OCR Text |
Show 1 i I A Emery County Progress Castle Dale, Utah Tuesday November 26, 2002 11A Commentary LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Monument for Futures Sake Dear Editor: It was with a sense of sadness that I read of the defeat of the initiative for the establishment of the San Rafael Western Monument and the defeat of Commissioner Johnson, an advocate for the monument. Even with Governor Leavitt and Representative Cannon backing the proposal after much effort in working out compromises, non-bindi- the monument was still defeated. During the last two weeks I have had the opportuto Colonity of driving on rado and also taking Amtrack from Denver to Green River as well as driving to Goblin Valley and Capitol Reef National Park. What beautiful wild country! ' My grandfather, E. P. Pectol, and my grandmothers brother, Joseph S. Hickman, spent much of their lives gettingCapitol Reef (Wayne Wonderland) established as a small national monument. They are acknowledged as the "Fathers of Capitol Reef Na- tional Park. Through their efforts, a wonderful legacy was left to their family and the nation. It required courage, a vision of the future, and a lot of work not only by them but also by many other people who caught the vision and helped. Since the monument was established in 1937, it has been en- Presidents by Eisenhower, Johnson, and Nixon and made into a national park Not all people shared their vision. After eight years in the Utah State Legislature, Pectol was defeated in the election of 1938. The land issues that defeated him are basically the same land issues that defeated the San Rafael initiative. But the park was established, w hich was and is the important thing. I doubt many people would argue today that the best use for the Capitol Reef lands is not as a park. But in 1937, Capitol Reef was even more isolated than it is today. The population of Utah larged and the nation was much smaller than today. Many people could not understand why it was necessary to protect that remote piece of land for the future. And just like Capitol Reef of 1937, it is difficult at times to see the value of an Escalante Grand Staircase Monument or a San Rafael Monument. Perhaps in 2002 such monuments are not a pressing necessity. But w hat about in 2050 or 2100? What kind of I'tah will be important to our posterity? Every' year w hen our family holds the n reunion in the wonderful little town of Torrey, there is a sense of pride that our ancestors had the vision to es Peetol-Hickma- tablish Capitol Reef National Park and to preserve the land for the whole nation and world to see and enjoy. Pectol and Hickman asked themselves, What will be the best use of this land in the future? I only hope that the people who voted against the San Rafael initiative will ask themselves the same question and reconsider their vision and priorities. My grandfather found that it was difficult to go against the prevailing values and priorities of his day and lost his election for a fifth term. He fought hard and lost the election, but in the long run, he won. His beloved Wayne Wonderland be- came Capitol Reef National Iark. May the political leaders of Emery County, Utah, and the nation have the same courage and vision. After all, the land is not owned by Emery County, Utah, or even the federal government. It is owned by none of us and all of us at the same time. It is owned" by the world and our posterity. The question is: What is the best use of the land now and in 2100? I think Grandpa Pectol had the right answer. I also think Commi- ssioner Johnson, Governor Leavitt, Representative Cannon and many other supporters of the initiative had the right answer. May they have the courage to continue to fight for their convictions against some prevailing social and political values and pressures. Neal repeat, no such requirement in the Antiquities Act, the law under which presidents designate monuments. Any provision for public involvement in monu- ment management can be revoked by any future president who, with the stroke of his pen, can change anything President Bush might do in creating this monument. So, the only thing innovative about public involvement in this monument proposal was that proponents tried to convince us to trade legally mandated public input opportunities for no guarantees at all. We rejected that at the polls and all of us, including the millions of federal taxpayers you are concerned about, will have more input as a result. You also completely missed what truly was innovative about this issue. Unlike President Clinton, President Bush truly is sensitive to local concerns and impacts. He said that he would not proceed over our objections. How refreshing! The governor and our commissioners represented to him that this proposal had local support. We disagreed. So, w'e put it on the ballot by peti- tion to see who was correct. One additional point. The "special interests did not vote. We did. By definition, when a majority speaks, that is not some special interest you