Bears Ears to be 160,000 acres?

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Zabilde Riverdale, UT
    Aug. 30, 2017 10:18 a.m.

    To all those claiming that American citizens just lost this land. Exactly where is it going? It's still going to be federally owned and managed by the BLM as it was before Clinton and Obama locked it away from multiple uses.

    It's not going to be strip-mined, surface mining is not really that effective here in Utah. The coal is too deep, so any mines will have a very small surface footprint. Drilling in the region has not been successful. So exactly where is this land going?

    Nowhere, it will remain, exactly as it has been, under federal control, available to managed mixed use.

    Your fear mongering is without merit and baseless. We don't have to lock up land to protect it. If it's still scenic today then we've been doing just fine managing it without making it a tourist destination. 160,000 or zero acres it would still remain controlled and managed by the Feds. Just not locked away, or subject to hoards of tourists.

  • eastcoastcoug Danbury, CT
    Aug. 28, 2017 1:23 p.m.

    I'm not an 'extreme enviro', whatever that is...I'm a lifelong GOP voter who's tired of my brothers who think they have to go lockstep with the loony bird in the WH.

    Trump says he's entitled to grope women...it's OK
    Trump loves Russia...so do we.
    Trump embraces the white supremacists...so do we
    Trump says we need to drill and dig more...so do we

    If you really care about developing rural America, don't support a return to the 1800's drill, dig and mine mentality. We need to preserve our land, build renewable energy and support tech jobs that pull kids through college and into a better lifestyle. Let's support an America that is great because it's competitive and has a bright future for all counties.

  • Liberal Survival on Planet Zion Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 28, 2017 10:38 a.m.

    @HSTucker -

    The Educator: "More catering to white supremacists and big gas lobbyists?"

    "What is with all the race-baiting on the left?"

    Possibly those on the left will be entitled to ask the identical line of questioning? If I may..."What is with all the" deflection, enabling, excuses for bigotry, misogyny and xenophobia on the right? Not to mention a complete and utter lack of integrity for supporting all the above! This faction dares to continue offering unwavering support to their supreme leader while simultaneously pulling the "family values" card. Again as poster "The Educator" has suggested numerous times..."Get educated"! Thank you.

  • Liberal Survival on Planet Zion Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 27, 2017 4:29 p.m.

    @HSTucker -

    The Educator: "More catering to white supremacists and big gas lobbyists?"

    "What is with all the race-baiting on the left?"

    Possibly those on the left will be entitled to ask the identical line of questioning? If I may..."What is with all the" deflection, enabling, excuses for bigotry, misogyny and xenophobia on the right? Not to mention a complete and utter lack of integrity for supporting all the above! This faction dares to continue offering unwavering support to their supreme leader while simultaneously pulling the "family values" card. Again as poster "The Educator" has suggested numerous times..."Get educated"! Thank you.

  • UtahEngineer Sandy, UT
    Aug. 26, 2017 8:55 p.m.

    rmwarnick of Draper said,

    "Once a monument is proclaimed, it takes an act of Congress to modify or revoke. That's the law (Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976)."

    Sorry, rmwarnick, but Pres. Obama invoked only the Antiquities Act to create Bears Ears, not the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. That law only described how to manage National Monuments, among other things, it didn't supersede the Antiquities Act.

    However, it is time to either sunset the Antiquities Act or circumscribe the exuberance of future presidents by setting hard, inviolable limits to the size of additional monuments.

  • James B. Young SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Aug. 26, 2017 8:45 p.m.

    An EO by Trump will be jammed and die in the federal courts.

    Congress will need to pass appropriate legislation to accommodate Zinke's recommendation, and the GOP will not have a majority in either chamber to pass such legislation to pass it on Republican lines.

    The recommendation is dead on arrival.

  • UtahEngineer Sandy, UT
    Aug. 26, 2017 8:44 p.m.

    Beware Enviro-Zealotry!

    Today's environmentalist want the right to act arbitrarily, irrationally, and dictatorially, when and where it suits them.

    The Antiquities Act was used quite appropriately to create the small Dinosaur Monument less than 20 years after Utah gained statehood; [that was even before there were any roads in Utah]. At the time, that monument was unique in all the world in its concentration of fossils. That was a perfect example of the intent of a law being perfectly congruent with its timely application and use.

    But, here we are More Than a Century Later and that same law was grossly and misappropriately abused by Obama to create a massive monument to his own legacy on land that is mostly "Plain Vanilla" western land. This was a prime example of a law stretched far beyond its time and justification.

