| OCR Text |
Show keeps sending me latest articles and communications from the Bureau, I interpret, and we_ have periodic exploratory discussions of the meaning of developments and where we'll go.next. He also keeps Fred updated on BuRec communications to the Sierra Club - which are far more extensive than what CRCUP gets.(Why? We requested this,too ' I've been working with Fred and Pete Hovingh on a membership "brochure" "form" . It was sent back'-to me for comment. It is straight facts - no illustrations, no pizzaz, no real appeal for public involvement. So, I've been trying to duplicate the type of appeal other groups utilize. And, as I've worked on this, I see that we may need two types of forms: one to go to Utah residents; a second to go to more sophisticated "joiners". What facts I consider essential to tell the pub lie about what is going on and what isses we are dealing with, are too "far out" for most Utah people. Even folk in Wasatch Mountain Club are not interested in the CUP. Even CRCUP fly fishermen are limited to pressing for stream flows - thinking they can get these and still have CUP. The Utah mentality is a difficult one to work within. Anyway, I'll propose to Fred that he utilize what facts he can get by with, in one brochure, and print for wider national distribution a far more penetrating paper. I don't know whether he'll go along with this or not. The problem, as I see it, is that EPC, NRDC, EDF, Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation members won't respond to the level of appeal we have to work at in Utah. I can't see the total benefit for CRCUP action coming from not presenting major developments to the constituency you want to get Involved I I've sent a whole packet of background information and suggestions to a fellow who works in the Forest Service in Duchesne, Utah. He and I had discussions at his house last year. He is not a professional forester but knows the entire CUP issue since its inception - 1922. I've asked him to map Outstanding National Resource Waters for all streams he knows on the Uintas. And, I've explored possibilities with him for involving Duchesne County people - farmers and taxpayers - who are disgruntled with payment of $350,000 annually for water they don't get. The issue of getting Duchesne County involved is tricky because you are also dealing with farmers who want all the benefits of stored water (CUP) but not the present development plans. They want supplemental water. They are far too unsophisticated to understand 208 Water Quality planning...and the Carter Water Policy. I've also sent along a letter requesting group and individual support for CRCUP (enclosed here) with a cautionary note to this Elden Welkin on its use. It's so difficult to straddle fences all the time; you need people's help but you get compromised by the constraints under which they'll help. Anyway, this man is astute and perhaps can pull together for us, a Duchesne constituency. They do have to be careful, though, because the BuRec had a big office in this small town of Duchesne, and opponents of CUP have to go around "whispering"! How's that for a democracy! I've also asked him for Insight into where the Indians really are on CUP. I'm sending you the Draft material for the membership brochure - not illustrated, not yet organized adquately, but you need some of the information on it. This is my proposal for a membership appeal - it may not be accepted by Fred. Don't forget Conte! Dorothy |
