If SUWA is against it, then I am for it.
A whole lot of Utahns rail at government intrusion and wasteful spending, and
they'll quietly sit by and watch Herbert waste millions of taxpayer
Give the land back to Utah and it will be overrun with oil companies, SUVs, and
feds always do a better job of everything, just look at the financial condition
of the country. it is UTAH's land. let them deal with it.
If SUWA is against it, then I am against it. Now that should really clear up
Go Governor Herbert!! This Uthan stands behind you!
There is plenty of private land for developers to develop on. They want the land
for free or very cheap. You need to see this for what it is; a land grab, by
some very wealthy people. There is plenty of private land that they could buy,
but they consider the price too high. The alternative, get the government to
give you the land. Wake up Utah. When they say that they want to take the land
back from the Feds and share it with the developers, what they are really saying
is that they want to take it from you and me and give it to their rich partners
or keep it for themselves.
Instead of focusing on lands tht are owned by all US taxpayers, Gov. Herbert
should focus on the sound management of lands owned by Utah taxpayers.
Let's hear some bragging about how great that's being done. Are the
Utah state parks the best in the nation? Do folks from all over the country
flock to them? The US taxpayer owned lands in Utah are among the most visited
in the country. It's mystifying why Governor Herbert wouuldn't be
exploiting those golden eggs. Don't kill the goose Gov. Herbert!
SUWA is extreme but I still support them. I feel like Gov Herbert is so far out
there that you have to fight extremism with extremism, maybe then we will end up
in the middle.First it's unconstitutional.Then, how
much have the feds spent on fires this year alone? Add to that the 300 million
spent every year managing the lands.... We should thank them for doing such a
good job that we can sit back and benefit from the billions of tourism dollars
spent here. The state having full control would open the flood gates
for corruption and crony capitalism.ATV riders complain about the
lack of access. If you think access is bad now just wait until the no ATV sign
is replaced by a private property no trespassing sign. The
Wellsville mountains in Utah were once private land. The citizens below the
mountains got so fed up with the erosion and flooding caused by poor management
they pooled their money together and purchased the lands themselves, they then
donated them to the Forest Service. If you want to know what
it's like without public lands move to Ohio. Just remember
Cooke/Rampton this November.
SUWA has gone way to far, closing off access to lands that were once open to
recreational use by everybody: hikers, bikers, ATVs...since when does an
organization made up mostly of out-of-state liberals know more about what the
local public wants than the local public? SUWA has been an economic disaster for
the state. Time to get back to fair and balanced. I enjoy all forms of outdoor
recreation, have generations of ranchers in my family line, and I'm sick
and tired of Clinton, Obama, Bush (designated military training zones) and all
other federal politicians kicking our lands around to make points with special
interest groups. The state managed things just fine for hundreds of years. The
federal government in Utah has a long history of gong against the will of the
public. I'm certain we can find solutions that keep everybody happy,
employed and enjoying the incredible place that Utah is...without politicians
who have never even visited here!
I am guessing Gov Herbert has run out of things to govern, so he is suing the
federal government. No wonder people sue McDonalds for spilled hot coffee.By suing the fed government he can fight unemployment by keeping the
lawyers busy and working. Like other elected people from Utah Gov Herbert is
out of touch with the regular taxpayer, money means nothing to him.By the time this washes out expect another 12 million to be kicked in by the
losing party, that being the taxpayer.When I go in the backcountry I
do not care if the state or the feds own it. It does cost money to maintain so
I am guessing Herbert can pay for it out of his never ending supply of state
The funny thing about eminent domain is that you need to pay for the land first.
I see our budget every year and we are just scraping by since our budget must
be balanced by the end of each legislative general session. We can't
afford to buy the land even if it was constitutional, which it isn't. So,
now we spend money on legal battles we cannot win.Even if we got the
land we cannot afford to maintain it. One wildfire could cost our entire
discretionary budget for a year or two. This issue was not thought
through very well. It is a money pit either way it goes.
Utah should manage their land. They were doing fine until the feds took it over.
Why wouldn't we be fine now? From what I see in the news there appears to
be much more illegal stuff going on in the land than were ever going on
before.With the costs of Common Core (Education) getting more and
more visible, the Governor has to have some resource of income if we can't
currently get it. Supposedly the current changes in Common Core isn't
going to cost Utah a dime., but those who are watching the costs know that it
does cost and will cost. I don't see managing our own lands as a problem.
