Biden restores Bears Ears National Monument size

[Irrelevant]

I'd say yes, the risks associated with major mineral plays are far greater to wildlife and the soul of wild places than being designated one way or another.

Again, you're complaining about the number of humans. That's a manageable issue. Whether or not we have the will to manage places for their conservation value remains to be seen, especially on open lands, where we actively look to defund their conservation in favor of mineral extraction.

It's a manageable issue that doesn't get managed just like O&G plays are a manageable issue that you claim doesn't get managed.

 

[Irrelevant]

Someday the Pinedale anticline won't have well pads anymore. There will never be a time when Grand Canyon doesn't have too many people.

 

[SAJ-99]

So either we make more of these areas, wildlife refuges, national monuments, wilderness areas, national parks, or we restrict usage in the number of places we have now.

Hard to do that when the areas of lowest population densities and most likely to have areas that could be conserved are red as red can be and the Repub party is staunch its believe that all land should be privately owned- unless it is landlocked by a rich landowner who cares deeply about "conservative values" (that's $$$s). Looks like restricting usage is the only option.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Someday the Pinedale anticline won't have well pads anymore. There will never be a time when Grand Canyon doesn't have too many people.

But the existing roads, noxious weeds and polluted pits will stay, as will the ozone degradation that affects so many other areas of SW WY. The damage done by the anticline will take lifetimes to erase. Cutting visitation to the Canyon now would be an immediate fix to the issue, and since the habitat is largely unaffected, it will take far less time to restore what has been lost.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Hard to do that when the areas of lowest population densities and most likely to have areas that could be conserved are red as red can be and the Repub party is staunch its believe that all land should be privately owned- unless it is landlocked by a rich landowner who cares deeply about "conservative values" (that's $$$s). Looks like restricting usage is the only option.

I think it's a mistake to look at the entirety of the GOP and assume they're anti-conservation. Conservation hasn't done a good job selling the vision, quite frankly. Look at the MT Budget from 2021. That was a $70 million investment in conservation programs and new state parks, new access projects, etc. We need to do better in selling it rather than expecting others to move to our language.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Someday the Pinedale anticline won't have well pads anymore. There will never be a time when Grand Canyon doesn't have too many people.

Pinedale anticline <> Grand Canyon

A lot of our national parks were protected, because they were astonishingly beautiful. This is pure speculation, but I think regardless of the designation people would have been drawn to the grand canyon.

My surmise is that the protections, have made it better than it would have been.

So your equivalency is flawed.

GC without versus GC with

Yosemite without versus Yosemite with

not

Yosemite versus some other spot

 

[Deleted member 28227]

@neffa3 I think you also have to consider accessibility.

Yosemite, Rocky Mountain, etc are also very close to urban areas which provides easy access to a lot of people. Many of the 'better' spots have lots of access issues comparatively. Would they be as nice if they had a major city next to them. As was the proximity part of the reason they were designated.

It would be interesting to look at the relative 'quality' of Gates of the Artic versus southern brooks range on the east side of the Dalton highway.

 

[Ben Lamb]

@neffa3 I think you also have to consider accessibility.

Yosemite, Rocky Mountain, etc are also very close to urban areas which provides easy access to a lot of people. Many of the 'better' spots have lots of access issues comparatively. Would they be as nice if they had a major city next to them. As was the proximity part of the reason they were designated.

It would be interesting to look at the relative 'quality' of Gates of the Artic versus southern brooks range on the east side of the Dalton highway.

Plus, we should look at what happens to those crowds when the Boomers are out of the picture. Sounds like it would be a wonderful spreadsheet opportunity,,,if you know what I mean.

 

[Irrelevant]

But the existing roads, noxious weeds and polluted pits will stay, as will the ozone degradation that affects so many other areas of SW WY. The damage done by the anticline will take lifetimes to erase. Cutting visitation to the Canyon now would be an immediate fix to the issue, and since the habitat is largely unaffected, it will take far less time to restore what has been lost.

Ben the point is "lifetimes" is still a timeline. While you say we could cut visitation right now and "fix" the problem, we don't and we won't. That's the genuine reality we've seen. Just as we could restore the anticline, but you claim we won't.

Pinedale anticline <> Grand Canyon

A lot of our national parks were protected, because they were astonishingly beautiful. This is pure speculation, but I think regardless of the designation people would have been drawn to the grand canyon.

My surmise is that the protections, have made it better than it would have been.

So your equivalency is flawed.

GC without versus GC with

Yosemite without versus Yosemite with

not

Yosemite versus some other spot

There are always going to be flaws but that doesn't make the point any less relevant. I will continue to argue that for a vast number of areas our "protections" have ruined them. But that reality cannot be accepted by some as it is a form of religious zeal for them and not subject to analysis.

I'm out of this one. As I've said before, I hope no one ever tries to protect the places I love the most.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Ben the point is "lifetimes" is still a timeline. While you say we could cut visitation right now and "fix" the problem, we don't and we won't. That's the genuine reality we've seen. Just as we could restore the anticline, but you claim we won't.

Why 'Orphan' Oil and Gas Wells Are a Growing Problem for States • Stateline

When Bill West drives his weed sprayer over wheat and hay fields at his ranch northwest of Gillette, Wyoming, he bumps into the occasional debris from the more than a hundred defunct natural gas wells on his 10,000-acre property. The company that owned the wells went out of business four years...

www.pewtrusts.org

I'm out of this one. As I've said before, I hope no one ever tries to protect the places I love the most.

We're just flapping out fingers pal. No harm, no foul.