Proposed Dolores Canyons National Monument

[Oak]

I received an interesting email from Mesa County, Colorado this afternoon that I thought I would share. This post is less about the proposed national monument and more about the public opinion survey that was commissioned to gauge support for the proposal.

The subject line of the email read, "Survey reveals that 60% of of community members oppose the Proposed Dolores Canyons National Monument." A look at the data shows that they rounded up, and 57% either strongly oppose or somewhat oppose. Probably not too surprising in our neck of the woods. You can find the text of the email and links to the survey and other information here.

The data I found surprising and want to highlight from the survey is shown in the slide below. It indicates that only 20% of respondents support federal management of federal lands. Do you find this as surprising as I did?

 

[perma]

Interesting that county is so high.

 

[Mudranger1]

It's not surprising to me. People are fed up with government in general I believe so in some people's eyes anything would be better the federal oversight... unfortunately I don't think they are taking into account what this state has become into consideration

 

[Straight Arrow]

unfortunately I don't think they are taking into account what this state has become into consideration

Nor the financial burden associated with managing and conserving public lands.

 

[Big Fin]

That's very interesting. Lots to think about as to what is expressed in those results, and why.

Thanks for posting @Oak.

 

[rtraverdavis]

I don’t think your average American knows much about the differences in how different governing bodies can/must manage land. It likely just comes down to Fed = bad.

 

[WildWill]

Other then a non profit or a third party contractor what else would be other? Seems like a bunch of people wanted to vote for the one that didn't have Govt. at the end.

 

[Carnage2011]

It seems accurate to me. For the most part the Feds do a fairly shitty job of managing the land. A lot of it has to do with them being under funded and a lot of it has to do with all the red tape around their policies.

It’s also very tough to please people because everyone wants something different. The backpackers don’t like motorcycles, the motorcycles don’t like wilderness…etc.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I think a lot of rural county residents in Colorado probably feel frustrated with federal and state government. They feel abandoned and believe state and federal government make policies that generally disfavor rural residents. Now whether those feelings are justified is a whole other discussion. I’d say with Colorado state government it is pretty justified based on the Polis administration and their handling of the wolf reintroduction.

 

[338win]

I have seen some pretty good wma management by the state on fed land (strategic logging, wildlife openings ect) and I have seen some scorched earth management of state land by the state. No single choice is going to do a perfect job. Keep engaged and be thrilled that we even have the option to bitch about management or land that we are allowed to go fart on without asking the queens permission

 

[marksjeep]

I think Mesa pulled the 60% opposed from slide 26. The age demographics are surprising. I'd have thought the old curmudgeons would have opposed, but they were more inclined to support than either of the two younger demographics, for both the informed and uninformed groups. Younger folks around here seem to be more purplish and most certainly into the outdoors. So that part is surprising to me. Thanks for posting it. Lots about the proposal in the news lately but had not seen that survey.

 

[LuketheDog]

Other then a non profit or a third party contractor what else would be other? Seems like a bunch of people wanted to vote for the one that didn't have Govt. at the end.

Seriously...how do that many people choose "Other" in this survey?

 

[TOGIE]

but on the flip side, 77% of respondents think some form of government should manage and conserve public lands.... that's at least encouraging to some degree. far cry from straight up straight to private managment of everything.

i mean, if i was asked that question I would want to say that in some cases the feds are the best to manage public lands, sometimes it's the state, and sometimes it's the county. tough to answer such a broad question.

i'm more curious why in the heck san miguel county, definitely the bluest of the three, went 41% "other" - what the hell is the "other" they have in mind?

 

[antlerradar]

i'm more curious why in the heck san miguel county, definitely the bluest of the three, went 41% "other" - what the hell is the "other" they have in mind?

Is there a reservation in San Miguel?

 

[TOGIE]

Is there a reservation in San Miguel?

No just ultra rich democrats and movie stars with ski mansions

Telluride dominates the electorate

 

[antlerradar]

No just ultra rich democrats and movie stars with ski mansions

Telluride dominates the electorate

That does make San Miguel county interesting.

I was in Telluride back in the 80's. Took less than 15 minutes to decide I needed to be elsewhere. I can not imagine what Telluride is like now. The San Miguel canyon was a much better fit for me.

 

[elkduds]

Look @ age demographics and Gop/Dem ratios in each county, realizing San Miguel is much less populated that Montrose and Mesa. These counties sent Boebert to Congress, a fact which fits w their statistical distrust of the Fed. Besides San Miguel, these counties are heavily rural, have lower tax bases, more influence from extractive industries, high % of public lands, and are more likely to seek monetization of public land resources. @Oak, your OP explains a lot, thanks for posting.