I’m writing to address the growing misinformation surrounding the proposed National Conservation Area for the southern Dolores River. As someone who has worked and lived in this area and who participated directly in the collaborative process that produced this proposal, I believe it’s important to explain why many local interests came together to support it – and what it does, and does not, mean for our communities.
Because of the interests and concerns that come with Wild and Scenic River eligibility and suitability – which originate in Washington, DC, and direct the Bureau of Land Management’s current river corridor management plan – many interests came together, in good faith, to discuss what matters to us as a community that relies on and enjoys the Dolores River. Over time, a local proposal for a National Conservation Area took shape. If that bill passes in Congress, it would take both a national monument and WSR designation off the table.
There has been a flurry of misinformation online about the NCA, its creation, and what it would mean for the lower Dolores River corridor in Montezuma, Dolores, and San Miguel counties. Did any one interest or stakeholder get everything it wanted? No. Does any one interest or stakeholder think it is perfect? No. It is a compromise. It reflects our diverse communities and provides greater certainty for everyone about how multiple uses and resources will be managed moving forward.
The process of developing the details of the NCA took place over many years and included hundreds of meetings, numerous site visits, multiple drafts of legislative language, several different maps, and many opportunities for public input. From the perspective of a local rancher who operates in all three counties and along the river included in the bill – and from the perspective of the counties that participated – we saw a deep sense of fairness and consensus-building throughout the process. We have deep roots in southwest Colorado, and we understand the need to work with all interests regarding public lands. Public land is not, and should not be, simply partisan.
Lands included in the proposed National Conservation Area and Special Management Area are already managed and owned by the federal government. If this bill passes, it will not mandate additions to the federal estate, affect or harm private property, or create any buffer zones. It protects valid existing rights. Livestock grazing will not be changed or altered by this legislation.
It is naive to assume that conditions – on public land or in national politics – will remain the same in the future. An NCA designation developed from the ground up offers the best way to secure a degree of certainty for our water rights, multiple uses, and reliance on the Dolores River corridor. This proposal was developed locally, on the landscape, and it takes a national monument or WSR designation off the table. It also gives us a seat at the table if future changes are proposed.
If we do nothing, an outside proposal will emerge in the not-too-distant future and determine how the Dolores River is managed. The NCA represents a reasonable compromise for the Dolores River and respects the majority of local voices.
Please study the facts. Don’t simply follow personal opinions, negative rhetoric, or conspiracy theories that do not offer a meaningful alternative to a WSR designation. I have never found those to be beneficial.
Al Heaton is a third-generation Colorado rancher and farmer whose livestock and farming operation spans all three counties in the proposed NCA, including federal grazing allotments. He represented grazing, mining, and private land interests in the collaborative process that led to the NCA proposal.
