Comments about ‘In our opinion: Rulings should cause introspection at BLM’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Nov. 9 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
KDave
Moab, UT

Lets hope China is willing to loan us the money to pay for all these "studies" and resulting lawsuits.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "Conservation groups are praising a federal court ruling . . . ."

Oh, those aren't "conservation" groups.

Rather, they're mindless radical greenies and their allies in the political left. They've co-opted a corrupt, out-of-touch activist judge to illegally pressure BLM to abandon its statutory mandate to encourage multiple use of federal lands by real people. They insist, rather, on substitution of an unsubstantiated, lunatic-fringe impact analysis that views mere presence of humans as somehow toxic to nature, for the requirements of a law they don't like.

Their intent is not to preserve, but to destroy. By bullying the real people, who have for centuries conserved and preserved Utah in a state that makes it attractive to radical greenies today, to leave behind our heritage and, ultimately, the "king's forest" they intend to create on absentee federal landholdings throughout the West.

It's just sad that their lap dogs in the media, not only cover-up and make excuses for them, but actively spout their disingenuous bilge.

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

"Rather, they're mindless radical greenies and their allies in the political left." Over the top bunkum. The "greenies" as you call them want to preserve some wilderness in Utah. So do I. I understand that balancing wilderness with jobs is a tough deal, as do most of the "greenies" I have met. I tend to differ with them however in that I, being a labor-sensitive socialist favor jobs over wilderness in tough cases. But the "greenies" I've met are for the most part not the wild eyed nut cases you make them out to be. That has been my experience.

BeagleDancer
Wausau, WI

Multiple use does not mean eroding the landscape, filling the air with noise and exhaust fumes, and spewing trash onto the landscape. Motorized users can do that in their own yards. A good ruling.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "Multiple use does not mean eroding the landscape, filling the air with noise and exhaust fumes, and spewing trash onto the landscape."

That's true. In fact, multiple use DISCOURAGES all those things. And has for many, many years.

The greenie goal of excluding real people from wild Utah, on the other hand, actually ENCOURAGES all the very things greenies disingenuously claim they oppose. Since nature abhors a vacuum, greenie success in banning responsible recreational users from federal multiple use lands, inevitably encourages and enables the squatters, pot hunters, illegal miners, and marijuana growers to move in and take over, resulting in the evils laid out above -- and more.

The actions of mindless leftists, greenies, and government bureaucrats have been thoroughly discredited, time and time again. They ALWAYS encourage and subsidize the very evils they disingenuously claim will justify their unwarranted, politically-motivated power grabs.

If greenies really loved wild Utah, they'd side with real people, AGAINST destructive leftist politicos and the criminals that have a proven track record of mindless destruction.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

I agree with repubs here. Lets use every single acre of land in mining and extracting precious natural resources. I'm sure our grandchildren will understand and forgive us.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments