Letters - Friday

BROWN’S CANYON

ATV riders have plenty of other places to ride

Because of the excellent big game winter range, a source of water from the Arkansas River, and its relative remoteness, the proposed Brown’s Canyon Wilderness supports elk, mule deer, mountain lion, black bear and bighorn sheep, along with a wide variety of smaller wildlife. The protection provided by wilderness status is critical for these species during the stressful winter months when higher-elevation habitat is snow-covered and unusable.

The Brown’s Canyon core area of 20,000 acres is also easily traveled by foot and horseback and provides a high-quality hunting experience. In addition, the area is readily accessed by a number of roads north, south and east along Aspen Ridge Road.

A Brown’s Canyon Wilderness would provide for excellent primitive hunting and backcountry experiences. For people who prefer to hunt with their ATVs or SUVs, the 100,000-acre Four Mile Travel Management area and most other public lands in the county provide plenty of motorized hunting opportunities. Indeed, even with a Brown’s Canyon Wilderness, more 80 percent of public lands in Chaffee County will remain open to non-wilderness uses, including responsible motorized recreation.

The Pike and San Isabel National Forests have 5,350 miles of motorized roads and trails. The Salida Ranger District offers more than 476 miles of motorized roads and trails, whereas there are only 199 miles of trails designated for nonmotorized users. As a result, most points within Chaffee County are less than two miles from a motorized route.

Today’s hunters and anglers are seeing less and less of the public lands backcountry that we enjoyed in past years (mainly due to off-highway vehicle overuse and abuse and uncontrolled energy development). This trend is sure to continue, eroding the opportunities for quality backcountry hunting and angling experiences in the future. For this reason, I consider the proposed Brown’s Canyon Wilderness designation both timely and important.

David A. Lien

Co-Chair, Colorado Backcountry Hunters and Anglers

Colorado Springs

Exclusionists must learn to share the outdoors

Who does Bill Dvorak think he is, suggesting that somebody might want to shoot ATV riders in an area they are legally riding in (“Brown’s Canyon worthy of wilderness designation,” Letters, July 11)? Many ATV riders are armed as well during hunting season. And what kind of person gets up at 4 a.m. and walks for hours before daylight into an area that has ATV access?

As far as ruining someone’s outdoor experience, what about his rafts coming down the river when I am fishing? They mess up the fishing with their oars. But I don’t want to hurt them.

I hope that as a business owner, he would understand that sharing the resources is an important aspect of any outdoor experience. If he’s so strong in his convictions, why doesn’t he refuse to allow ATV riders to use his rafting or fishing guide services? Let’s see Dvorak put his money where his mouth is.

I don’t necessarily disagree with making Brown’s Canyon a wilderness area, but extremists like him do nothing to further the civil debate.

Larry Williamson

Colorado Springs

HOGS ON THE HILL

Gazette missed mark in attack on Paul

In its July 7 Our View, “White House hogs?,” The Gazette claimed that Ron Paul had

a “pretty weak” arguments in defense of his earmarks. Perhaps that was because the paper chose a weak quote to use.

Although we all have a distaste for earmarks, we must remember that the people can ask our representatives to request these earmarks in the first place. This is one reason why Paul has made so many earmark requests.

To quote a Houston Chronicle article, “The way it works in Paul’s office is that local groups and officials from his district make pitches to him for federal funding. The congressman passes along those recommendations to the Appropriations Committee as earmark requests. Paul said he tries to treat everyone equally and rejects few requests. He said it would be unfair ‘for me to close the door and say this is a bunch of junk.’ ”

It would also be nice to remember what Paul also said about earmarks when he said, “I don’t think they should take our money in the first place. But if they take it, I think we should ask for it back.”

Perhaps most telling about this congressman is that just because he makes the request, it does not mean he supports bills simply to get the money requested in these earmarks. Paul himself has said he would likely vote against the spending bills even if they included earmarks he sought.

Paul is considered a “Taxpayer Hero” by Citizens Against Government Waste, the same group The Gazette tried to use to discredit him. Paul has never voted to increase taxes, he has never voted for an unbalanced budget, and he has never voted to raise congressional pay.

Instead of criticizing this man for a few earmarks which his constituents asked for, perhaps The Gazette should be commenting about how he has helped save you and me a lot of money.

Richard Lyons

Colorado Springs