Utah lunacy is frequently demonstrated in the Governor's office and, of
course, in our infamous loonislature. Thank goodness there are organizations
like SUWA to try to stop it with occasional doses of sanity.
SUWA is wrong on this one, as they usually are. The responsibility for public
lands in Utah should rest with those who reside here and stand to lose or
benefit the most from any regulations. SUWA simply wants the federal gov't
in control because then every other liberal crony in the country will determine
what is right for us in Utah. We need to get the Federal government out of
everything that we can. We send the money to Washington in the first place and
then get a small percentage of it back. The money should stay here in Utah where
we as a state have control over how it will be spent. The federal government is
nothing more than a huge black hole of bloated bureacracy and is the least
capable organization when it comes to getting value for the dollars spent.
Going to donate another grand to SUWA. SUWA exists because of politcans like
Herbert. These are public lands and don't belong to Utahns. Proximity
does not give us more rights than citizens living outside the state. Thank God
"5.7 million" environmental wackos are usually wrong.SUWA
folks need to take a good hike and leave land management to the grown ups used
to dealing with responsible issues, nut just issuing outrageous press
releases.Gotta go with Gov. Herbert on this one, and with anyone
else SUWA opposes on anything else.
Those of us who have seen the heavy hand of federal agencies spurred on by
extremists are in a knowledgeable position to comment on the issue of the state
receiving control of land now controlled by the BLM and the US Forest Service.
I support Governor Herbert in this action. These lands belong to the people of
Utah. The wealth that will come to the state when multiple use is properly
implemented will more than make up for loss of federal funds. Besides, the
federal government is rapidly going bankrupt and is not a good model for the
state to follow. The current federal management plans are aimed at denying
access to people who want nothing more than to see and enjoy. I have already
been shut out of places I love to visit and each new plan from SUWA brings more
restrictions and denial of access.
The Gov has got my vote and support with his stance of having Utah manage Utah!
SUWA is a eco terrist group that would leave me out of access to lands my family
and I have been using for generations. GO GOV!
Wow, so the federal government can do a better job than the state? I've
never heard of that ever happening. The federal government can't afford to
do anything, they just don't know it yet. The idea that things are best
done by Obama is not working. Place the control with the state and it will cost
less, be more responsive to all the people, and allow the citizens access to
their public lands.
busymom123, speaking of education, you might try going back to 4th grade Utah
history. These lands have never been managed by Utah; there was no "federal
takeover." The federal government purchased these lands from Mexico in 1848;
federal ownership of these lands was reaffirmed in the Utah Enabling Act of 1894
which set forth the conditions for Utah becoming a state.Herbert,
Swallow, and the State Legislature are trying to make an unconstitutional land
grab (even the Legislature's own legal counsel attached a note to the bill
saying that it had zero chance of standing up to judicial scrutiny and would
simply cost the state a whole lot of legal fees trying to defend the
indefensible). So much for these supposed conservatives' much-vaunted
respect for the Constitution! Even if they succeeded, managing the lands would
be a huge financial burden on the state, and an increase in exploitation of
natural resources is often associated with a *decrease* in the strength of the
local economy (look up the "resource curse" paradox and Dutch disease
for some explanation).There's no way on earth this is the
answer to our problems funding education.
Doug Chee and Busy Mom are prime examples of the misinformation so commonly held
by Utahns.Doug claims that we send taxes to the Feds and get
"only a small percentage back." Not true! Utah receives about $1.30
for every dollar we send the Feds. Which is about the same as many other Red
states that claim to hate Federal spending so much.Busy Mom needs to
go study Utah history again. Utah never has owned those Federal lands. Never.
And as for those lands solving all our education funding problems? Pure
nonsense.You all know the definition of a "liberal"
don't you? A liberal is simply someone who refuses to let anyone delude
him by accepting as fact false information. A liberal actually THINKS before
It is ironic that SUWA is now using the term "Land Grab". Backed by
their support, litigation and lies, the Federal Government has been Land
Grabbing for decades. It is about time that Utah, (and the other affected
states), take some bold steps to return to the people of Utah that which is part
of Utah: our heritage and lifestyle. If you are a SUWA supporter,
why not allow Utah to manage their own lands and then work to influence policy
within the state of Utah? Oh yes, that is because most of the SUWA supporters
are from out of state and therefore do not have voting mass within Utah. Their
only choice is to take the control of Utah, away from Utahans, so that they can
force their outside will upon the people of Utah. One hundred
percent support to Governor Herbert on this one. The ad campaign by SWUA just
motivated me to make another donation to USA-ALL (Utah Shared Access Alliance).
