Monument brings jobs

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    June 25, 2013 8:28 a.m.

    Not one post from CA, The writer wasn't from CA so who are you talking about mike?
    CA and WA for that matter have wonderful National and State Parks and I seldom hear
    any complaining except from those who have selfish interests in mind and are being
    prevented from some short term personal gain.

    Parks don't lock up the land they free it from being actively hunted and destroyed by private commercial interests.

    KDave said: "Designating it a National Monument did not create anything that was not already there."
    Very true, but now it will keep it that way, instead of creating strip mines that were not already there.

  • Utahhikerdad TOOELE, UT
    June 24, 2013 10:22 p.m.

    Some things are worth saving for their intrinsic value, not their extrinsic, monetary value -- a value that benefits very few for a very short time. We are blessed with many places intrinsically worth saving in Utah. We Utahns and our political leaders have shown little inclination to long-term thinking and every inclination to short-term gain. I, for one, am grateful for every square inch of land that has been spared, and will be spared, from development, and will remain forever wild.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    June 24, 2013 9:31 p.m.

    Yes, Mr. J the Federal government does create jobs.

    But don't tell the conservatives. It'll blow their little minds.

  • Mister J Salt Lake City, UT
    June 24, 2013 6:46 p.m.

    re: one old man

    "So why do you want to turn Utah into another California?"

    Because alot of people already have a Disneyland state of mind & it would cut down on travel???

    Seriously(?), I'm confused. According to the title of the article, it means the Federal Govt creates jobs.

  • Steve C. Warren WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    June 23, 2013 9:19 p.m.

    Great letter, Steve.

    Many of the greatest national parks/monuments were at first strongly opposed locally, then later embraced.

  • Res Novae Ashburn, VA
    June 23, 2013 6:32 a.m.

    @Mike Richards,

    "It's a weekend, so any comments must be pro-Sierra Club."

    I'm not a member of the Sierra Club, but I imagine that many of them were, like me, enjoying the outdoors instead of surfing through the DN letters section. I fail to see the logic of your assertion.

    "Nobody can state the obvious, which is that those who demand access to OUR State's virgin land are those who have spoiled THEIR State."

    Who is "demanding" access to Utah's land? The letter and many comments are simply pointing out that Utah's greatest treasures lie on the surface, not beneath the ground. I agree with that sentiment.

    Since your ire is particularly aimed at Californians, I note that they have 32 national parks in their state. You are welcome to visit there.

    Here in Virginia, we have 30 national parks. I spent Friday night camping in one with my family. It is an oasis of peace against encroaching development (our General Assembly apparently views development as Virginia's best 'natural' resource). Cars were there from up and down the eastern seaboard, filled with people who value Virginia's rich natural and historical heritage.

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    June 22, 2013 11:36 p.m.

    As usual Mike is exactly right on, and the big government leftist worshippers don't have a clue! Letter writer is all proud that big brother, (not the FREE market) stepped in and decided who is going to be in business....or not. The biggest problem with this country is that there are to many persons, who can only see half the equation. I think that it is a great idea to charge a "surcharge" to all the mindless patrons at the authors business.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    June 22, 2013 10:22 p.m.

    Land is only "locked up" to people who refuse to lace up some boots and go for a walk.
    If the State were to take federal land, that is when we would really set it become "locked up".

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    June 22, 2013 10:02 p.m.

    @mike richards. All of California's beaches are public. It is in their state constitution, but that doesn't mean people who live along the beach do not try to prevent public access and misinform people about their right to be on the beach.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    June 22, 2013 7:36 p.m.

    Liberal Larry,
    the letter was talking about Escalante, not Canyonlands, Zions, or Bryce.

    Liberals are always screaming about how we underfund education - slick willy locked up a lot of revenue sources for our schools when he waved his pen and created the monument - the day after he LIED to our congressional delegation and said he was not going to do so. I don't have so much trouble with the monument as in the way the liar slick willy did it. oh well, what do we expect from a dem?

    Maybe we should charge a school surcharge to everyone who visits the author's business since he is benefiting at our children's expense.

  • Thinkin\' Man Rexburg, ID
    June 22, 2013 4:09 p.m.

    The point here is not tourism or the monument, but the misuse of Federal power under the guise of the Antiquities Act. Clinton didn't even dare set foot in Utah for the signing, which speaks volumes. I believe the Act is unconstitutional as used in the last 20 years because it assumes powers not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 22, 2013 3:46 p.m.

