Canyon hasn't suffered
Mark Newby, Northglenn
Friday, June 27, 2008
In his analysis of the manufactured controversy about Browns Canyon ("Browns Canyon hardly a 'wilderness,' " Speakout, June 13), Carl Bauer is accurate and correct in his description of the access issue at the Browns Canyon recreation area.
What right does any authority have to infringe on the rights of the general public and especially the handicapped to enjoy responsible recreational vehicle access to these areas? For more than 100 years - and during my entire lifetime - we have had vehicular access to Browns Canyon, and it has not suffered to any degree that limits its conservation and use by future generations.
It most certainly is not appropriate for wilderness designation to satisfy a few self-serving special interests.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
June 27, 2008
3:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
clyde writes:
How about declaring Park Meadows a wildlife sanctuary? Remember, it's the gesture, not the logic, that determines what is right.