The Federal government is not always the answer but with their systems in place,
with public comment and a broad range of agencies involved with many aspects of
their processes, we do have an opportunity to say what happens to the land use.
It is not just for Utahns to say. It is interesting that the Utah Attorney
General has been involved in this process for quite a while and that office is
not even mentioned in his article. I know the Governor and Attorney General
don't always get along with each other, but the Attorneys General for
several Western States have issues with public lands and are working together.
In the article, Mr. Realtor and Developer Ivory brings up the States and their
actions in 1828. For a person interested in money those states back then were
not the kind of states developed in the West. The State of Utah cannot manage
all the federal lands that lie within our state's borders. Developers want
the water, beneficial property for views and development so they can do a
daybreak type of thing in Zion and Bryce national park and not just a
Ruby's Inn that dates to 1916.
The Utah legislature has chosen a fools errand with his one. Even though they
have a valid argument, it is probably not fiscally a good idea. Note that the
state successsfully used similar arguements sevrral decades ago to take
ownership of the Great Salt Lake and Utah Lake from the feds. The current
situation, however, came out of frustration which in part was caused by SUWA.
When the state government and federal government agreed to land swaps similar to
what Colorado and Arizona did to allow better management of their lands, SUWA
stopped them. When the state proposed that the feds set aside certain lands,
such as Desolation Canyon and the Deep Creek Range as wilderness areas, SUWA
opposed it because they didn't include certain small parcels. SUWA's
philosophy has been 'all or nothing.' If they weren't so extreme
and intrusive, this wouldn't be going on and Utah's public lands would
be managed very differently than they are now. I don't know which is
worse, this bill pushing the state into a law suit with the federal government
Hooray for Governor Herbert! The Governor doesn't have just a small faction
of people supporting this lawsuit, as stated by opposing groups. Rather, he has
hundreds of thousands of state residents who support this. Any
increased costs will be paid for by the improved management of the land. So, the
scare tactics about costs are absolutely bogus. This will be nothing
but a boon to the state. And, we know how to take care of and properly preserve
the land. It's not going to be trashed.
@Spirtree"The Gov has got my vote and support with his stance of
having Utah manage Utah! SUWA is a eco terrist group that would leave me out of
access to lands my family and I have been using for generations. GO GOV!"-----You might want to rethink your stance. Since the governor
went against the unanimous Utah Supreme Court decision on the stream access
issue a few years ago, and signed away access to rivers and streams that the
unanimous Supreme Court ruling stated that the public has a right to access, it
is clear to me that the governor is NOT interested in the public's right to
use the public's property, but is interested in transferring it to the
private, wealthy who will lock it up.
Yep. SUWA and the envirowacks will support the Federal Government in miss
managing our natural resources out of business. Prairie Dog on endangered list
(poisoned to the brink of extinction by the BLM). Mule deer in decline (not one
so-called winter range chaining by the USFS or BLM done in specification
required in range restoration manual published by USFS, DWR and BLM). Wildfires
rage across Utah in dry season (no timely response to fuels build up like
grazing cheat grass ranges in the springtime by BLM or USFS). Decline of aspen
type forests (no control harvest of evergreen competition that is killing
aspen). Beatle killing spruce across Utah forests (no management logging by USFS
of overgrowth of spruce stressing trees). Beatle kill trees not removed for
forest health and use in the economy as building materials (no logging by USFS,
buy from foreign source cutting rain forest). Yep... we need SUWA and the
federal government. Not.
What hyprocrisy (or ignorance) the Governor, legislaure, as well as uninformed
commenters here, show, in claiming that federal lands belong to the state.
