I’ve lived in Dolores County nearly all my life, and bought my first land here in 1950. I grew up working on a farm near Dove Creek, and I’ve seen this area go through a lot of changes over the years. Some of these have been good, some bad; but one thing I’ve learned is that things are going to change whether we like it or not. The important thing is to make sure that we locals who work in agriculture have a chance to influence those changes.

We had this chance with Sen. Campbell’s NCA bill, but he took it away from us. I’m surprised that some of my fellow landowners seem happy over that. Actually, it shows clearly that we’ve lost a battle in the struggle to maintain our rural way of life. Instead of having the chance to influence the particulars of how the NCA would be managed, the hard-line position of the Southwest Landowners Association has given us a national monument. And we’re sure to have less say over what’s in it. But it still can work.

When I began farming in the 1940s, America had over 7 million farmers. Today we number about one million. We must wake up to reality before we’re all gone, for we don’t have enough votes to control this region by ourselves.

Two things are clear. We must protect farming and ranching in our counties so we don’t end up like a lot of other places in Colorado who are constantly fighting runaway growth. We also have a huge store of archaeological sites and artifacts that must be kept intact, out of respect for those who lived here in past times, and so we can study and enjoy these sites.

I’ve felt all along that the NCA was the best way to accomplish these goals, but that’s no longer an option. A national monument can still do this, but it’s got to be the right kind of monument. While we won’t have as much say as we would have with an NCA, we can still work to make sure that the area is managed for all the right kinds of uses. First, the monument should permit continued grazing on the public lands, and it’s up to local ranchers to become involved in forming the management plan. Secretary Babbitt has said he supports the maintenance of a local agricultural base, and we should make sure that this remains a provision of the monument. If we landowners keep cool, and work with moderate local county and city governments, we can still preserve much of our rural ways of life.

Of course, access to private property should not be infringed upon; but unlike some of the claims being made, both Campbell and Babbitt have already committed to this. It’s obvious that this monument will be a unique mix of public and private lands, and private land uses will need to be respected if it’s going to work out on the ground.

As for CO2 production, it’s fine to keep it going, but it ought to be kept out of Cross, Cahone and Squaw/Papoose Canyons. If they need to get to the gas reserves under the canyons, they should be required to slant drill from outside. The canyons are great areas for wildlife, along with containing numerous Anasazi sites. From our front yard, we look out on Squaw Canyon. I feel strongly that these areas should stay undeveloped, as they are now.

With these provisions, a national monument will work for us who live and make our livelihood off the land in Southwest Colorado. We can preserve these irreplaceable ruins, and continue to maintain our farming and ranching way of life.