hear. It is the people governing themselves. Mark H. Williams, Castle Dale-reprifrom Salt Lake nt Tribune Busk, Richfield Where to Go From Here? Monumental Errors Dear Editor: In my opinion this has been a sad election for Emery County. The defeat of the Monument Initiative took us out of the forefront of western counties trying to resolve their own destiny to a point where we do not even know what direction we are going. We had a chance to work w ith the president, the department on the interior, and the governor of the state of Utah to design a monument that would manage the San Rafael Swell in a way that would protect those values most important to the people of this county and we voic'd it down. All the people I have talked to since the election have said, Y e have to go on, we can't let it stop here, w e have too much to lose. 1 agree but what can w e do? This was not a debate about the We voted meaning of P. Your editorial A Swell Monument (Salt Lake Tribune, Nov. 10) was seriously incorrect in several respects. You lament that 2,151 Emery County voters who voted against the San Rafael Swell monument proposal scuttled at the starting gate an innovative approach to increasing public involvement in federal land management." As a result, we somehow canceled out the interests of millions of federal taxpayers who have a stake in the land. In fact, the Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA), BLM's organic act, gives everyone in the country the opportunity to influence the agency's land management plan for the Swell and all other areas it manages. How ever, FLPMA also requires BLM to give priority to the management objectives of state and local governments. This is appropriate since the impact of federal management policies falls most heavily on the state and local citizens. This public involvement is mandated in FLPMA. There is no is. whether "the Emery County Commission shall, by resolution, endorse the establishment of 621.000 acres of public land in Emery County as the "San Rafael Western Heritage Monument." A sizable majority of the voters said no. I realize the pub POLITICALLY CORRECT lic lands council and the commission can get around it just by making the monument 620,000 acres, but it is going to be difficult for them to say they have the support of the public when the public voted no. I am finding that I am apparently not the only one who does not know what should happen as a result of the election. It appears the opposition is just as confused. Last Friday 1 got a letter from the leader of the opposition, Mark H. Williams saying he is going to have a meeting to establish a new plan that we will all love. He is bringing in outside experts and news media from the Wasatch Front. I dont think thats w'hat the ballot initiative that 1 voted on said. It is ironic that they seem to be saying they want to do w hat the monument process was already doing, but they worked very hard to convince us to vote to kill that process. Then on Sunday I read another letter from Williams in the Salt Lake Tribune. This letter w'as a learned dissertation on FLPMA (Federal Land Policy Management Act) and the protections it supposedly provides for the local citizens. Williams second letter w'as in response to a Tribune Editorial on Nov. 10 that stated: Federal, State, and Local officials should move the monument question to a broader stage, one less easily manipulated. Emery County voters have had their say. Millions of others deserve the same opportunity." It looks like the Tribune is saying wre lost our chance and now its time for others to take over the process. Who will those people will be? Do the citizens of this county realize what we have done? We would have been able to write the proclamation which would establish the management of the monument. This document would protect our heritage, our grazing, hunting, and most of all our water. (Read Jeffrey O. Durranis opinion piece on wa- tablished a precedent for future presidents if they wrant to establish any new monuments. Future presidents would have been obligated to go through the very public process we were going through. This not only w'ould have been good for us, but it would have provided a way for other rural counties to develop their own processes. Emery County would have had permanent representation on the monument advisory council. We would have been part of the planning for, and management of the monument. We have lost that opportunity. It is ironic that the biggest concern from the opposition w'as access and roads. The BLM w ill be putting out their access management plan after the first of the year. This was going to By Tim Huber would soon move another Grand Staircase Escalante Monument. The full page ad from SUWA probably provided the death knell for the monument. SUWA did not say in their ad that they supported the monument proposal, they supported a monument that supported their way of thinking. I think they have a better chance of getting what they want now that the monument process was