One of the "facts" being thrown around is that Monument designation will
bring greatly increased numbers of tourists. Does anybody have any figures
showing how much this has been with previous sites which get Monument
The State of Utah cannot manage it's own State lands and especially the
enforcement and maintenance costs. The cronyism of the legislators in the GOP
will erode the process. The John Swallow and Governor Herbert goal was to get
all the Federal land review completed and even sue the Federal government for
the land. There is or will not be enough water for development so the real
estate and development legislators and governor won't get much profit or
name recognition. Public land at the State level will not be an improvement.
ATV trails will open up more erosion and potential travel to ancient ancestral
sites that have not been unearthed. It is good the Secretary came to see the
land and have public meetings.The federal government and bureaucracy
have spelled out processes that do evolve. Hopefully, the Utah Representives
will have an open and fair meeting with those of all local and native Americans
who have an interest in their ancestral land and a desire to preserve it for our
citizens.Fair and open meetings with integrity and honor should be
the goernment's process.
UtahBlueDevil: It is true southern Utah rural communities are struggling for
economic survival, but we don't want to turn into another Moab -- crowded
and crazy where minimum wage earners can't afford rent, and businesses
close down 4 months a year. If you want a cause to help the Native American
population, bring jobs down to the reservation. Let them enjoy the lands of the
Bears Ears without a ranger breathing down their neck, and red tape to fill out.
They have had enough broken promises, and this National Monument does not bode
well for them in the future.
Re: 2 Bits The Feds have already been managing the majority of this proposed
land in San Juan County via the BLM. Is that why they only had 1 ranger out in
this staggering expanse of wilderness? They talk the talk but don't have
the money to supervise this, or other large National Parks for that matter.
That's what happens when you have an $18.6 trillion dollar national debt.
And you want more territory to manage? Estimates say it will require a minimum
of 1000 rangers to patrol 1.9 million acres. What kind job have they been doing
in other Parks, and large monuments? That's what you need find out before
we as a nation take on more tax burdens.
I just want to provide clarification to the comment by Watercolormom claims that
"the fees to take those pictures go from $0 to at least $180 per
session"... if the lands become a monument. Per the US
government site... it very clearly stated "The NPS will not
require a permit for photographers, commercial or non-commercial, to go anywhere
or to do anything that members of the public are generally allowed to go or do
without a permit.""Generally speaking with editorial and
fine-art work, there is no need for a permit, because you'd be
photographing only what is found in the park, and not using a crew. Even if your
photos are going to be used as commercial stock, as long as they are taken in
accordance with the quoted paragraph you don't need to apply for a special
permit. ""The comments in this article generally apply to
the lands administrated by the National Park Service (NPS). This includes
National Parks, National Monuments, National Seashores and Lakeshores, and a few
other designations."So her daughter in no way should be charged
$180 to take her pictures, monument or not.
"Matthew Anderson is policy analyst for the Coalition for Self-Government in
the West, a project of the Salt Lake City-based Sutherland Institute."Enough said right there. The argument here is so convoluted.
A monument status will bring harm to the land because it was increase access to
hikers and tourist to these lands...?...? In a time when these communities are
struggling for economic survival, Southerland says that we need to protect these
lands from tourist to protect native American rights.Watercolormom.... I am sorry but if your daughter relies on using public
lands for her business for free... that is just a really bad business model.
Very few businesses get to rely on public lands for free to run their business
on. Add to that per the government website, there is no fee to photograph at
national parks or monuments. There is a fee to run a workshop - but that ranges
from $50 - $100.The headline is correct..... the argument over the
Monument designation and its impact is based on false narratives... and this
Sutherland piece is just yet another of those false narratives. This is not as
black and white as many paint it.
I have been trying to think of something that would feel similar to those who
live in the city. So here goes my try at that...I used to live in
Provo and have visited Provo/Orem area many times. While there, I have noticed
that the pollution problem is huge. As well as the traffic. So I have already
quietly gone to your city councils and proposed that there no longer be any
vehicle traffic in these two cities. They agree!Now this is good for
you. You all get more exercise. The pollution is down. I don't mind because
I like to ride the local transit system. But truthfully, if I need to do some
major shopping will go elsewhere. I really don't believe that this
will hurt you. How will this change how you make a living? The stores will still
be there. The schools will still be there. You have cleaner air. When you
disagree and they have a meeting to meet with you about it. I bus in people at
my own expense to say that it is a greatplan. You just didn't know
that you needed it. You're welcome.
Thank you Ernest Bass for asking.In this debate there only seems to be shouting
how everyone knows best. But there is the rare person that really wants to sit
down and learn the facts. My daughter runs a photo studio here. Most
of her pictures are taken in the surrounding mountains/dessert. If this were to
be turned into a national monument, the fees to take those pictures go from $0
to at least $180 per session. She is lucky to get that much from each client
that she books. Although, we have been told that tourism will go up
and therefore there is no problem. Most of those jobs are seasonal at best. All
one has to do is take a look at Moab and Garfield County to get a sense of what
this really means. If you will take a look at the Grand Staircase
National Monument, they had to declare economic state of emergency last year.