    Yet, the Enviro-Zalots are screaming as if the time, place, and circumstances of the creation of Bears Ears was a perfect match.

    Such extreme emotionalism and irrationality is a positive danger to America and the world at a time when so many great problems demand the best critical thinking we can bring to bear to solve titanic problems.

  • rmwarnick Draper, UT
    Aug. 26, 2017 11:13 a.m.

    If you want to preserve public lands without attracting more visitors, wilderness designation is the answer. But Utah politicians typically reject meaningful wilderness proposals. So the only option for conservationists and native Americans was to advocate for Bears Ears National Monument.

    The Obama administration cut the size of the proposed monument by 30 percent, from 1.9 million acres to 1.35 million acres (roughly the same boundaries as the national conservation areas in the failed Public Lands Initiative bill).

    Once a monument is proclaimed, it takes an act of Congress to modify or revoke. That's the law (Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976). The question is, will Trump commit an impeachable offense by defying the law? National monuments are a lot more popular than he is (34 percent in the Gallup Poll).

  • UtahEngineer Sandy, UT
    Aug. 26, 2017 5:57 a.m.

    robin138 - springfield, VA said,

    "All of the land is owned by all 325 million of us Americans."

    Right, robin138.

    Since America owns 2/3rds of Utah, Fair-sized states like Virginia own thousands of acres here.

    And how much of Virginia does Utah own? Probably not enough to build a Burger King on.

    You easterners simply can;t wrap your brain around the fact that over a century after becoming a state, Utahns want a little simple equity, visa-vis distant federal ownership.

    Utah belongs to the nation, but not vice-versa....[At least East of the Rocky mountains].!

  • Utah Navajo Montezuma Creek, UT
    Aug. 26, 2017 3:52 a.m.

    The problem is that the land is Already protected.
    In the eyes of the Dept of Interior, they understand that.
    Thanks to President Clinton's executive act pertaining to the Government to Government Tribal Consultation Act of 2000, anyone in their right mind who reads the Bears Ears Monument Proclamation can see its scripted nearly verbatimly to the Consultation act, so why the need for a monument at all if the federal protections are already in place?
    REDUCE and RESCIND BEARS EARS NATIONAL MONUMENT

  • oldasdirt Grantsville, UT
    Aug. 26, 2017 3:29 a.m.

    I lived in the area for a little over 8 years prior to when Moab was turned into a major tourist destination . I did work in the extraction industry spending a lot of time during environmental control work. Visiting Moab for the first time in 10 years, now a town in disrepair, where private property are full rusty old cars with multiple trailers on small plots. I am not against trailers, having lived in them during my career. The industrial based jobs 20 years ago were paying $12 to $20 per hour , with benefits, were replaced by service jobs,paying $10 to $12. It is no wonder why people cannot afford the 1/2 acre plot with a nice double wide and maintain their property, common 20 years ago.
    While extraction jobs lead to boom and bust cycles, they also support the building of airports, hospitals , roads and other infrastructures. We should not artificially drive out industrial work thinking that service work will off set the quality of life style.
    I was working at the Capital shortly after the Escalante monument process and have first hand information about that monument process. I visit Excalante 1 ir 2 times per year and see no improvement there

  • robin138 springfield, VA
    Aug. 25, 2017 9:54 p.m.

    All of the land is owned by all 325 million of us Americans. It is not owned by Utah. Western extraction industries do not have any entitlement to the land. If Trump and Zinke do this, it will be cooperate welfare of the highest order.

  • John Jackson Sandy, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 9:34 p.m.

    I read an article that suggests Bears Ears has, "some of the most stunning landscapes that America has to offer," and contrast that with the comments in this thread suggesting the landscape is nondescript and commonplace. Either way, it probably doesn't matter. The Antiquities Act says nothing of protecting scenic sites and beautiful landscape. Instead, it speaks of protecting historic, prehistoric, and scientific-valuable lands. On that count, Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante definitely qualify.

  • BigLib Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 9:03 p.m.

    Th Secretary has done a great job balancing the need to develop natural resources with the need to preserve sacred sites. Special interest groups have locked up vast amount of Public acreage in Utah for far to long. It is refreshing to see a President who actually wants to address all sides of an issue.

  • stevo123 Driggs, ID
    Aug. 25, 2017 8:10 p.m.

    RB, I'll take that bet.

  • Swiss Price, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 7:31 p.m.

