NOREEN: Wilderness can be an economic development tool

Some Colorado communities use wilderness designations as an economic development tool, but Colorado Springs is not among them.

Decades ago the city could have had its own backyard wilderness -- the 26,000-acre Beaver Creek area managed by the Bureau of Land Management. It's about 11 miles southwest of downtown, although driving to the trailhead is a much longer journey via Penrose (please see a map on my blog).

While places such as Vail, Aspen and Telluride actively market wilderness experiences close by and have lobbied the congressional delegation, Colorado Springs has a much narrower view of what economic development means.

Economically, the downside of wilderness areas is that they don't bring a lot of money in. The upside is wilderness is an asset that won't cost taxpayers a dime.

Fifth-District Congressman Doug Lamborn declined to comment on Beaver Creek Tuesday. He told The Gazette in 2006: "Public land should have some degree of accessibility for maximum enjoyment by the whole public."

Before environmentalists attack him, they should appeal to the local powers-that-be. If the City Council, county commission, Convention and Visitors Bureau and others asked for a wilderness designation, you can bet Lamborn would listen.

Third-district Rep. John Salazar soon will unveil a wilderness bill that includes U.S. Forest Service land in Ouray, San Juan and San Miguel counties. There is a lot of local support for the bill, including all three county commissions.

The bill will honor active energy leases. Is wilderness economic development?

"I see it now as that," said San Miguel County Commissioner Joan May. "The regions that have beautiful views, clean air and clean water are starting to see that those values attract people."

A cynic might say Telluride won't attract the next Intel and that the community must work with what it has. A realist, though, might say that, yeah, Colorado Springs can have the next Intel and its own wilderness, too.

Leah Quesenberry of the BLM's Cañon City office said Beaver Creek has no oil or natural gas reserves. In fact, she said, "I'm not aware of any issues" that would block a wilderness designation.

John Stansfield of the Pikes Peak chapter of the Sierra Club said "three sides of Pikes Peak are quite heavily developed. The fourth (south) side is the wild side."

Stansfield and other local environmentalists envision an unbroken swath of land that includes Cheyenne Mountain State Park, the city-controlled South Slope of Pikes Peak and the Beaver Creek area.

Elected officials want us to believe in their economic development prowess but won't use all the available tools. The city remains neutral on Beaver Creek.

Colorado Springs Utilities spokesman Steve Berry said "as long as our water rights are not harmed, (Beaver Creek) would not be an issue."

Neutrality won't get the job done. Officials have to be supportive, or the congressman won't hear.
-
Read my blog updates at
gazette.com/blogs/barrysblog