Their schools have decreased by more than half. Ranchers have been forced out of
business. They call the winter months the starving months. I could go on and on.
@watercolormom: How would a monument take away your livelihoods? Serious
question, I haven't heard what jobs it would take away.
Simone Griffin and watercolor, nope not missed at all. Proximity is not
ownership, nor does Not give you more rights than other American's You DO
not own the land. I would hope that other locals had as much respect
as you say you do, and I have met many good people in the small towns, (and some
gun toten' complete lunatics) but love the small town idea, and have lived
in a few of them.That being said, I trust our politicians at the
capital like Mike Noel etc.. to steal it out from under you in a New York
second, if they thought they could profit from it's destruction. They have
shown this time and again.
There are many different locales and quadrants of the proposed Bears Ears area.
Cedar Mesa for example, S of Natural Bridges, has a paved road down the
"middle" and dirt spur roads that head to canyon access points. These
have been in existence for decades and have been popular to the public for
years. Doubtful that visitation in some of these areas is going to increase that
much. Other more remote sections have dirt roads leading into the areas. Unless
for some reason they are paved, it's doubtful that visitation is going to
increase much more than incrementally. Front range zones may see more people;
middle and backcountry wilderness area, probably will not.The voices and
views in this piece - represent a small section of the Native Americans;
otherwise, most Indian groups have supported the Monument cause feeling the Feds
will provide much more protection than that that has existed for the past 100
Prometheus Platypus are you saying that more people will create less problems?
Really? I am really sorry that you miss the whole point of this.
Apparently, you think this is about me and the solitude of this area. While that
is really nice. (We live here because we love the land. That is kind of the
same.) We are most concerned about the land that we love and how it is cared
for. Have there been some cases where there has been people not taking care of
the land. Yes. This monument will not stop that. Those cases have come from
everywhere. Just because someone did something they shouldn't does not make
everyone bad. I have not decided that because you live in Orem, UT
and there was a murder there that you are a murderer. And I don't mind if
you disagree with me. But I would like it if you would look a little more into
this subject. All I keep hearing is protect the bears ears. But all I see is
eventual ruin for the bears ears. I love this land and live here.
Why in the world would I ruin it?
@ 2 bitsI think the evidence speaks for itself. The Feds clearly
manage lands better than locals. If Utah cannot manage the lands it currently
owns why should it be given even more?
@GaryO Virginia Beach, VARE: "90% of Utah should consist of National
Monuments.I am tired of our land in Utah being exploited and ruined by the
mean, greedy, and careless Religious extremists who run that state"...---Uumm... where do I start.#1. Why is somebody in
Virginia Beach VA tired of what we are doing in Utah?#2. What does
religion have to do with it?#3. If you want 90% of a State you
don't live in to be National Monuments... Why not 100% of the State? Why
not make Utah 100% a National Monument (if you're going to make 90% of the
State a National Monument)?#4. If you want 90% of Utah to be
National Monuments... would you support making 90% of Virginia a National
Monument? And if not... why not? Is Virginia not as cool and worth preserving
as Utah?#5. If you make 90% of Utah a National Monument... where do
you put the people? Where are the people of Utah allowed to live and build
homes for the next generation?Turning 90% of any State into a
National Monument is just ridiculous.
@Maverick,RE: Using algae in Utah lake as a reason for this monument...---Are you seriously assuming if Utah Lake were a national
monument... Algae wouldn't grow there?Or that the Federal Government
could stop algae from growing there?Or that the somebody in Washington
would have noticed the algae growing before the locals living around the
lake??Parts of Lake Powell have been closed for algae blooms some
years... it's a National Park. So much for that silly assumption.Your logic is ridiculous.-------RE: "Let's
erect this monument today"... because there's algae in Utah Lake?
Ridiculous!I think Utah responded to the algae bloom as soon as
they could (as soon as it appeared). Kinda hard to react before it even appears
isn't it? Even for Federal authorities...There are algae
blooms in different areas of the ocean every year. Is that Utah's fault
too?There are algae blooms in various lakes every year. Is that
Utah's fault?Does Federal Government prevent all algae blooms
on their land? No.Algae in an algae prone lake in Utah County... is
a bogus reason for a national monument in Wayne county.
@ 2 bitsCall me crazy but isn't the shutting down of Utah lake,
Jordan River, and all of its canals a red flag? Isn't that scary? Who is in
charge of those waterways?I think local control has completely and
utterly failed. For how long will these water sources be toxic? 1
month? 1 year? 10 years?I just feel that if local control really
wants to gain support then maybe it should actually prove to the rest of us that
it can maintain the lands that it currently has stewardship over. I don't
think the lord would reward a child for bad behavior. Why should the Feds award
Utah anything? Let's erect this monument today.
90% of Utah should consist of National Monuments.I am tired of our
land in Utah being exploited and ruined by the mean, greedy, and careless
Religious extremists who run that state.