    It is of interest that all businessmen don’t share the ego trip that they did it all by themselves.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    June 22, 2013 1:46 p.m.

    It's a weekend, so any comments must be pro-Sierra Club. No dissension is allowed. Nobody can state the obvious, which is that those who demand access to OUR State's virgin land are those who have spoiled THEIR State. They are those whose salaries allow them to travel, to explore, and to become "one with nature" while we, who live here, are expected to pay our debts with their "gratitude".

    How did they earn those salaries? Is it possible that they use electricity generated by coal? Is it possible that they travel on roads that use cement or coal based tar? Is it possible that they fly on airplanes that use fuel that was pumped out of the ground?

    Who made them special? Who gave them the right to use electricity, fly on airplanes or drive on highways and then tell us that any commerce that might "spoil" their vacation is wrong?

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    June 22, 2013 11:41 a.m.


    By all means!

    Lets turn the possession of our lands over to the likes of John Swallow and Jeremy Johnson. They'll for sure take care of our land!

    Just like the Uranium tailing in Moab that taxpayers were left footing the bill for after the company went out of business?

    Time for some of you to get informed and stop just playing ideological games.

  • FreedomFighter41 Orem, UT
    June 22, 2013 10:08 a.m.

    "Why can't we travel I-5 and see California like it was before crass commercialization turned it into the nation's food supplier?"

    Whether you know it or not, you just made the best case for creating these monuments one could ever make.

    So thanks Mike!

    Do we really want corrupt businesses to tear up and destroy our beautiful state? Don't we all enjoy having access to these lands? Don't we like to be able to go hiking, fishing, camping, etc without being impeded by gigantic farms, mines, oil drills, and, as Mike Richards stated, "Crass Commercialization?"

    Keep the federal land out of the hands of our corrupt legislators and greedy businessmen.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    June 22, 2013 9:57 a.m.

    Mike, virtually ALL the things you cite are reasons why we NEED to protect our Federal lands in Utah. It was not the Feds in other states that set those limits you decry in place. It was -- guess who -- the state legislatures!

    So why do you want to turn Utah into another California?

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    June 22, 2013 8:57 a.m.

    Ultimately, the struggle about Utah lands comes down to ego. Steve Roberts and many others find economic opportunities where the historic local powers, like Mike Noel, see infringement upon their personal agendas.

    I'd imagine news of Utah citizens like Steve Roberts finding economic success from tourism makes people like Mike Noel boiling mad, because it undermines their position that Utahns - or more specifically the local powers and historic favored families - should be the beneficiaries of the land by whatever means *they* decide is proper.

    It would be exactly the same thing if all the federal land were given to Utah and then the Utah State Legislature (somehow) decided to protect huge tracts for their scenic value, promoted tourism, etc.

    It's Mike Noel's land, not ours.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    June 22, 2013 8:41 a.m.

    Isn't it nice that people from other States dictate to Utahns that we must preserve our State for their enjoyment while they restrict us from even taking fruit into their State when we visit them while on vacation? Where are their national parks? Why are their beaches, their mountains, their lakes and their valleys not protected? Why can't we travel I-5 and see California like it was before crass commercialization turned it into the nation's food supplier?

  • KDave Moab, UT
    June 22, 2013 7:48 a.m.

    Designating it a National Monument did not create anything that was not already there.

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    June 22, 2013 7:25 a.m.

    Its amazing how many people in Utah bellyache about the wild lands in Utah being "locked up" by the federal government. Yet when ever I talk to out of state friends or family the first thing they mention is their trip to Zion National Park, or pictures they have seen of Bryce or Canyonlands. It is time for Utah to out grow this "gold rush" mentality and get on with the task of developing our intellectual capital. We need to look to countries like Germany and Japan for our future, and not extraction economies like South Africa and Saudi Arabia.

  • Baron Scarpia Logan, UT
    June 22, 2013 5:33 a.m.

    With California's cutting off of coal-fired power contracts by 2025, the coal in the monument is rapidly losing its value anyway. Can you imagine if extractors had been allowed to rip this up only for a couple of decades only for it to have shut down as demand dropped? Who would have paid for the reclamation of the land had those extraction companies gone bankrupt?

    I always think about those uranium companies that went bankrupt near Moab, and good ol' Uncle Sam and U.S. taxpayers had to clean up their mess when the uranium market went bust.