Bears Ears is just a land grab...
Feb 23, 2017 | 502 views | 0 0 comments | 57 57 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Mr. Harry Holland’s op-ed (Feb. 16 edition of The Times-independent) referred to Bishop’s PLI, and similarities of boundaries to the current Bears Ears National Monument (BENM). Boundaries are just one irritant. San Juan County, by and large, was not happy with the multi-county PLI. It planned to trade SITLA lands to the Uintah Basin, in return for a percentage of tax revenues, but that does not provide jobs to San Juan. It was a poor idea that would not raise San Juan from the bottom economic slot in the state.

Such a gigantic monument was only a solution President Obama used to further restrict land use. His environmental cronies have preyed upon the public lands of the West, using multi-million dollar campaigns and media spin looking for or inventing problems to justify such actions.

And you wonder why a line was drawn in the sand? I’m glad we finally have Western states with congressmen who listen to their constituents. Similar ill-conceived extreme actions in Oregon, Nevada, Hawaii, California, Maine and Arizona are still negatively reverberating. Such flagrant acts are contrary to federal laws, and the BENM is just one of many festering wounds.

The Diné Coalition started to unravel last fall when several hand-picked Native leaders were voted out of office. Top down, hand-picked leaders do not, and will never represent a whole tribe, especially when members never had a chance to learn about, nor vote on such a designation. The BENM campaign relied excessively on the power of money donated by “a few already wealthy individuals” and “big money donors” including The William-Flora Hewlett Foundation, Wyss Foundation, Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation and Wilburforce Foundation.

Rural Americans, Native and Anglo alike, who live and depend upon this rural landscape in San Juan County have been good stewards. Like urban residents, we too, are upset when looting happens in our neighborhoods. We don’t condone it, nor do we initiate it. As one of the poorest counties in the nation, we resent this discriminatory act that further curtails our chances of economic success. Rural states need productive multi-use sections of land to support water, power and road infrastructure, as well as schools, hospitals and other facilities. National monuments do not improve these situations. They basically provide minimum wage jobs — which Moab well knows about.

In contrast to Holland’s assertion, last year, Garfield County was declared a state of emergency because of fallout from the national monument.

The federal government does not have a good track record in paying their bills nor in dealing with rural people, or even maintaining National Parks. Another monument in Utah only causes more restrictions, more vandalism and mistrust. We cannot jeopardize important services and education by curtailing multiple use of the land. Nor can tourists afford to drive to this isolated area, without fuel.

—Janet Wilcox

Blanding


Copyright 2013 The Times-Independent. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

report abuse...

Express yourself:

We're glad to give readers a forum to express their points of view on issues important to this community. That forum is the “Letters to the Editor.” Letters to the editor may be submitted directly to The Times-Independent through this link and will be published in the print edition of the newspaper. All letters must be the original work of the letter writer – form letters will not be accepted. All letters must include the actual first and last name of the letter writer, the writer’s address, city and state and telephone number. Anonymous letters will not be accepted.

Letters may not exceed 400 words in length, must be regarding issues of general interest to the community, and may not include personal attacks, offensive language, ethnic or racial slurs, or attacks on personal or religious beliefs. Letters should focus on a single issue. Letters that proselytize or focus on theological debates will not be published. During political campaigns, The Times-Independent will not publish letters supporting or opposing any local candidate. Thank you letters are generally not accepted for publication unless the letter has a public purpose. Thank you letters dealing with private matters that compliment or complain about a business or individual will not be published. Nor will letters listing the names of individuals and/or businesses that supported a cause or event. Thank you letters about good Samaritan acts will be considered at the discretion of the newspaper.