OCR Text |
Show Viewpoints The A-21 Park Record. Sat/Sun/Mon/Tues, April 14-17, 2018 editorial Marchers are right: Science shouldn’t be a partisan issue O letters to the editor Students should chase their dreams Editor: I was disheartened reading the article about Treasure Mountain Junior High’s Reality Town activity. I was an eighth grader at Treasure Mountain 2008-2009 and remember participating in Reality Town. However, the takeaway described by the students in this article seemed to be the fear of having an inadequate paycheck, rather than the possibility of being financially successful in life. One student aspired to be an agricul- The Park Record Staff PUBLISHER ....................... Andy Bernhard Editor ................................... Bubba Brown Staff Writers ......................Jay Hamburger Scott Iwasaki Angelique McNaughton Ben Ramsey Carolyn Webber Contributing ............................. Tom Clyde Writers Jay Meehan Teri Orr Amy Roberts Tom Kelly Joe Lair Copy Editor ............................ James Hoyt Engagement Editor.........Kira Hoffelmeyer Photographer .........................Tanzi Propst Office Manager ..................... Tiffany Piper Circulation Manager ............. Lacy Brundy Accounting Manager ......... Jennifer Snow ADVERTISING Classifieds/Legals ............. Jennifer Lynch Advertising Director ........... Valerie Spung Advertising Sales ................... Jodi Hecker Erin Donnelly Olivia Bergmann Chris Roberts Sharon Bush Production Director ..................Ben Olson Production .......................... Patrick Schulz tural scientist, but now was reconsidering that career and whether or not she wants to have children. Agricultural science is a respectable and valuable career path, and I hate to think that she may abandon it. Two other students interviewed wanted to be a psychologist and a cameraman. Again, those students’ comments were focused on the lack of money. It might be true that these careers don’t pay as much as others, but that doesn’t make them less valuable pursuits. The world needs agricultural scientists, psychologists, and cameramen. There is something to be said for having a stable career, family planning, and other forms of financial responsibility that Reality Town aims to teach. I agree that students should have realistic expectations of what they from their life, but they should be encouraged to value other aspects of their career as well, such as self-fulfillment and contributing to society. Ingrid Jorgensen Park City Letters Policy The Park Record welcomes letters to the editor on any subject. We ask that the letters adhere to the following guidelines. They must include the home (street) address and telephone number of the author. No letter will be published under an assumed name. Letters must not contain libelous material. Letters should be no longer than about 300 words (about 600 words for guest editorials) and should, if possible, be typed. We reserve the right to edit letters if they are too long or if they contain statements that are unnecessarily offensive or obscene. Writers are limited to one letter every seven days. Letters thanking event sponsors can list no more than 6 individuals and/or businesses. Send your letter to: editor@parkrecord.com n Saturday, a crowd was set to march down Park City’s Main Street in the name of science for the second straight year. The size of the demonstration, dubbed the March for Science, was not expected to be on the same scale as the recent March For Our Lives or the protests held during the last two Sundance Film Festivals. But its primary message — that elected officials should base policy on science — is an important one. And the need to share it highlights one of the biggest problems our society faces: the fact science itself has become such a partisan issue. Long gone are the days when members of both political parties generally accepted scientific research, then debated how to address problematic trends, like deforestation and air pollution. Instead, many conservatives now reject scientific evidence outright. Environmental issues are the most stark example. For instance, the debate about whether climate change exists, and whether humans are causing it, has been closed in the scientific community for years — at least 97 percent of scientists say it does exist and we are causing it, according to a 2016 analysis of nearly 12,000 climate research papers. Yet, Republican leaders transformed the issue from science fact into a political wedge and convinced a significant percentage of Americans that the entire idea of man-made climate change is fictional. The damage to our planet from the resulting lack of action is impossible to quantify but catastrophic. On a national level, the right’s dismissal of science has been exacerbated in the Trump era. Most notably, the president declared his intention to pull the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Accord. Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency has loosened a number of regulations that were aimed at fulfilling the very mission identified in the organization’s name — protecting the environment. Just this month, in fact, the EPA indicated it may roll back Obama-era fuel efficiency standards put in place to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. All of this despite overwhelming scientific evidence indicating the government should ramp up its environmental efforts instead of dismantle them. Locally, residents are fortunate that Park City and Summit County have been proactive about issues like protecting the environment and appear to understand the role science has in determining policy. The Utah Legislature has been frustratingly slow to catch on but has shown signs of progress. In the recent legislative session, for instance, lawmakers passed H.C.R. 007, a concurrent resolution that “encourages the use and analysis of sound science to understand the causes and impacts of local and regional climates.” The resolution, while non binding, earned the support of