I believe most people would like the BLM to get their B (along with their L and
M), out of here. And this dude mentioned should have never left Chicago.
Aren't we still paying for a super site clean-up there at Moab?Is
that what the "Grand Bargain" is for Bishop, strip the land of it's
resources and leave the cost to clean it up on the people, again.
Good points in the article. It is sad, however, that there is continuing to be
the desire to frack, scrape, dig, mangle, and pound the land for minerals, etc
that will be sold on the open market. There is nothing good for all of the
natural land in the extraction industry.Be smart, not short sighted. Once
blasted and mined it will take hundreds of years for the land to recover. No
Once before the Moab area had high hopes and dreams of becoming an industrial
mining area from the late 1947 to the 1950's by mining uranium in the
region. The market crashed and so did Utah and hundreds of people who invested
tens of thousands of dollars. It crashed and cost Utah many years of job losses
and financial collapse spending funding for years in advance, just like
today's irresponsible legislators and kickback millionaires.Herbert is setting up our barren landscape to another tragedy and failure and
more damaging environmental dangers than the uranium mining industry left behind
with damage measure in 50,000 year half life contamination.The oil
industry is high risk out of sight, out of mind, built in deniability of
environmental damage by fracking and destroying the subterranean structure with
millions of pounds of bunker buster bombs many miles below and hundreds of miles
around the blast.Any where in this country the damage has become
news and scientific fact, gases escaping from fracture mining burn blue in
pastures and food producing farms, and water aquifers turns brown and toxic and
unusable or drinkable. Only oil companies and legislators will profit from the
destruction they approve.
None of the three Grand County land use plans is "more protectionist of land
resources". If Grand County ignores the public's stated desire for
conservation of land, water and minerals, as all three plans currently do, where
is the balance in that? All three Grand County plan alternatives rely on the
fatally flawed Utah Recreational Land Exchange Act of 2009 (URLEA). For example,
Parcel 32, destined for Utah/SITLA control and development was appraised as
"grazing land", which clearly it will not be. For Grand County to use
the flawed URLEA adds insult to injury in Greater Canyonlands and should stop
before it is too late.
This is way to far left. They are trying to do the same on the San Rafael
Desert,South of Green River to Hanksville.