| OCR Text |
Show 120 Clyde and other opponents of Canyon lands often insisted they supported creating national parks, just not large parks that excluded developmcnt. 353 Several weeks after the governor appointed his sixteen-member committee, the group presented its own national park proposal for southeastern Utah: three national parks, each encompassing distinct points of interest in the Canyonlands area. The Salt lake Tribune summed up the proposal: "Thus the committee's view was that such areas as the Island in the Sky, Upheaval Dome, the Needles and the Land of Standing Rocks be made separate parks or monuments - in effect, single-use islands, surrounded by a sea of multiple-use public land operated by the Bureau of Land Managcmcnt."354 Clyde's and Udall's divergent visions ofa national park or national parks in southeastern Utah were soon articulated in competing legislation. Utah's Democratic delegation sponsored a single-park bill, while Senator Bennett proposed three "island" parks. One month after Udall's excursion to promote his park plan, the Democrats in Utah's congressional delegation introduced identical bills in the llousc and Senate to create Canyonlands National Park. The proposed park, in size and management, fell somewhere between the proposals championed by Udall and Clyde. It would encompass 300,000 acres surrounded by a "buffer zone" that would allow limited mining and other development. Senator Moss and representatives King and Peterson, the bill's sponsors, presented their proposal as a compromise that included the best of the polarizing proposals: "This would assure the state of all the benefits of multiple use and protect the m Lundstrom, "Utahns Back Clyde," Deseret News and Salt Lake Telegram , July 28, 1961. JS.. Jerome K. Full, ''Clyde Panel Upholds 'Limited Wilderness,"' Salt Lake Tribune, August 9, 1961 , 13. |
