Comments about ‘BLM pulls land near parks from sale’

This is good. Our national parks can still be beautiful too.

My heck, what is wrong with a hole in the ground every so often. The BLM has studied this to death -- 10 years of studies at least. Let them lease the land for energy activity. 100's of cars and tourists aren't any worse than a big truck or two.

SUWA and its ilk apparently lost the battle on these leases during the BLM study process. Mind you, they won the battle on millions of other acres. Let the bidding sale go forward.

Any oil companies that bid on the rest of the controversial tracts will be buying themselves a fight - with the next administration as well as with Utah conservationists. Fools rush in! But the next chapter is far from certain.

Heckster, I was standing at the Green River Overlook at Dinosaur National Monument, with leasing map in hand, looking at the foreground and background views that the BLM wants to develop. I assure you, it was not an attractive thought. You may value your Utah national parks so lightly, but I, and local merchants who depend on the tourist trade, are not so foolish.

You are not a local merchant who depends on the tourist trade in Uintah County. There are no tourists because they have no place to stay. The energy industry has given local merchants in the Uintah Basin the best two years of their lives in 2007 and 2008. Record sales, record profits. Don't give us the tourist spiel this day. It ain't true and you know it!

It's true, Heckster, that due to the gas boom overnight lodgings are hard to get in Vernal. (of course, you are glossing over people who don't sty overnight, but let's ignore that.) That's why no one is missing the falloff in tourists right now. But remember, my rambunctious friend, that 300,000 people PER YEAR used to visit Dinosaur. When the oil and gas boom tapers off, as it inevitably will, do you think those 300,000 people will be missed? It IS true, and don't I know it!

The fact is that the BLM has leased a huge number of parcels for oil and gas exploration in Utah during the Bush term, and the vast majority were not controversial. This is different. This appears to be a slap in the face to common sense environmental stewardship by the outgoing BLM team, who are only representing the oil and gas industry. Wanting to inflict permanent damage to some of the most iconic features of the national park system of preservation, this act of trashing our country is hideous and should not be tolerated.

Your choice of words leaves much to be desired: "permanent damage", "trashing our country," "hideous". Come on now, no one can do stuff like that on BLM or National Park acreage. There would be prison time for sure.

Get real. Any company doing business on public lands meets standards of performance. Just ask them. They'll tell you.

I don't see local Utah political representatives helping to represent the interests of Utah in this political decision. Where are they? What supposedly do they think and what do they feel Utahns want?

Threats to our precious national parks come in all shapes and sizes. As a former national park ranger, I can testify that our parks need all the protection they can get. Consider the recurring proposals for open-pit coal mining directly beneath the southern viewpoint in Bryce Canyon or hydrothermal drilling close outside Yellowstone's boundaries in an area that could be rich with power possibilities -- but what effects might it have on Yellowstone's hydrothermal features. There are those who are willing and ready to sacrifice our scenic, natural and historic heritage for a few more dollars in their already swollen wallets. And the administration of President Cheney and his little buddy have been kept under a bit of control by a few courageous professionals within the BLM, Forest Service and Park Service. People who frequently risked their careers to stand up and be counted.

By the way, Utah Congressman Jim Matheson was instrumental in helping provide this small reprieve for our park areas.

Appreciate your service and insight. I don't think, however, the acreage proposed by the BLM hardly falls into the same category as forests and rivers in Yellowstone Park or Bryce Canyon. One gets the sense that the BLM is trying to drill in the middle of the dinosaur bones at Dinosaur Natl Monument. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The BLM did their homework and identified lands that could be used for energy exploration. It wasn't all the land around a park, probably only a small fraction, and certainly not the sensitive structures that can a park a park.

Let's quit pushing the panic button. Energy development is good for communities, keeps jobs in the US, and may keep the cost of our gasoline and natural gas down to a reasonable rate.

I visited the monument, with the map of proposed leases in hand, and the BLM DIDN'T do their homework. Right on the boundary, right on the Green River, right where beautiful rock formations form the impressive scenery, the BLM was proposing leasing with only "standard stipulations": In other words, business as usual. If you think the BLM always does their homework and comes up with the right plan, I've got a bridge over the Green River at Jensen I'd like to sell you. It's the one the BLM plans to use to access their "homework".

They're talking about drilling in Spanish Valley! That is a freakin suburb of Moab. This is IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, right by the golf course. Hello? Does this sound like a place to put an oil rig? Noise pollution. Air pollution. Light pollution. Large trucks driving down neighborhood roads. Least we also forget that's near Ken's Lake, the water reservoir for Moab (since they don't take water from the Colorado River).

No, this is not well thought out.