Arizona Strip

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • No More Wilderness SLC, UT
    April 24, 2012 10:48 a.m.

    @ Nan BW

    "Should we just tell those hardworking ranch owners who have owned land there for varying lengths of time, 'Tough. Find something else to do.' ?"

    Isn't that what happened to the indians when we came over to this continent?! So are we now getting back what we dished out as we settled across the West?? I don't like it now and I'm sure the natives didn't like it back then...

    @ Cato

    "We should be about conservation, not preservation. Wise use of resources, not non-use."

    I agree with that statement 100%! I would also add my opinion, that if there was a place to drill for oil or other natural resources, I'd rather see them do it in the remote sliver of the AZ Strip than somewhere like Moab or Kanab or the San Rafael Swell areas.

  • Cato Spanish Fork, UT
    April 23, 2012 11:59 a.m.

    Yes, the strip is in Arizona, but it is isolated from that state and mostly used by Utahns. No commercial use of the land? Ranchers have made living by grazing cattle on the otherwise unprofitable land for generations. Providing an income and family life for those in a rural spot most couldn't find on a map. Tourism dollars only go so far. No civilization has come about without developing resources, either farmed or mind. As we've become so used to our wealth and excess, we have forgotten where it came from. We have a tendency to do that with our bellies full and pantry's stocked. Some say protect the West? That's nice of the East to say after they've developed everything they have. You be the playground for everyone else. And good luck trying to pay for your school kids without any private land to generate a tax base. We should be about conservation, not preservation. Wise use of resources, not non-use.

  • Geezer Catonsville, MD
    April 23, 2012 9:30 a.m.

    It looks like the ambition of Utah lawmakers isn't just to control the federal lands in Utah, but to control those in Arizona. Have they forgotten the Arizona Strip is not in Utah?

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    April 23, 2012 7:00 a.m.

    You never really say why not. Just because Utah officials don't like federal management of lands? There is no obvious commercial use for the land, it is in another state, and in all my years, I have never seen any one care about this land. Access to it has always been a big problem. So why not? What real difference will it make?

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    April 22, 2012 10:51 p.m.

    Re: "State and local governments are too easily swayed by powerful special interests."

    That's liberalspeak for, "State and local governments are too easily swayed by powerful special interests not wholly-owned and controlled by cynical, politically motivated liberals."

    In other words, state and local governments are too likely to do what we, the people want, less likely to ignore the people and listen to liberal hustlers.

  • UTAH Bill Salt Lake City, UT
    April 22, 2012 3:27 p.m.

    I support any fed efforts to protect more land in the West. States like Utah have a poor record of protecting the land. If not for the feds, much more of our beautiful wilderness would be put under a bulldozer.

  • Nan BW ELder, CO
    April 22, 2012 3:34 a.m.

    Should we just tell those hardworking ranch owners who have owned land there for varying lengths of time, "Tough. Find something else to do." ? This does not seem to be a protection of property rights.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    April 21, 2012 6:10 p.m.

    We need to put oil wells pretty much everywhere. No need to save oil or wild places for future generations.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    April 21, 2012 11:50 a.m.

    I recently drove the highway between Hurricane and Fredonia, Arizona for the first time in MANY years. I was astonished at the new housing developments that have popped up along that road. Dry desert land filled with more houses.

    Somebody is making money off the deal.

  • Henderson Orem, UT
    April 21, 2012 10:25 a.m.

    @ Mav

    "So go ahead, sue the feds. Just make sure you do it on your OWN time and OWN dime."

    If there's one thing republicans have taught me over the my lifetime's history is that they are NEVER afraid to spend someone else's paycheck.

    Republicans are addicted to large spending, unsustainable government growth, and destroying the Constitution.

    Just look for example, how government growth increased and how spending skyrocketed from Clinton to Bush.

    Unsustainable tax cuts, more government subsidies, TARP, bailouts, bridges to nowhere, wars, No Child Left Behind, the F-22 (costs over 120 million per jet!).

    No wonder why our surpluses were quickly overturned into massive amounts of debt.

    Republicans are addicted to spending and government growth. They love handouts and entitlements to oil companies, wall street, and the rich.

    Republicans are great... If you want your money to be handed out to someone who hasn't earned your paycheck.

    The Republicans in Utah are perfect examples of this. They will spend your hard earned tax money to sue the federal government... IN order to benefit their special interest groups who wish to take advantage of natural resources.

    Gee, thanks.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    April 21, 2012 10:01 a.m.


    1. a statue, building or other structure erected to commemorate a notable person or event.

    2. a structure or site of historical importance or interest.

    3. an enduring and memorable example or reminder.

    I suppose you could argue the last definition?

    I oppose this designation of "monument" to huge wilderness areas as an assault on the English language.

    Gay used to mean "carefree"; love used to indicate intense affection for someone or something, not lust; marriage meant the legal union of a man and woman. I protest that the English language is being systematically or inadvertently destroyed.

    And please let's beautify land or put it to use. If your backyard was but a wilderness the neighbors would be understandably concerned. If you were too old to improve it your neighbors hopefully would help you out.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    April 21, 2012 9:43 a.m.


    Scare tactics at their finest, is what this editorial is....

    No one other than a few angry and bought off state legislators are still smarting over Clinton's creation of a national monument which prevented the mining of precious resources there. The rest of us either didn't care in the first place or have since moved on.

    Of course, I cannot necessarily blame those legislators for still being angry. If I were being bought off errr receiving "campaign contributions" from those wanting to exploit Utah's natural resources, I'd be pretty angry too about the federal government protecting those lands.

    Here's my suggestion...

    If legislators want to waste money into suing the federal government, that's fine. Just make sure that it comes out of their OWN wallets. I don't want MY tax money to be wasted on something so frivolous like suing the federal government over their creation of national monuments in Utah.

    I personally, either will support the federal government in protecting lands or am indifferent to millionaires wanting to further exploit us.

    So go ahead, sue the feds. Just make sure you do it on your OWN time and OWN dime.

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    April 21, 2012 7:09 a.m.

    Environmentally sensitive land in Utah is best served by having it controlled by the federal government. State and local governments are too easily swayed by powerful special interests. If Utah had their way they would sell Delicate Arch to McDonalds and let them paint it gold. If you want your grandkids to have any undeveloped wild spaces you had best keep it out of the clutches of locals.