Christopher Watkins, Deseret News archives
In a recent article, arguments were given that for an "insignificant" amount of money, determined by the authors to be between 10-15 percent of certain costs of energy companies in the state of Utah, the sage grouse can be protected. Do Utah residents really want to pay 15 percent more for our energy costs to save the sage grouse? The government tells me I have sage grouse eggs on my property, but I have never seen them. I know they are on some adjoining property that has been developed for mountain homes, and the birds seem to do just fine in the surrounding environment with cabins several hundred feet away. I have nothing against the grouse and I think we can all live together, but the grouse should not take precedence over energy costs, range feeding cattle and planned development.
The greatest enemy to the grouse are the crows and ravens that eat the grouse eggs. Maybe we should kill the ravens and crows.
- In our opinion: Brexit and the U.K.'s new...
- On Second Thought: Departugal, Italeave and...
- In our opinion: California considering bold...
- John Florez: If elephants can dance so can...
- Letter: Come together
- Letter: Reducing teacher load
- Charles Krauthammer: Hillaryism: Tired...
- Robert J. Samuelson: Are you a 'work martyr'?
- Letter: Shooter's motives 39
- Letter: Carbon emissions fee 30
- In our opinion: California considering... 29
- Kathleen Parker: Repeat, retreat, reload 23
- Letter: Brexit shortsighted? 20
- My view: Taxpayers should call foul on... 19
- Letter: Panhandlers in Sandy 19
- In our opinion: Brexit and the U.K.'s... 18