A bill that has been considered in the U.S. House of Representatives in some form or another for 20 years is still causing a lot of discussion in the 111th Congress.
America's Red Rock Wilderness Act would set aside 9.4 million acres in Utah as wilderness, and prohibit mining, development and off-road vehicles in the area.
The Red Rock Bill, as it is called, has been reintroduced in every congress since 1989, and the strong liberal control of the House may give this bill the best shot it has had in years.
The bill's main sponsors have continually been eastern democrats, sometimes putting them at odds with Utah's traditionally conservative delegation.
All five of Utah's federal legislators are opposed to the measure as it is written, with both Utah Republican senators Orrin Hatch and Bob Bennett and 2nd District Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT) have testified against the bill before the House Natural Resources subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
First District Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT), the ranking member on the subcommittee told The Salt Lake Tribune that he is tired of liberals from outside the state trying to improve their rapport with environmental groups by creating these wilderness lands.
Though the bill had been opposed by mining groups, drilling lobbies and ATV enthusiasts, and championed by the Sierra Club and other environmentalist groups, one argument rises above with repercussions that may be felt throughout the state.
Declaring areas as protected wilderness that surround land held in a trust to benefit Utah schools may impact the ability of these lands to continue to generate revenue for public education.
The University Journal Editorial Board joins administrators from the state's educational trust lands to voice concerns about how this bill will impact public schools.
The Salt Lake Tribune reported in September that roughly $24.3 million go to public schools in our state each year, and every school receives some from the pot.
Associate Director of the School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration John Andrews said his organization believes the bill needs to be significantly revised to specify how the state would be compensated if the trust lands, many only 1 square mile, were surrounded by protected wilderness.
We support the idea behind this bill, as Utah has a natural beauty that is unparalleled in any state.
However, we feel that any protection of lands is futile if the protection of another important resource, our state's K-12 education system, is not taken strongly into consideration.
The Journal urges members of congress to not abandon this bill, but rather consider the objections and make the legislation into a law that will work to protect the unique parts of Utah, but also protect the future of our children.
In addition to the economic issues at stake, Bishop's comment about easterners caring more about Utah land than Utahns do is a sad commentary on the beliefs about nature in our state.
It is the responsibility of the citizens of Utah to start caring more about the land that surrounds us.
We strongly urge Utahns to take an active interest in the protection of the greatest natural treasure our state has, not gas or oil, but the beautiful landforms that make our state unique.
The opinions expressed above are the collective perspective of the University Journal Editorial Board. The editorial board meets every Monday at 5:45 p.m. and Thursday at 5 p.m. in room 176C of the Sharwan Smith Center.
