Brian
Hawthorne
USA-ALLI don't know exactly what to say about this report. I sat on the
information for a couple of days because I wanted to report it in a rational and
non-emotional way. I don't know if I can do that.
Last Friday, the BYU law school sponsored a State and Local
Government Conference that, among other topics, discussed the San Rafael Swell
monument proposal. At the conference Larry Young, speaking for SUWA, said that
the monument proposal is a win-win situation for SUWA. He said a
"good" monument will address SUWA's concerns (OHV use, wilderness),
and a "bad" monument will highlight problems and result in demands
from the "conservation community" to correct its deficiencies and
eventually will become a "good" monument.
He also said that SUWA was surprised to learn of the monument
concept, that during the previous year the Governor had asked SUWA to meet with
Emery County officials. He said that SUWA had had 8 to 10 meetings with county
people during the year preceding the announcement. This had come about after the
county's conservation area legislation failed in congress.
He emphasized that the "big issue is roads." He said
he is not against administrative roads. He said that there are a thousand miles
of roads in the area and SUWA does not oppose them. (a lie, see: http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,295006942,00.html
) When pressed on this he fudged and declined to identify the thousand miles
SUWA doesn't oppose as being within the current monument proposal. He said SUWA
is not against grazing in the proposed monument. He said that SUWA does not
involve itself with grazing issues. (another lie. see: http://www.fguardians.org/frontline/ofront107.htm#2
)
Fighting SUWA isn't easy. I can testify to that. Multiple Use
activists don't have multi-million dollar budgets like the WAGs do. We rely on
volunteers. Folks who take time from their jobs and their families to write
letters and attend meetings. We require people to battle their own lack of
knowledge and learn about complicated land use laws. We require people to battle
human nature itself and overcome their own apathy when they resolve to try and
make a difference. I get emotional when I think about the sacrifices that
individuals make when they help us in the fight. I think of guys like Alan
Peterson and Victor Johnson who have devoted so much time from their families
and their jobs. It takes a toll. I know what you all sacrifice when you decide
to participate. This is why I appreciate our members so very much.
When I learned that SUWA views the San Rafael National Monument
as a "win-win" situation, it really pissed me off. Our volunteers give
enough of their time fighting SUWA. The last thing we need is our own elected
representatives delivering SUWA the "win-win" situation.
One cannot help but wonder what the motivation might have been
to back such a risky scheme as the proposed San Rafael National Monument. After
all, the Grand Staircase has been a monumental failure. The promises and
protections of that proclamation have proven to be fraudulent. Ranching and
other traditional uses are being suppressed. Other than the millions of tax
dollars being wasted for superfluous monument management, there has been no
economic boom to the localities.
Some have suggested that this is an effort to head off massive
Wilderness designations. If so, it is akin to committing suicide to avert the
possibility of being murdered. You still wind up in the same place, only sooner.
Any conviction that this process can be controlled for long is an illusion.
Monuments are increasingly being managed like National Parks that are
increasingly being managed as Wilderness. Regardless of the original protections
written into the proclamations, monuments ultimately result in wilderness like
management, complete with regulations preventing nearly everything but
breathing.
It's no wonder SUWA loves the idea.