    Kudos to Amy Joi for another even handed article on this subject. My only suggestion is adding a map with the Paved Roads around the Proposed Monument,
    The one that the "Old Gray Lady" put in their article doesn't show the paved roads let alone the RS2477 roads.

  • RRB SLC, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 7:18 p.m.

    I bet you it's reduced by 160,000.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 7:15 p.m.

    Doesn't really matter since the land was federally owned before anyway.

  • Howard Beal Provo, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 6:35 p.m.

    The sooner we can strip mine and frack that whole area the better.

  • cowshed Provo, Utah
    Aug. 25, 2017 6:26 p.m.

    I wish those who so vehemently decry the idea of the Secretary of the Interior properly applying what the Antiquities Act actually says would explain what it is that "greedy politicians" gain by enforcement of this law and setting aside only what the act actually authorizes. I fully support the application of the Antiquities Act as it was written and intended, to preserve the scenery and historic sites of our nation, from prehistoric times down to more recent history, but lets be reasonable, folks. Also, lets please keep hatred and vitriol to ourselves.

  • TJ Eagle Mountain, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 5:29 p.m.

    YES!
    It was created illegally as part of a political agenda of a corrupt administration against the wishes of the majority of the citizens of the state of Utah.
    Same scenario as grand staircase Escalante.
    Hopefully that will be drastically reduced as well.

  • barfolomew TOOELE, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 4:09 p.m.

    @ David M - Metairie

    "1,350,000/160,000=8.4 not 12"

    And 8.4 goes into 100, 11.905 times.

    So yes, 160,000 acres is one twelfth of the current designation.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 3:58 p.m.

    Let's see:

    - The inter-tribal coalition proposed 1.9 million acres.

    - Obama designated 1.35 million acres

    - Trump will give them .16 million acres.

    Does this sound like a "compromise" to anyone? The coalition member's term "insult" is understandable.

    Trump definitely threw his base in Utah plenty of red meat on this one, the same people who act perplexed - and even angry - at how Utah is quickly getting a national reputation for being hostile to environmental / conservation actions, such as with the Outdoor Retailers bailing out to go to Denver.

    @David - please, for your own sake, do an Internet search about how much input Obama got from locals, how he said he preferred a legislative approach and waited for Bishop's Public Lands Initiative - which never happened - and how long Bears Ears National Monument was discussed.

  • golong Washington, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 3:42 p.m.

    Sanity returns. There was (is) no justification for over a million acres for this monument. I have been there, other than the native American stuff, there isn't much worth looking at...or to protect. Environmentalists have never been honest or fair in their dealings with this country; they can't get elected because they are so far out to the left that no one would vote for them, so they raise money, campaign, lobby, and litigate. Trump should be cheered and praised for this action.

  • Blue Collar Huntington, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 3:39 p.m.

    It shouldn't be one acre. Be grateful you get 160,000 acres. That's a huge swath of land.

  • Prometheus Platypus Orem, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 3:24 p.m.

    Not expecting much to happen, since Trump has failed to accomplish anything, and will continue in his inept vacuum of leadership.

    Zinke can crank out this recommendation in a few weeks but Bishop couldn't do it in a few years, the GOP is void of leadership, right down to the local do nothings.

    Bet Bishop made bank off donations from the extraction industries while dragging his feet, which is what is most important to the GOP. Why else would Trump still be campaigning instead of working?

  • deseret pete robertson, Wy
    Aug. 25, 2017 3:15 p.m.

    For all those who say they want to take away beautiful lands, you shouldn't worry , a lot of that 1.5 million acres looks a lot like many areas in Wyo.,Nev. Colo. Montana. Just get in you car and drive to those areas and and enjoy the beautiful lands and then you can visit the 160,000 acres of Bears Ears. No one is taking anything from you.------ I'm not buying the Liberal and narrow minded view of a few who think they own the land that is in dispute yet cry over any decision with dirty air ,dirty water, and granny over the cliff doomsday if their views are not sacred to everyone else.

  • water rocket Magna, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 3:08 p.m.

    both this and the Grand Staircase monuments should have never happened in the first place, at least, not like they did. Satisfying the interests of only one special interest group at the exclusion of all other interests is extremely unamerican.

  • Lone Eagle Aurora, CO
    Aug. 25, 2017 3:02 p.m.

    "...unnamed congressional aides..." Sounds like a leaker to me. I guess someone feels like it is his/her duty to speak anonymously because he/she disagrees with the legal and proper function of a federal government position.

  • ute alumni Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 2:52 p.m.

