Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
It's a good read.......check it out
http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/251560/57/
Wise use of Utah's resources
Daily Herald
Utahns need to know that politicians and corporations are right now making plans to carve up our state's landscape like a holiday turkey.
We can't afford to sit still.
First of all, we must put the brakes on a clumsy plan to lock in huge swaths of the state as wilderness areas. The America's Red Rock Wilderness Act of 2007, sponsored by Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), would designate more than 9 million acres of public lands in Utah as wilderness. It would ban all development in and around Book Cliffs, Uinta Basin, Mojave Desert, Grand Staircase-Escalante, Glen Canyon, Canyonlands, San Rafael Swell and other areas.
Such a blanket ban on development over such a huge area is too crude a way of preserving the landscape. It fails to distinguish between those areas that are truly extraordinary and those that can support some energy development or other uses.
Overprotection isn't new. Wayne Owens first introduced such a plan in 1988 when he was a Utah congressman. But we think it is telling that lawmakers from the Midwest and the East Coast are now pushing it. We'd love to see a Utah senator strike back and declare that the black soil of Durbin's state is a natural resource that must be protected from farmers. Or maybe our congressmen could push to ban trout fishing and boating on the Finger Lakes in Hinchey's district.
Actually, protests are coming -- not from Washington but from Salt Lake City. State Reps. Aaron Tilton, R-Springville, and Mike Noel, R-Kanab, said in a letter to voters that the Red Rock Wilderness Act would cost Utah hundreds of millions of dollars and lead America to become more dependent on energy from hostile foreign nations.
They are quite right, but we wish somebody else was saying it. Tilton's and Noel's personal interest in bringing a nuclear power plant to Utah taints their credibility. It's not that nuclear power ought to be discouraged. Just the opposite; Utah would benefit by its expansion.
But where are Utah's other political voices in protest of a major land grab? They need to be raised, and soon.
If you have become jaded about the state's natural gifts, take a drive, or better yet a hike, in almost any spot within its borders, and you'll encounter vistas and locales that inspire awe.
Many of these lands face threats. For example, the federal Bureau of Land Management recently identified nearly 2 million acres, including more than 600,000 in Utah, that it might someday consider leasing for oil shale projects.
The U.S. is the Saudi Arabia of oil shale. The conservative Heritage Foundation says that developing these reserves could end American dependence on OPEC by 2020.
That's a mighty tempting prospect. But what it might do to the Utah landscape takes off some of the shine. The extraction process used in the past begins with the mining of huge quantities of rock, then uses immense quantities of water and produces mountains of waste. Recent technological advances might lessen the impact, but that remains to be demonsrated.
The tradeoffs between development and preservation need to be evaluated carefully. To both guard and appropriately use our natural resources, it is essential that Utah and the nation prioritize energy and environmental needs. If we're going to wean ourselves from foreign oil, alternative energy sources must be selected and nurtured. If we choose wisely, the environmental impacts can be minimized.
Not all of Utah's natural landscape is created equal, the imaginations of members of Congress from eastern states notwithstanding. Some areas are more important than others and should be protected more strictly. Some lands can sustain oil shale development and nuclear power plants without unacceptable negative impacts. It would be better to actually protect 1 million acres than to vainly tout quixotic legislation to protect 9 million.
But setting priorities requires leadership. We'd like to see more of that from our lawmakers. Senators and members of Congress from other states seem to be very active in putting constraints on our land, and it is vital for Utah's delegation in D.C. to be equally vigorous.
The people of Utah also need to be more invested. A federal hearing last week in Provo on whether to protect some of the state's key rivers, including the Provo and American Fork rivers, brought out only one private citizen.
Utahns can't afford apathy. Lawmakers, activists and corporations all over the nation are making plans for the rivers, canyons, mesas and mountains all around us. Those of us who love the land had darn well better get informed.
http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/251560/57/
Wise use of Utah's resources
Daily Herald
Utahns need to know that politicians and corporations are right now making plans to carve up our state's landscape like a holiday turkey.
We can't afford to sit still.
First of all, we must put the brakes on a clumsy plan to lock in huge swaths of the state as wilderness areas. The America's Red Rock Wilderness Act of 2007, sponsored by Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), would designate more than 9 million acres of public lands in Utah as wilderness. It would ban all development in and around Book Cliffs, Uinta Basin, Mojave Desert, Grand Staircase-Escalante, Glen Canyon, Canyonlands, San Rafael Swell and other areas.
Such a blanket ban on development over such a huge area is too crude a way of preserving the landscape. It fails to distinguish between those areas that are truly extraordinary and those that can support some energy development or other uses.
Overprotection isn't new. Wayne Owens first introduced such a plan in 1988 when he was a Utah congressman. But we think it is telling that lawmakers from the Midwest and the East Coast are now pushing it. We'd love to see a Utah senator strike back and declare that the black soil of Durbin's state is a natural resource that must be protected from farmers. Or maybe our congressmen could push to ban trout fishing and boating on the Finger Lakes in Hinchey's district.
Actually, protests are coming -- not from Washington but from Salt Lake City. State Reps. Aaron Tilton, R-Springville, and Mike Noel, R-Kanab, said in a letter to voters that the Red Rock Wilderness Act would cost Utah hundreds of millions of dollars and lead America to become more dependent on energy from hostile foreign nations.
They are quite right, but we wish somebody else was saying it. Tilton's and Noel's personal interest in bringing a nuclear power plant to Utah taints their credibility. It's not that nuclear power ought to be discouraged. Just the opposite; Utah would benefit by its expansion.
But where are Utah's other political voices in protest of a major land grab? They need to be raised, and soon.
If you have become jaded about the state's natural gifts, take a drive, or better yet a hike, in almost any spot within its borders, and you'll encounter vistas and locales that inspire awe.
Many of these lands face threats. For example, the federal Bureau of Land Management recently identified nearly 2 million acres, including more than 600,000 in Utah, that it might someday consider leasing for oil shale projects.
The U.S. is the Saudi Arabia of oil shale. The conservative Heritage Foundation says that developing these reserves could end American dependence on OPEC by 2020.
That's a mighty tempting prospect. But what it might do to the Utah landscape takes off some of the shine. The extraction process used in the past begins with the mining of huge quantities of rock, then uses immense quantities of water and produces mountains of waste. Recent technological advances might lessen the impact, but that remains to be demonsrated.
The tradeoffs between development and preservation need to be evaluated carefully. To both guard and appropriately use our natural resources, it is essential that Utah and the nation prioritize energy and environmental needs. If we're going to wean ourselves from foreign oil, alternative energy sources must be selected and nurtured. If we choose wisely, the environmental impacts can be minimized.
Not all of Utah's natural landscape is created equal, the imaginations of members of Congress from eastern states notwithstanding. Some areas are more important than others and should be protected more strictly. Some lands can sustain oil shale development and nuclear power plants without unacceptable negative impacts. It would be better to actually protect 1 million acres than to vainly tout quixotic legislation to protect 9 million.
But setting priorities requires leadership. We'd like to see more of that from our lawmakers. Senators and members of Congress from other states seem to be very active in putting constraints on our land, and it is vital for Utah's delegation in D.C. to be equally vigorous.
The people of Utah also need to be more invested. A federal hearing last week in Provo on whether to protect some of the state's key rivers, including the Provo and American Fork rivers, brought out only one private citizen.
Utahns can't afford apathy. Lawmakers, activists and corporations all over the nation are making plans for the rivers, canyons, mesas and mountains all around us. Those of us who love the land had darn well better get informed.
