Confrontation only part of story when considering opinions on public lands

It’d be very easy, looking at local and national headlines and editorial comments, to conclude that opinions on public lands issues and associated environmental concerns are tilted strongly toward development, privatization and state or local primacy rather than preservation and conservation.

Last week’s meeting in De Beque regarding energy development on the Thompson Divide, Sunday’s Daily Sentinel editorial on that same subject, lingering differences over local travel management plans and the back and forth over national park status for the Colorado National Monument all might support that perspective.

But opinions expressed by louder and well-organized voices on all sides of public lands issues don’t necessarily reflect those held by a majority of Coloradans.

For four years, the State of the Rockies Project at Colorado College has commissioned polling in six western states done jointly by firms associated with both major political parties. Results of the latest survey, released earlier this year, indicate somewhat different feelings about public lands than are usually found underneath headlines featuring confrontation and argument.

In Colorado, 72 percent of those questioned would be more likely to vote for congressional candidates supporting enhanced protections for the public lands so important to our tourism, outdoor recreation, agricultural and energy economies.

Nearly three out of four Coloradans surveyed (73 percent) thought eroding wildlife habitat was a serious problem.  That same percentage also thought pollution of lakes, streams and rivers was a serious concern.

More than three-quarters of Coloradans polled (78 percent) think conservation, recycling and wise use are the answers to water shortages.  Only 14 percent support moving water from less-populated areas to areas where more people live. 

Thirty percent of Colorado voters thought oil and gas drilling on public lands should be strictly limited, while 18 percent said those lands should be generally open to exploration and development.  More were in the middle, with 50 percent thinking some drilling should be allowed but that environmentally sensitive areas should be protected.

Other questions looked at energy-related hot topics, hydraulic fracturing and local control over drilling and production.

Most Coloradans (84 percent) know about hydraulic fracturing. Twenty-eight percent think there should be stricter regulation of that oil and gas industry practice. Another 29 percent think enforcement of existing regulations should be strengthened.

More than half the respondents (55 percent) would allow local communities to also regulate fracking, while 22 percent think it should be the role of the state to set statewide standards.  One-fifth (20 percent) of those surveyed offered no opinion, one reason we’ll be awash in pro-and-con advertising should proposals for some degree of local control of drilling and production activities make the ballot.

No survey question addressed opinions on a statewide fracking ban. Perhaps that’s because, contrary to recently ramped-up spin attempts by opponents of potential ballot issues, there’s no such thing being proposed for the November ballot either here in Colorado or in the other five states where polling occurred.

With all the controversy in western Colorado regarding federal agencies and their management of public lands, these findings stand out.

The National Park Service enjoyed an 85 percent approval rating among Coloradans surveyed with the U.S. Forest Service right behind at 80 percent.  The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the agency that will decide whether or not to list the sage-grouse as endangered or threatened, won 74 percent approval with the BLM at 54 percent, likely because agency activities such as oil and gas leasing and travel management are center stage.

Frequent calls for privatization of public lands didn’t fare well.  Only 16 percent of the Colorado voters surveyed supported selling off public lands while 77 percent opposed that suggestion.

It shouldn’t be surprising that Coloradans feel a strong connection to public lands.

Almost 4 in 10 (39 percent) of Colorado residents polled were “users” and had visited public lands 6-20 times in the past year.  Another third (34 percent) had visited 1-5 times and a surprising 22 percent had tallied more than 20 visits.  Only 5 percent had not visited public lands in the past year.

Somewhere, between headlines and editorials, the slogans and spin from all sides, maybe there’s a reasoned discussion to be had about all of the above issues.

 

Jim Spehar thinks stories about various public lands issues could benefit from some broader context.  Your thoughts are welcome at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).


COMMENTS

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Page 1 of 1


By Mrs. Price
Polls are not reliable sources of the majority of citizens. There are too many variables to alter or achieve a given result. Furthermore the number of those polled is so minimal to the majority and those too can be chosen to achieve a given result.

I don’t agree that “public lands issues and associated environmental concerns are tilted strongly toward development, privatization and state or local primacy rather than preservation and conservation”.
I think the issue stems from an over reach by the federal government failing to keep the contract of statehood for Colorado in August 1876 as it has done in many western States. All lands not used for the purposes specifically stated in the US Constitution were to be turned over to our State. The State of Colorado (local Control of lands) is more to the issue. The primacy of States is one of the basic principals of the US Constitution. Our Federation of States has usurped Western States rights left and right by land theft, intimidation, partial monetary incentives with our own tax payments, programs unfunded, resulting in our diminished State sovereignty.
Ask yourself if our State has truly benefitted from the plethora of all the Federal Government’s programs here in Colorado. Can we truly trust them when they started out breaking their own laws? Why is it that the western states, Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Utah, Arizona, and Nevada are not allowed to control and regulate all of the land and resources within their own state?

Page 1 of 1




TOP JOBS
Search More Jobs





THE DAILY SENTINEL
734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
970-242-5050
Editions
Subscribe to print edition
E-edition
Advertisers
Sign in to your account
Information

© 2015 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy