The use of natural boundaries as dividers makes sense. Historically, people used rivers and mountain ranges to divide communities, states and nations.The same ought to hold true when drawing the boundaries for national parks and monuments.

With that in mind, a proposal to double the size of Canyonlands National Park deserves a long look by Utah's congressional delegation.On its face, the notion is logical and is not without precedent. Rep. Chris Cannon last year pushed through Congress a modest expansion of Arches National Park so its boundaries would follow natural geography. Walt Dabney, departing superintendent of Canyonlands and Arches who is leaving to head the Texas state park system, supported that and has lobbied to realign Canyonlands as well. His efforts may be paying off.

Gov. Mike Leavitt's spirit of "enlibra" may be contagious -- at least mildly -- and there are some signs of compromise on both sides of the great wilderness debate. The Canyonlands proposal appears one area ripe for consensus.

The park encompasses 333,000 acres. Proposed expansion would increase it by 519,000 acres to 852,000. Amazingly, nobody is laughing -- a least not out loud. None of Utah's delegation in Washington is lobbing grenades, either. That is equally encouraging but not shocking. No one should be concerned about making a park out of land that already is locked up by default, and everyone should be happy about increasing public access to such a beautiful area.

Of the additional 519,000 acres, 150,000 are part of the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. The remaining 370,000 seem to have clear wilderness characteristics. No private land is included except for the Dugout Ranch, purchased by the Nature Conservancy. The larger proposed boundary would follow the natural geography of the canyon rims that encircle the basin.

View Comments

The expansion proposal is reasonable and sensible, and it deserves a fair hearing. Utahns should be encouraged by this potential area of compromise on the fractious subject of wilderness -- a glimmer of light in a darkened debate that has historically given little hope of seeing the dawn.

Looking for comments?
Find comments in their new home! Click the buttons at the top or within the article to view them — or use the button below for quick access.