Consider these facts:1. The United States existed before the state, or
even the territory, of Utah.2. The people of the Utah territory
petitioned the United States for admission as a state.3. The vast
majority of the citizens of Utah profess to be law-abiding, and Mormons in
particular believe in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.3. In the
Enabling Act, as a condition of admission, the people of the territory of Utah
relinquished all claims to unappropriated lands:That the people
inhabiting said proposed State do agree and declare that they forever disclaim
all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the
boundaries thereof; and to all lands lying within said limits owned or held by
any Indian or Indian tribes; and that until the title thereto shall have been
extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the
disposition of the United States . . . .Now the Governor,
legislature, and states' rights zealots want to ignore their
predecessors' legally binding promise. Hypocrisy indeed.
This whole argument boils down to one truth. The vast majority of federal land
in Utah was considered absolutely worthless. It was not capable of sustaining
any kind of industry. Utah was then very willing to turn over this useless,
unwanted land to the federal government. Now that the energy industry is
interested, all of a sudden Utah wants the land back. If you sell a piece
of land, and several decades later the current owners discover a vein of gold,
you cannot go back and sue for the return of the land!
Look st most of the states in the East and Midwest--many have few Federally
owned acres of land. Kansas, North Dakota, Oklahoma mostly privately owned
land. While the liberals, including many who responded to this article, go on
about so-called fairness, why shouldn't we have the ability to manage our
own lands. Go to Oklahoma or Texas HS Fan and tell them you have the right to
do whatever you want to do on their land and see what happens.
@Danish AmericanSo selling off all the land in the state to private
interests so we can be just like the other states is what you are recommending?
It is all a moot point. There is absolutely no way the yocals from
Utah will reign supreme over the federal government in this case. It is waste
of time and resources.
Some people say they have been shut out of public lands. Can someone elaborate?
Do you mean you can't access some areas with an ATV or vehicle? Cause
that is the way it should be. No one is shutting you out, just get off your ATV
and go in. If you don't like peace and quiet go somewhere where ATVs are
allowed. Some land needs to be reserved for non-motorized activities. When I go
into the back country I like to enjoy nature and have some peace and quiet.Does anyone actually know what the state of Utah plans to do with the
land once in their control? I need to know the answer to that question before I
decide which side I'm on.
The SUWA is wrong on several accounts. The most blatant is their contention in
their commercials that property values will go down when a whole bunch of real
estate goes on the private market. Personally, I find that laughable. No real
estate in Grand County, Wayne County, Uninta County, Carbon County, Tooele
County, Box Elder County, San Juan County, Kane County, Washington County, Emery
County, et al, is going to affect my property values in Kearns. What I want, and what the SUWA won't tell you is for the School Trust
Lands locked up in these Federally owned parcels, to start making money for the
schools through energy and mineral development. Some of that money can and will
go to the administration of those lands. The state will make money with the
royalties that such development will bring. The SUWA saying that administration
of these lands will drain the state is pure bunk. And the sad thing is, they
know it but they lie just like anyone else and it is their way or the highway.
One old man, you just made the case for less government from the Feds. If Utah
is getting $1.30 back from the Feds for every dollar we contribute in taxes,
then we are getting too much back and the Federal Budget is out of whack. No
one wants all the lands to be developed. Just the land that will benefit the
state and its taxpayers.
So Flashback wants to increase state taxes. Interesting.Or will
Flashback let us know exactly which tax funded things he wants to eliminate?
I support Gov Herbert in getting our lands back. North Dakota is using their
land and resources to lower the unemployment in the state and create a Billion
dollar Surplus from oil and gas drilling on those lands. North Dakota has
around 4 billion barrels of recoverable oil in there state and in Montana. Utah
has 19 billion barrels of oil in Tar Sands around the state. We can lower our
tax burdens for our schools, balance our budget and lower our unemployment rate
with responsible access to our own lands.
@Brian BWho exactly is Utah "getting our lands back" from?
Who is the original owner of that land? When did Utah ever "own" the
land the federal government now owns? Inquiring minds would like to
This isn't a conservative or a liberal issue, this is a common sense issue.
Who introduced the Bill? IVORY, as in Ivory homes. What profession does the Gov.
come from? Real Estate... What is the main purpose of this bill? To sell the
land to private interests. Who benefits? Utahans? NO!! But the Govenor and his
cronies. Not the people of Utah. Yes, we might get something back, but
it'll be a one time return, and it won't be anything compared to what
the corrupt officials of this state will get. Once the land is gone, it is gone,
and owned by someone else. NOT BY UTAHANS. Don't you get it people? We will
LOSE our land. No more access!! IT WON'T BELONG TO US!! Get this through
your heads. This is not a winning situation for Utahans. No hunting, hiking,
biking, backpacking, day trips into the backcountry. Think about the added
pollution from development, the loss of tourism dollars. Do we want to live in a
state where we, the citizens, can't access the land? I don't want to
be like Texas or Arkansas. I'm smarter than them. Save Our Land!
