Jean Stetson
Moffat County Landowner and Rancher
Maybell, Colorado

I recently read some information regarding the Proposed Vermillion National Monument that was on the National Wildlife Federation's website. Many inconsistencies and questions come to mind when reading this.

First of all, the headline reads, "Secretary Babbitt Proposes New Vermillion National Monument ... " Secretary Babbitt did not propose this monument. It is a "Citizens' Plan" submitted by various environmental groups. To the best of my knowledge, this monument is not a priority for Secretary Babbitt.

Secondly, one must understand that the term of "Citizens' Plan" is very misleading, for there is no local support for this plan. Both the Moffat County Commissioners and the Colorado State Government are opposed to this plan because of the lack of local input.

One will also note that the Colorado Wildlife Federation in an August 23, 2000 letter to Secretary Babbitt expressed concern that ... "the (Vermillion) proposal has damaged land-use discussions and relationship-building efforts in the affected region that had involved federal, state, and local governments, and the environmental and conservation communities. National Wildlife Federation, which led in developing this proposal, had been party to these discussions, yet apparently did not fully consult involved parties prior to submitting their proposal."

Next, I question the validity of the concern that these public lands are indeed "threatened". Off-road vehicles and oil and gas development are mentioned. Is there any valid scientific proof that supports these threats?

Next, I would like to know if anyone has thought about what happens to these areas when they are put on the map as a "monument" or "wilderness". Undoubtedly, these areas will be impacted by the increased volume of human visitors. More traffic, more hikers, more camping, more trash.

Finally, the "Citizens' Plan" speaks of the history in the area. It says that "the area is essentially the same wild untamed country as when outlaws holed up here over a hundred years ago." Wouldn't that suggest that the multiple use management plan that the BLM has been implementing for years works just fine? The area is in no danger. The true history of the area reflects an approach that achieves a common sense balance of multiple use, local control, and careful use of the natural resources, while at the same time protecting these natural resources.