To the considerable amazement of many, the Colorado Roadless Task Force will, in a matter of short weeks, spit out a recommendation that essentially will preserve those 4.1 million acres originally set aside late in the Clinton administration.
To be sure, the proposal that will be sent to Gov. Bill Owens will contain all those caveats and exclusions one might expect from a panel whose 13 members include a generous sprinkling of industry representatives.
Commercial interests still will be granted certain inroads into this vast network of wild lands, including a likely withdrawal of more than 8,000 acres to facilitate ski area development. But in the main, the task force recommendation will sustain the existing characteristics of untrammeled places vital to wildlife and recreation.
It’s what happens to the document after that Sept. 13 deadline that’s cause for trepidation. From there, the process ultimately might become entangled in party politics, the developing governor’s race and perhaps even Owens’ personal ambitions.
Should Owens, a Republican, fail to support the finding, he would give Democrat Bill Ritter considerable ammunition against Republican opponent Bob Beauprez in the upcoming election. Other speculation revolves around Owens’ intention toward the U.S. Senate, or whether he might sacrifice the roadless designation for a plush position in the oil and gas industry.
The most remarkable thing about the proceeding thus far is how a task force representing such diverse interests and seemingly so divided during early debate generally came together in favor of roadless down the stretch run.
For that, we all can take a bow.
It becomes increasingly clear that an outpouring of public opinion for roadless made it almost impossible for the committee to act otherwise.
When the final compilation of public comment was tallied, an overwhelming 91 percent declared support for keeping these important buffer areas free from injurious road construction and motorized access.
Not even pro-development politicians such as state representatives Josh Penry and Diane Hoppe could stand before their electorate with that sort of noose around their necks. When the public speaks with such a clear voice, contrary interests must proceed at some peril.
Without this protection, deer and elk ultimately would have been pushed farther back into dwindling sanctuaries and vital native trout habitat sullied by erosion.
It must be noted that most of the heavy lifting in this grassroots effort was performed by mainstream conservation groups such as the Wilderness Society and Colorado Mountain Club, with vital assists from the Colorado Wildlife Federation, Trout Unlimited, Colorado Bowhunters, Colorado Outfitters Association and a powerful statement from Bruce McCloskey, director of the Division of Wildlife.
Conspicuously absent from the frontlines were rank-and-file hunters, the very people who stand to benefit most. Noted for their inaction, hunters left the heavy lifting to environmentalists.
As Eddie Kochman, a former state wildlife manager and one of the stauncher pro-roadless members of the committee declared, “If we depended on hunters, we’d be in big trouble.”
Now, with the process on its downhill slide, considerable wrangling remains. The task force failed to complete its deliberation and produce a final recommendation as scheduled at its meeting July 20. An Aug. 3 conference call will link all the members in a final push toward resolution.
It’s likely that pro-industry interests will use this shield from public scrutiny and a mounting desperation for resolution to push for last-minute concessions and exclusions. Eight votes – a so-called super majority – are required for any decision.
When a document finally emerges, another period of public comment, perhaps two weeks, will be allowed. If you haven’t been counted before, this will be your last opportunity to finally do your part.