Utah can't afford to fight the wildfires without the feds help. Utah
can't afford to manage all these areas. Those lands don't belong to
Utah, they belong to all Americans. Herbert is going to waste a lot of money in
this silly legal battle which is going to hurt Utahn's in the long run.
Less money to manage the State Parks that are set for closure or have closed
already. Utah is in over it's head on this one. I don't necessarily
support SUWA, but I can't see how we could fight fires and manage the lands
we think we have a right to (which we don't).
He's right! Utah can't afford to keep it's State Parks going
now, much less take on funding more lands. These lands that are now maintained
by the Federal Government would fall into disrepair. Let the feds maintaintain
as much land in Utah as they will! It's a bargain! Utah has had a lot of
federal land right from the start. The money that is brought in to our economy
by tourism just in our National Parks is far more that anything Utah could do
with the land.Also, the goveror is wasting taxpayer money on these
lawsuits that will be in the courts for years. Think what good this money could
be doing in the proper channels!
Little to do about nothing. The federal government will never give up any of
the land that it kept illegally when Utah became a state. Environmentalists
relax nothing will happen.
We need to understand that SUWA is part of an environmental industry whose
agenda is to NOT resolve environmental issues. To resolve these issues is to
put their organization's employees out of work. Consequently, even when
their actions do not advance the interests of the environment, I fully expect
them to do everything possible to seek continued conflict rather than working to
reasonably resolve areas of disagreement. In today's world of energy
shortage and unemployement it seems that areas of compromise can be found where
everyone wins, not just the staff of environmental lobbyists.
The Shingle fire not far from the Zion area was started by a guy on an ATV with
a defective spark arrestor on a Sunday afternoon at approximately 3:30 p.m. when
Utah state government is not working. No state has the resources nor capability
to do what needed to be done. It took a joint effort from various federal
agencies from various states in the West and including Alaska. Other western
states are strapped with fires and droughts that prevent them from coming to our
aid with reciprocal agreements. The federal government has various areas and
regions that can respond. We pay for the common welfare of citizens that live
in other states. There is a balance and there is accountability in the form of
voting but not enough people vote and you get what others may have voted for.
It is not perfect but it is so much better than 99 percent of what the world
has. Many of the commenters are probably involved in more than commenting but
others just sit and don't know what is going on or care as long as they
have their needs met or handed to them on a platter.
We all need to hope and pray SUWA wins this one.
If any of you who claim SUWA "locks up" the land, just wait until
Herbert and his developer buddies get their hands on it. You'll wish
you could lace up a pair of boots and hike in.The fact is, SUWA
hasn't locked anything up. Wilderness, by definition, can't have roads
in it. Do you really believe a paved road would ever be built to Lone
Peak, or do you agree it really is a wilderness.Everyone should thank SUWA
for their work. Seriously, the worst thing that could happen for everyone is for
the State to take over the federal land in Utah.The State can't even
sufficiently fund the State Parks, how do any of you expect them to fund
recreation on these lands? The BLM has done a much better job of
stewardship than Herbert could ever dream of.
"What they're saying is you people in Utah are not good enough, not
strong enough, not smart enough to manage your own lands...." That's
right, we're not.
These land belong to America. To take public lands out of federal control and
give them to Utah means stealing these lands from Americans in the other 49
states. Governor Herbert will niot succeed inn this effort, and as a result,
he'll look like an even bigger fool than he already does.
Re: "This isn't a conservative or a liberal issue, this is a common
sense issue."Whenever a liberal tree-hugger says something like
this, rest assured it IS a liberal issue, one that defies common sense.
It should have been Utah land all along. When Utah became a state, it was not
afforded the rights and privileges that had been guaranteed to the original
states of the Union, and which were promised to all subsequent states. The
federal government failed to keep its promise. I suppose we have the right to
charge them "back taxes" on the land they withheld from the State and
her citizens from the beginning of statehood. If you are a Utahn, you deserve
your land. Simple.