    Good
    Barry wanted the whole state

  • at long last. . . Kirksville , MO
    Aug. 25, 2017 2:47 p.m.

    If this article is correct, then it seems to me that it is a great example of using the Antiquities Act as it was intended and within a reasonable interpretation of the law. Unlike Obama's totally unreasonable, indefensible use of the Act to lock up 1,350,000 acres of land. I don't say it often, but "Good work, Trump!"

  • Rebekeh Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 2:45 p.m.

    Just what the world needs.... less natural beauty for everyone to enjoy. This is an incredible loss for Utah at the hands of our elected leaders.

  • John Jackson Sandy, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 2:40 p.m.

    I do not know how large the monument should be, but I would say it has nothing to do with how large Zions is, or whether all five national parks in Utah could fit into it. Consider Bears Ears on its own merits. Following the Antiquities Act, it would seem you rope off all the archaeological sites, and keep it to the smallest size that does cover all the sites. Now, that might remain a large tract of land, as Bears Ears is said to contain perhaps the highest concentration of archaeological sites in North America, and perhaps the world. As such, if any land in appropriate to be protected by the Antiquities Act, it is Bears Ears. And, if any monument is to be vast and sprawling, it is Bears Ears (supposing the artifacts are scattered throughout the full of the monument.)

  • David M Metairie, LA
    Aug. 25, 2017 2:35 p.m.

    "There's no other information to indicate the relevance and rationale behind a reduction to 160,000 acres, which is about a one-twelfth of what President Barack Obama set aside last December."

    1,350,000/160,000=8.4 not 12

  • kaysvillecougar KAYSVILLE, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 2:28 p.m.

    I'm not sure I understand the argument that by reversing this everyone will be drinking dirty water and breathing dirty air in southern Utah. It's a pristine area at this time, right? This national monument designation will bring hordes of people to the area with their polluting cars and their need to use the restroom. I don't know what is best for this area, but my common sense tells me that declaring this whole area a national monument brings pollution and wear and tear to an area, not protect it. Could someone knowledgeable explain the folly in my thinking?

  • essence Ivins, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 1:46 p.m.

    Definitely lawsuit material.

  • Tyler McArthur South Jordan, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 1:47 p.m.

    Wow, that was quite the over-reaction by the tribal councilman in the article. The Navajo nation is already the size of West Virginia. They don't need to rope off another area almost twice the size of Rhode Island. We can all work together to come up with sustainable plans for the land in southern Utah. Unilateral land grabs are not working together.

  • 3grandslams Eagle Mountain, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 1:35 p.m.

    That's sounds more like it. Protect the land but don't hoard the land.

  • Jim Cobabe Provo, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 1:21 p.m.

    I do not find it acceptable that announcements of this nature are continually being "leaked" by "anonymous" through the New York Times, or that local news sources are so eager to jump in and repeat the unsubstantiated rumors, as if this was an honest or honorable way to discuss news. Let us wait for the news to come from official sources in the White House, where the decisions will be made. I strongly suspect that such media sources in New York City have only the vaguest idea of what the implications for western lands, beyond partisan political considerations. It would have been better all around for local interests to have a greater voice in these deliberations. In fact, I would be willing to venture that few of the journalists telling about it have ever spent any substantial time working or living in the area of these "public lands".

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    Aug. 25, 2017 1:20 p.m.

    I have no idea how much of the Bears Ears should be protected. Only that 1.35 million acres is not a monument, it's a huge national park. Such things should go through Congress.

    As to whether the designation can be undone. What if a President in failing health decided to declare an entire State to be a monument? Unlikely to be sure, but what if? Could that not be undone by his successor?

    Whatever else, this should serve notice that monuments should be small in scale and the minimum required to save it from an impending threat. Designations beyond that should go through the full legislative process.

    This is not to repudiate what President Obama did (I think in good faith) or what President Trump will do. Simply that a one person, stroke of the pen process needs to be very limited in scope and/or time. No matter who that person is.

  • Utah Navajo Montezuma Creek, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 12:58 p.m.

    Personally, I was pushing and hoping the Secretary would have recommended to Rescind the Monument completely. Oh well, less than 160,000 acres seem somewhat reasonable.

  • HSTucker Holladay, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 12:54 p.m.

    @Barb Wire: "These people will be breathing polluted air, drinking polluted water because they don't necessarily like Trump but they despise a intelligent black man who did have their best interests in mind."

    Playing the race card again? Can't we all just get along?