dozens of Republicans, including three who represent parts of Summit County, Sen. Kevin Van Tassell, Sen. Allen Christensen and Rep. Logan Wilde. Rep. Tim Quinn, however, voted against it. Hopefully, the resolution indicates the Legislature is ready to take stronger action on environmental issues going forward. That would doubtless please those convening Saturday in Park City. But until the federal government follows suit and science is no longer a partisan issue in America, they’ll have plenty of reason to march. guest editorial The public lands movement faces complex threat as opponents adopt insidious strategy MICHAEL DAX Writers on the Range At a recent Senate hearing, Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden asked Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke whether Teddy Roosevelt, whom Zinke claims as his mentor, would support the elimination of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a 50-year-old account used to support the protection of land and water across the country. Zinke answered, “I challenge you to give me one square inch of land that has been removed from federal protection.” This incongruous response from Secretary Zinke, likely intended to appease public-lands advocates, failed to acknowledge the more complicated reality that the propublic-lands movement is facing today. When the Interior Department excised millions of acres from Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments in Utah last year, that land remained under the control of the Bureau of Land Management. Now, however, it receives much less protection from activities like hardrock mining and oil and gas drilling. So protest signs with slogans like “Public lands in public hands” and “Keep it public” can miss the point of what the Interior Department has been doing over the past year. It is true that maintaining access to public lands has united a broad range of sportsmen and environmentalists. Because these lands are used for both conservation and recreation in the West, the movement has gained new support. That even includes politicians known for their anti-environmental bent, such as former Utah Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who used the hashtag #keepitpublic when he announced the withdrawal of a bill to dispose of 3 million acres of public lands. But the conservation target has moved. Although the motivation of privatizers is partially based on a states’-rights ideology that resents the federal government on principle, the movement’s more practical side seeks to skirt environmental reviews. On state or private lands, for example, activities like oil and gas exploration, logging and grazing often don’t require compliance with laws like the National Environmental Policy, Clean Water and Endangered Species acts. So, with the pro-public-lands movement effectively rallying supporters, those who wish to transfer public land to For the record Asked at Park City Market Dana Reilly Park City No, because I control who sees my stuff knowing it’s an imperfect system. That’s definitely a negative aspect to social media. Brian Gustas Oklahoma City No because I don’t care what anyone pulls from my social media. I don’t really have any secrets. As long it’s not financial. the states have shifted tactics and begun to employ a much more insidious strategy. Instead of pushing for the outright disposal of these lands, transfer advocates like Utah Republican Rep. Rob Bishop are attempting to undermine the landmark laws that provide oversight of extractive industries — especially oil and gas — on public lands. In late 2016, Bishop declared, “I would be happy to invalidate the Endangered Species Act.” In 2017, other politicians publicly agreed with him, and there were more than 70 legislative attacks on the law, which Congress overwhelmingly approved in 1973. Meanwhile, land-transfer advocates, with support from President Donald Trump and officials like Secretary Zinke, have pursued their end goal of opening up protected public lands while still maintaining federal management. On the territory lopped off from the two reduced monuments in Utah, drilling for oil and gas and mining for minerals such as uranium will now be allowed in places where such extractive industries were previously banned. Other activities, like motorized recreation, can be allowed in monuments but face far less scrutiny in non-protected BLM and Forest Service tracts. National monuments also typically draw more funding for staff and protection of archaeological treasures like Cedar Mesa, which was left out of Trump’s revised monument. What’s more, last September, Secretary Zinke allowed a two-year moratorium on oil and gas leasing in prime sage grouse habitat to expire. Though the land will remain under the management of the BLM, its ability to support imperiled species will undoubtedly decline as new extractive leases are developed. Congress has also opened the 1.5 million-acre coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration. While it is true that the land will remain in “public hands,” the change is disastrous ecologically. The area, which supports 200 species of migratory birds, all three species of North American bears, and one of the last great caribou herds, stands to be devastated. The fight for public lands can’t merely be about keeping them public. Public lands need vigilant protection to ensure that they support healthy forests, clean water and robust wildlife populations. With public lands advocates slowly embracing this more complex mission, the real fight can begin. Photos by Kira Hoffelmeyer Will the Facebook news about privacy make you change the way you use social media? Agnes & Dave Howard Park City Agnes: I’m leery of what goes on there. The other thing about social media is that it’s very narcissistic and selfish. Dave: I’m not worried about it because I don’t use social media. I think it’s a waste of time — it’s too open. See these photos and more by following The Park Record on Facebook.com/parkrecord and Instagram.com/parkrecord |