defeated. Most of all I was saddened by what I consider as attacks made on the individual county commissioners and members of the public lands council as well as the governor, and the president. We have always prided ourselves on our ability to get Be Careful for wish for w hat y ou Dear Editor: Paul Young suggested in his letter of November 19 that the residents of Emery County had better come up with a plan or be prepared to got hammered." Young proposed that the cil meeting. There is another alternative. In a recent Federal Court opinion, the Judge found that the BLM must achieve consistency with local government land use plans (Uintah County, Utah v. Bureau of Land Management and Defenders of Wildlife et. al.). This means that the County could enact a local land use plan that describes how the Swell should be managed to benefit the residents of the county. The BLM would be required to develop column Nov 10, A Swell Monument contained the statement, Federal, state and local officials should move the monument question to a broader stage, one less easily manipulated. Emery County voters have had their say. Millions of others deserve the same opportunity. There have been calls for the rewilding of the Salt Lake basin. This would mean relocating the citizens of your metropolitan area to somewhere else. Applying the logic of your statement above, such a move should be decided by the people of the other 49 states. Maybe since you support such an absurdity the rest of the nation can oblige with a grant financed campaign to accomplish returning the area to its pristine glory of an settlement. The objective of our Constitutional form of government is the protection of our creator endowed inalienable rights against the whims of democracy or more accurately mobocracy. Forsake that principle at your own peril. The rest of the nation have no more right to dictate to the people of Emery County than to Salt Lake City. Be careful what you wish for. Howard Hutchinson Executive Director Coalition of Arizona and New Mexico Counties Glen wood, New Mexico Newspaper Clarifies Letter letter to the editor recently appeared in the Emery County Progress voicing a A consumer's personal opinions about a local funeral home. The Emery County Progress has concluded that it should not have published said letter because the letter deals with private rather than public issues. Letters to the editor sen e as a forum allowing the public to discuss public issues only, not private issues. Further, after the letter was published, i l COPY the funeral home provided the Emery County Progress with documentation indicating that several of the claims of said consumer were significantly inaccurate. The Emery County Progress hereby apologizes to said local funeral home for publishing said letter. P for- their Resource Management Plan with consideration of consistency with the County plan. happen whether the monument There is a national policy of no was established or not. How negotiations with terrorists. many people think the results of There are laws against extorthis election will increase the tion and we should never conaccess on the San Rafael? duct our lives in response to exThe fallback protection for tortion. There should be no neaccess is the countys RS 2477 gotiation with extreme environassertion. The governor has a mentalists. You will never be statewide initiative going on able to satisfy their constantly with the BLM to protect these expanding demands. Mr. Durrant reasoned that the rights. One of the complaints by the opposition was they w'anted editorial in the Salt Lake Trithese decisions to be made lo- bune, reprinted in your paper, cally, not by outsiders. One of demonstrated that federal the driving forces for us to be monument designation was still proactive was that the public threat. My response sent to the lands council wanted to avoid Tribune follows: Your opinion ter in the Nov. 5 Emery County Progress for an excellent disalong. These people put in many cussion of the potential effect of hours in our behalf, even if we any management plan on water dont agree with their proposrights). The proclamation de- als. I am not sure what we should termines how the monument will be managed during its exdo for our next step but perhaps istence. No president has ever our best chance is to see if we changed the proclamation on can get the original process another president's monument. back on track. I am sure that Several monuments got bigger wtatever the process is we dont but the management emphasis w ant it led by outsiders and spew as never changed. Even if we cial interests. Id rather see it can get things back on track it led by the people duly elected by is questionable whether w e can the citizens of Emery County. ever have the control we had before. Kent Petersen, Perron If the monument proposal had gone through it w ould have es- - enviros ward with a plan to lock up the area using the Endangered Species Act. Jeff Durrant wrote offering a couple of suggestions following a Public Lands Coun- |