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 12:46 p.m.

    While all historical reductions in Monument boundaries have been minimal and never challenged in court this certainly would be. I can only imagine the conservative Supreme Court looking at the attorneys for Trump asking him on what legal grounds have you made these changes? What law gave you such power? Go ahead and do it President Trump, your track record in court is certainly nothing to fear. Bears Ears will stay because Congress gave the President such authority and it's never been rescinded, no matter what the size of a Monument is.

  • conservative scientist Lindon, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 12:38 p.m.

    Bears ears definitely does not need to be twice the size of all 5 of Utah's national parks combined. A vast reduction in size is fitting and appropriate.

  • oldasdirt Grantsville, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 12:12 p.m.

    A 160,000 acres is about 250 square miles or a strip of land 10 miles wide in SL/Provo going down to Provo. Seems like more than enough. Remember that the extreme eviro's will also start to talk about scenic vistas, water shed protection and other areas that are around any monument which could expand the current 1.9 million or the 160 k. Having lived in this area for 8 years I saw no effort by the Native Americans to post signs improve these sites for their children or others . While most people are caring about their concerns their lack of effort to improve the area speaks volumes.

    It is hard to said but, we know about as much about the previous Native
    Americans as we ever will, since they did not have a written record, only the pictures on rock surfaces and buildings that remain.

  • David Centerville, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 12:11 p.m.

    Skeptic,

    You wrote "The American people across the the nation just got sold out to a bunch of greedy politicians. "

    I suspect the same could be said for the Obama administration for creating this monument, and many others like it. They are doing this to create a legacy and to protect their far left base of supporters and voters.

    The right way to create a monument would involve voter input from the affected state and local area. It seems distant and overbearing for a distant politician from hundreds, even thousands of miles away, to create a monument without getting input from locals.

  • 65TossPowerTrap Salmon, ID
    Aug. 25, 2017 12:04 p.m.

    I actually think that Southern Utah would be a great location for a nuclear waste site. Think of all the great jobs for those poor, starving, federal-government-afflicted residents. You wouldn't have to worry about all those "lefty hikers" coming in to spend money. The Bundy Klan could graze their scrawny cattle rent free. Sounds like a win-win.

  • Barb Wire USA, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 12:01 p.m.

    Well let's see...Trump has tried to eliminate Obama's environmental protections for the sake of $$, he is trying to take away beautiful lands from the public for the sake of $$. Seems to me Trump has conned alot of people into thinking he has their best interests in mind. These people will be breathing polluted air, drinking polluted water because they don't necessarily like Trump but they despise a intelligent black man who did have their best interests in mind.

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 11:44 a.m.

    Considering that Zion National Park is a little less than 150,000 acres (229 square miles), I should think that 160,000 acres for a mere monument is more than sufficient. Let's drop Grand Staircase / Escalante National Monument down to about the same size.

    Remember, had GSE been made a national monument before the Hogs Back road was built, it would be all but impossible for most people to ever see much of what makes the area so spectacular.

    Having the land under federal control was supposed to be sufficient to protect the land. And until the 1970s it did. Vast stretches of land in the West were routinely used by multiple entities in multiple ways. Cattle grazed, hunters had access, hikers and motorized users both had access, lumber was harvested in a sustainable manner that contributed to the health of forests, minerals were extracted, and energy resources developed.

    Then the feds started locking us out. Whole forests burn when beetles are not controlled and deadwood not removed. Ranchers are shut down. Energy development is stopped.

    Respect all public access, not just the radical lefty professional hikers.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 11:43 a.m.

    I hope this is the case, if so it is excellent news. These types of unilateral actions that ruin economies, ruin, jobs, and ruin lives need to be reigned in. Everyone, including the monument backers, knows this was done by Obama for purely partisan reasons and that he had no concern whatsoever about the local economy or frankly the monument itself. He did it as a political favor for his leftwing supporters and such action should be confronted and changed.

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    Aug. 25, 2017 11:40 a.m.

    The American people across the the nation just got sold out to a bunch of greedy politicians. Americas children will be paying the price for generations for the loss of preserving natures beauty and man's history for all to enjoy now and future generations.

  • Rick for Truth Provo, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 11:37 a.m.

    The only problem with the 160,000 acres is that it is 159,000 acres too many.

  • Sanefan Wellsville, UT
    Aug. 25, 2017 11:33 a.m.

    Seems about right. A very thoughtful, scientific, and legal approach is refreshing. Nice job Sec. Zinke.