A lot of these comments make me laugh. First, we are citizens of the United
States of America. Utah is part of that nation. Not its own nation. Our state
constitution is subservient to the greater law, which is the Constitution of the
USA. What is even funnier, is that our constitution has a section highlighting
federal vs. state land, and in it, it says that the state is giving its land, as
a way of saying we are forever binding ourselves, through the agreement of
statehood, to the superior statute or the United STATES of America. What Herbert
is doing is illegal. It is in direct violation of our state consititution and
state law. Also, and I can't believe most of you who support this bill, why
you can't see this, but this isn't going to benefit Utahans in the
slightest. If the state were to win, which it won't (any lawyer can see
that our constitution is being violated by this bill) the purpose is to benefit
a few and the state will get a one time reward, but that'll be wipped out
by our legal bills. This is foolish to support.
Some interesting observations and certainly what many out-of-state people I deal
with think of Utahans. We continue to hurt ourselves politically in many
places!From what I read in the Utah constitution, those lands,
except those which were patented and those expressly given to the State
(Sections 2, 6, 32 & 36) are federal lands. Of course there have been sales,
trades & purchases by both.I think the proposal would even lower
the price and saleability of lands currently on the market.I think
the new owners would be those individuals or companies who are financially able
to buy large tracts. Even the surveying and rights-of-way to a bunch of smaller
tracts is$$$.I think it would cost Utah residents money. The State
can't manage the lands it currently has and has talked about closing State
Parks.I propose a study by someone like Harvard Business School to
do a complete and unbiased financial analysis, including costs for admistation,
things like rights-of-way, appraised values, expected taxes, income etc. That
might be a better use of money rather than legal battles.Invest in
@RCS Orem, UT"It should have been Utah land all along. When Utah
became a state, it was not afforded the rights and privileges that had been
guaranteed to the original states of the Union, and which were promised to all
subsequent states. The federal government failed to keep its promise. I suppose
we have the right to charge them "back taxes" on the land they withheld
from the State and her citizens from the beginning of statehood. If you are a
Utahn, you deserve your land. Simple." RCS You might check the
history, for instance Connecticut was required to give up all it's western
land that extended clear over to the Cleveland area, which is still called
"The Western Reserve" even by many businesses. Maybe it should be
"given back" to Conn.Most of the Western States have public
lands within their borders, maybe Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho and Nevada should own
those lands in those states too. Alaska has the most, they will be really
rich.I think it is foolish to spend my money (I am a Utah taxpayer)
to even promote something that the State's own attorneys say doesn't
have a chance.
Go, Governor Herbert. Western States have been the whipping boy for the Eastern
environmentalist for years. New Jersey has 3% government land and
97% private land. So it goes in the East. Utah can best manage
Utah. Keep up the good work. You have my vote and support.GO GOV!
Under the US Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 8, Clause 17, and the 10th amendment,
the Federal Government can not exercise exclusive jurisdiction or own land in
Utah, unless it is for Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and
other needful Buildings, and it was purchased by the Consent of the Utah
Legislature.When Utah became a state, the Federal Government
committed to selling the unappropriated public lands, extinguishing the title,
and providing 5% of the proceeds of the sales to the State School Trust Fund.I believe it would be better to have the land transferred to Utah as opposed
to requiring the Federal Government sell the land to developers or other
countries like China. The Utah State Constitution is designed to protect the
Public Land based on Article XVIII, Section 1, Forests to be preserved, and
Article XX, Section 1, Land grants accepted on terms of trust. If
the Federal Government sells or transfers any public land to Utah or others, 5%
of the proceeds of the sales should got to the School Trust Fund. There is a
gaping loophole in that process which I have been working on to close.
It surprises me by the number of you that actually think SUWA is the greatest
thing to ever happen. I would bet a lot of money on the fact that all of you
that wrote those comments have never even seen what they are trying to take away
from you. Do you even realize that the land currently belongs to YOU, and they
are trying to take it away from you to protect the "wilderness". I am
all for national parks and state parks, but taking away land to protect the
sandstone and rock? Nature is going to get rid of it before we ever could! If
you think that they take it away to protect the plants and animals, then you
obviously haven't seen what they are trying to take away! I also like the
fact that all of you think that ATV riders are some satanic monsters that come
and eat up beauty! HA HA HA HA HA HA! If you have even been to true Utah
wilderness you know how funny the whole thing sounds!