| OCR Text |
Show State Geologist Says Kaiparowits Coal Could Be Used To Bail Out Babbitt's Parks And Help State Without Hurting Monument's Integrity Governor Mike Leavitt may have listened to but did not act upon recommendations by Lee Allison, director of the Utah Geological Survey, when he made his recent land swap with Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt vfiose national parks throughout the nation are clamoring for more money for maintenance and improvements. im-provements. Allison's recommendations included in-cluded a suggested solution that would provide not only billions of dollars for Babbitt's beleaguered National Park Service but equal amounts for Utah's school children chil-dren for decades to come. The Governor recently signed over to Babbitt sections of land owned by the state specifically designated to provide income for Utah schools. The sections were all located in national parks, on national forests, in national recreation recre-ation areas, and on the new Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. He traded them to the federal government for $50 million in cash and a variety of other federal properties not located on national parks, national na-tional forests, national recreation areas, and the new Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. The trade deal must be passed by Congress before it becomes law. ... . The state properties that were traded sections of land scattered throughout the state have traditionally been administered adminis-tered by the School and Institutional Institu-tional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA), and the SITLA board approved the exchange with one dissenting vote, that of Garfield County Commission Chairman Louise Liston who sits on the SITLA board. Allison, speaking at a debate in October 1997 at an annual meeting of the Geological Society of America, had said that minerals in the grand Staircase Escalante National Monument could solve the secretary's problem by generating gen-erating some $16 billion for the nation's troubled National Park Service. "Full scale development of coal should still be allowed in the monument," said Allison after hearing of the land exchange. He said that virtually all mineable coal in the monument (estimated at 11.3 billion tons) could be recovered by disturbing less than one-tenth of one percent of the monument's 2700 square miles, using roads that already exist. He said that only two square miles of surface land would be disturbed in the process of developing devel-oping all the underground coal on the Kaiparowits. He had earlier estimated the value of that coal alone at $221 billion to $312 billion. Allison had been asked immediately im-mediately after President Bill Clinton created the GSENM in September 1996 to estimate the scope and value of energy and mineral resources on the monument. monu-ment. In January 1997, he published pub-lished his "Preliminary Assessment Assess-ment of Energy and Mineral Resources Re-sources Within the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. " In that report Allison stated, "The value of the known and potential energy and mineral (See KAIPAROWITS Page 3A) Kaiparowits Coal Should Be Mined Says State's Geologist From Front Page I resources of the Grand Staircase-Escalante Staircase-Escalante National Monument at today's prices is between $223 billion and $330 billion." Speaking to his peers in October 1997, Allison suggested that revenues accruing to the federal government from taxes on development of coal resources in the monument could provide the funds needed to operate the nation's na-tion's national parks and monuments. monu-ments. Stressing that his opinions are his own and not those of the Governor, Allison said his agency is mandated with the responsibility responsibil-ity of assessing the resources on state lands and determining the "most effective and beneficial administration of those lands." Allison acknowledged that his agency has been outspoken and aggressive in pointing out the energy and mineral resources in the monument and the potential for their development. He said that the UGS is mandated by law to "study and analyze other scientific, economic, or aesthetic problems... to serve the needs of the state and to support the development devel-opment of natural resources and utilization of lands within the staie." Certain state funds, he said, are allocated to the UGS specifically spe-cifically "to be used for activities carried on by the survey having as a purpose the development and exploitation of natural resources in the state of Utah." Allison argued in September 1997 that "584 oil and gas operations oper-ations and 31 mining operations are currently active in national parks and monuments around the country today." He acknowledged acknowl-edged that "none of the oil and gas wells are drilled on federal surface acreage in the park units." Allison said Clinton set a precedent, pre-cedent, however, when he included inclu-ded the pumping oil wells of the Upper Valley Oil Field near Escalante within the boundaries of the GSENM, "the first-ever producing oil wells on federal C surface lands within a national monument. The oil field crosses a boundary to the monument. It is not unreasonable," he writes, "to ask, if resource development is so incompatible with a national monument, why was an oil field included in this one?" If no development is in the plans for the monument, at the very least, Allison says, monument monu-ment planners should consider preserving its resources for some future use. He suggests creating a national strategic coal reserve, a national petroleum reserve, and a "national strategic and critical mineral reserve to ensure that monument planning does not preclude future development of the resources at some time in the future when they may be critically criti-cally needed. An alternative, he says, would be to plan for the GSENM to be a "working" monument, where royalties from developing the vast (See KAIPAROWITS on pg. 4-A) I Kaiparowits Coal :;: f. From Page 3 A resources of energy and minerals . could be directed to a "national, parks trust fund for preservation,,, maintenance, and enhancement ' of parks and monuments around .; the country." But most in Garfield County, continue to argue that it has been all downhill for the county since Clinton created the monument ir-; September 1996 saying not only , has the county been treated in a; t grossly unfair manner, but it hs not been compensated for the impact of the monument on its economy and its lifestyle. Others, primarily those in the tourist-, businesses, say the monument is. i helping them. |