Prometheus Platypus You're missing a huge point here... vandalism happens
everywhere whether it is a monument or not. Vandalism happens in the Grand
Staircase all the time. Just because it is a monument doesn't mean it will
stop illegal activities. There is already more protection in this area because
of the problems you referred to and they have decreased greatly. Also, I think
you don't have all the best information when it comes to grave robbing and
looting. It sounds like you are getting information from the media on this. The
last big piece you are missing is that you are from OREM and like you said you
VISIT! You are not a local and don't understand what this will do to the
Sutherland Institute again? 95% of their funding comes from the
"Donors' Trust," the "anonymous" source which experts call
"the dark money ATM of the right wing." The institution
behind this article has no interest whatever in the Navajos. Their appeal to the
interests of the Navajos is naked cynicism. The real interest of Sutherland is
to ensure that their donors, which are undoubtedly oil, gas and mining
interests, get as much as they can grab in southeastern Utah.
2 bits said: "What do people living in Bluff, Blanding, Montecello and White
Mesa, Mexican Hat, or that county in general, know about this land? We in SLC
and especially folks in Washington DC need to be managing it for them!"Yes we've seen what they do, loot and sell antiquities, ride over
protected sites, and justify this bad behavior and then call the authorities
that are trying to prevent it "Bullies" Yep salt of the earth.Watercolormom, While I appreciate that you enjoy the solitude it will still
remain for a long time, but with more people then there will be less opportunity
for grave robbers and ATV rallies.....and yes I've been, i love
the outdoors and have tried to visit as many corners of the state as possible,
so far the only time I get turned back is by private property signs, or mining
@Lew Jeppson,RE: Your lecture going back to Europeans pushing Native
Americans out, and Native American cultures worthy of preservation...---Of course Native Americans have culture worthy of preservation.
Don't assume if you don't want Obama's monument you don't
want preservation. I want these treasures preserved. Don't need a 2
million acre monument to preserve them.Not wanting people in
Washington in charge of the land instead of local populations... does NOT mean
you don't want the treasures of the area preserved. How long
have the rock art and archaeological treasures been there... and they are still
there... So why assume if we don't get the monument in the next 6 months
they will be gone? That's bogus hype.=======RE: "As far as I'm concerned anything coming out of Sutherland
is presumptively false"...---Do you like being
"prejudiced"?Your statement is the very definition of
"Prejudice" (look it up).Assuming whatever they say is false
without even needing to look at it... is the very definition of
"Prejudice" and "closed-mindedness".Research.
Don't reflexively assume. Investigate their statements. Don't trust
"presumptive" judgement.No group is always wrong on
everything. Even Democrats.
Liberal Larry. You're right all U.S. land does belong to all Americans, so
go use the Bears Ears. No one is stopping you right now. Then once you are
familiar with the area, post your opinion.
It seems like to me, that most of you who are commenting have no idea what is
going on. This land is national forest. All we are asking is that it is not
designated a national monument. A national monument would bring more people to
this land. We keep being told that it is good because we will gain more
tourists. All we see with tourists, is more pillaging of the land. This was proven when so many people from all over the country (they were
bussed in and paid for their presence) showed up to let Sally Jewel know that
they know what is best for this area and it's residents. They left trash
and cigarette butts everywhere. They stomped through the woods so they could
see the place that they came to "protect". I was told by one
couple that it does not matter that we may lose our lively hoods and that it
would hurt the economy here. They just shouted at me and my children to move to
SLC then. Unbelievable.
"The Sutherland institute is in the bag for as little protection as
possible, and the State taking over and selling our public lands
heritage."And who doesn't know this? Let's take a
broad view of the situation. Before the arrival of Europeans North America was
occupied by a wide variety of civilizations. Europeans encroached on these
civilizations, doing their best to destroy them and trash their sacred places.
Now, of course, the first line Europeans are being encroached upon through
immigration. Doesn't feel so good does it? Native Americans
have cultures worthy of preservation. Contrary to myth these are not
degenerate. Whatever arrangement is adopted, it is necessary that sacred sites
be protected. They may not be because the Sutherland Institute in league with
their Republicans allies has starved the parks service, forest service, the BLM,
and wildlife services. As far as I'm concerned anything coming
out of Sutherland is presumptively false.
Bears Ears decision has little impact on the people posting on this topic. When
was the last time you set foot on that land? Besides visiting the already
declared smaller National Monuments there?Bears Ears decision has
more impact on locals that live there.... Who every day set foot on that land.
Indian and non-indian folks who live in that area and recreate in that area all
their life, not folks from SLC or Washington DC who may visit once or twice in
their lifetime if ever at all.People from SLC and Washington
lecturing them... or taking control of their land away from them... just seems
wrong. I'm sure it SEEMS like the right thing to do... to somebody from
SLC. Heck, those hicks don't know anything about anything, why
are we letting them control the land the live on and around. We surely know
better than them how to manage it!What do people living in Bluff,
Blanding, Montecello and White Mesa, Mexican Hat, or that county in general,
know about this land? We in SLC and especially folks in Washington DC need to
be managing it for them!
The Sutherland institute is in the bag for as little protection as possible, and
the State taking over and selling our public lands heritage.
Local control of environmentally, and archeologically sensitive, lands has never
worked! The National Park system was a response to the excesses of local
citizens, and economic special interests.Federal lands belong to all
Americans and should be owned and controlled by the federal government!