SITLA is supposed to operate for the benefit of Utah schools and students. That means more than just generating revenues in the short term.
Utah's air quality has already deteriorated significantly — and not just along the urban Wasatch Front. And much of that deterioration is due to drilling, mining, fracking and the overall burning of fossil fuels. Most Utah kids and teachers understand that, even if their public officials and SITLA board members may not.
It’s not a choice of schoolchildren vs. hunters. It’s a choice of schoolchildren vs. the growing pollution and deterioration of our state.
The Deseret News ran an article the other day which included, “It’s no secret that the world will have to make the transition from fossil fuels to something more sustainable” ("The ethanol strategy," Aug. 13).
Why doesn’t SITLA take the lead — in the interests of all Utah residents — and manage the lands for renewable, sustainable, minimally polluting, minimally degrading activities — even if it means the "return" might be a little less.
Salt Lake City
- On Second Thought: Departugal, Italeave and...
- John Hoffmire: The Amalfi Coast lemon: tasty...
- Letter: Panhandlers in Sandy
- Letter: Metal detectors
- George F. Will: The Great War: the hinge of...
- My View: High-risk pools: the life jacket...
- Richard Davis: Brexit wasn’t really...
- Kathleen Parker: Repeat, retreat, reload
- Kathleen Parker: Repeat, retreat, reload 59
- Letter: Shooter's motives 40
- Hal Boyd: Hal Boyd: Why Mitt Romney's... 35
- Letter: Brexit shortsighted? 32
- Letter: Carbon emissions fee 31
- Jay Evensen: Prayer can solve many of... 28
- Dan Liljenquist: Can Donald Trump be... 24
- Kathleen Parker: Clinton, Warren make... 23