nathan’?) can pollute the election with lies.

   Your mother must be proud, ‘Nathan.’  Are you a coward?  If not, then tell us which individuals and industries are funding your little effort–surely people should know to put your ‘posts’ in context…

   And finally, how does your quote show anything?  Do you understand what ‘national’ forests are?  They are ‘national’ meaning they are not Ritter’s to mange but the Forest Service, part of USDA and…wait for this…under Vilsack’s purview.  

   What have you got against the public ‘Nathan’?  Did you know that–for instance–in every single comment period on roadless management in Colorado–from the 2001 Rule, through the Task Force, through last summer’s DEIS (ask your boss what that means), and likely in this comment period as well–that the majority of Coloradans who commented–over 90% in EVERY INSTANCE–support the strong protections of the 2001 Rule.  Just saying ‘Nathan,’  not only do you lack any semblance of integrity–but as a shill you kind of suck.

   http://www.dontsellcoshort.org  

   Log in to Reply

5. and opened to a new coal mine under COlorado’s proposed ‘roadless’ rule:

   Roadless rule should conserve  
   
   Written by Jim Bryce  
   
   Wednesday, 17 June 2009 00:00
   
   Dear Editor:

   I am the owner of Jim Bryce Outfitting in Delta. Our business guides hunters from across the nation for elk and deer hunts on the south side of Grand Mesa in the Currant Creek roadless area.

   It has come to my attention that the Currant Creek roadless area is to become available for coal mining in the current draft of the Colorado roadless rule. This proposal is inappropriate for Currant Creek because of the area’s wildlife values and recreation opportunities. Further, unlike the other areas proposed for coal development in the proposed Colorado rule, Currant Creek is not close to any other coal operations nor have the mineral rights been leased.

   The area provides quality elk and deer hunting opportunities and is an important calving and fawning ground as well as winter range for big game. The Colorado Division of Wildlife considers this area extremely important for wildlife because of its location on the southern end of Grand Mesa.

   I understand the importance of coal to our economy. However, coal mining is better suited for the expansion of the existing North Fork coal mining areas that already contain the infrastructure needed for these operations. Establishment of new mining at Currant Creek would result in severe damage to the area through the construction of power lines, roads, and other industrial activity. Opening this pristine area to coal development simply makes no sense and should be reconsidered.

   I have made a living for my family in this wildlife-rich area for 30 years and it would be a shame to see this place roaded and mined. I urge Governor Ritter to remove this area from potential coal mining in the Colorado roadless rule to sustain Colorado’s hunting traditions and my family business.

   Jim Bryce

   Delta

   http://www.deltacountyindepend…

   Here’s another article–

   “We have very strong concerns the current Colorado Rule, as proposed, falls well short of protections afforded in 2001 rules. These aren’t just semantic differences,” Colorado Wild Executive Director Ryan Bidwell said Thursday in a press teleconference.

   Areas of concern include the Currant Creek Roadless Area. Special exemptions under the Colorado Rule would allow for coal mining and road construction in certain areas on the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison national forests, including Currant Creek.

   “It would totally destroy that section of roadless area, which is wintering grounds for elk,” Delta County outfitter Jim Bryce said Thursday.

   “That’s also a calving ground. With that kind of activity in there, less elk will be reproducing. It would be a bad deal all around,” Bryce said.

   Bryce said it would also sound the death knell for Bryce Outfitting. “It would totally destroy my business,” he said.

   Tony Prendergast of WCC said the public hasn’t had the chance to look at the Currant Creek situation. The groups in their letter called the exception allowed under the Colorado Rule an “inappropriate artifact of the Bush administration’s improper manipulation of this process.”

   http://www.montrosepress.com/a…  

   Log in to Reply

6. Log in to Reply