A survey of Westerners shows overwhelming support for conservation of the landscape, with strong pluralities agreeing that "national parks, forests, monuments and wildlife areas, are an essential part" of their state economies.
In the states of Wyoming, Utah, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Montana, some of which rank among the "reddest" states, politically, in the country, the survey showed a broad bipartisan support for a clean, healthy environment.
Despite the sluggish economy and various calls for more development on public lands, the survey of 2,400 registered voters in thsoe six states found growing support for protection of public lands and resources and a declining belief that protections of these places often are in conflict with strong economies.
The survey was conducted January 2-7, 2012, by two polling firms, one Republican and one Democratic -- Public Opinion Strategies and Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates -- for Colorado College's State of the Rockies Project. The poll carried a margin of error of + 2.0 percent nationwide and +4.9 statewide.
Among its findings:
* While 65 percent of Westerners identify themselves as "conservationists," just 29 percent affiliated themselves with the Tea Party movement, and just 25 percent connected themselves to the Occupy Wall Street movement;
* Whereas 74 percent of those surveyed in 2009 said land protection and conservation can go hand-in-hand with a strong economy, by 2012 that percent had risen to 78 percent;
* Whereas 24 percent of those surveyed in 2009 voiced the opinion that conservation of public lands sometimes is in conflict with strong economies, by 2012 that percentage had dropped to 19 percent;
* Among those respondents in this year's survey who identified themselves as Republicans, 76 percent were of the opinion that natural resources can be protected without harming economic conditions, an opinion shared by 84 percent of Democrats, 75 percent of Independents, and 74 percent of Tea Partiers.
Time and again the findings pointed to strong support for the environment. Two-thirds of those surveyed said the country's "energy policy should prioritize expanding use of clean renewable energy and reducing our need for more coal, oil and gas. Even in states like Wyoming and Montana, which are more often associated with fossil fuels, voters view renewable energy as a local job creator."
Additionally, there was strong disagreement that regulations such as the National Environmental Policy Act, the Wilderness Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and dozens of other environmental policies should be held in abeyance for the U.S. Border Patrol in its efforts to stem illegal border crossings. U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop, a Utah Republican who chairs the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, has been a key proponent of that measure, though this poll shows he's out of step with his own constituents.
In Arizona, the state seen as having perhaps the strongest problem with illegal border crossings, 73 percent of the survey's respondents opposed suspending the environmental regulations in the battle against illegal immigration; in New Mexico, 65 percent of those surveyed were against that move; in Colorado the percentage was 68 percent, in Utah 72 percent, in Wyoming 69 percent, and in Montana 66 percent.
Dave Metz, a pollster for Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates, said the survey's results pointed to a decided difference of opinion with many state leaders and those in Congress.
“Western voters consistently believe that conservation helps create and protect jobs for their states,” Mr. Metz said. “In fact, by a 17-point margin, voters are more likely to say that environmental regulations have a positive impact on jobs in their state rather than a negative one.”
In Utah, for example, while 69 percent of the state residents surveyed for the poll endorsed Environmental Protection Agency efforts to update Clean Air Act standards, Gov. Gary Herbert earlier this year wrote the the Obama Administration to challenge EPA regulations to limit toxic pollution from power plants, the pollsters noted. And while "some members of Utah's congressional delegation are supporting legislation that would suspend environmental protections within 100 miles of U.S. borders to help stop illegal immigration; by a margin of 72 percent to 20 percent, voters in Utah (with similar results across the West) feel this proposal is unnecessary," they added.
"The poll results show that voters of all stripes, including conservatives, believe protecting clean air, clean water, and our natural heritage is consistent with traditional conservative values,” said Philip Carlson, Utah Coordinator for Republicans for Environmental Protection. “We call on our elected representatives to listen to their constituents and embrace the conservative ethic of good stewardship.”
In Arizona, the survey found strong support for a 20-year moratorium on new uranium mining near Grand Canyon National Park, with 70 percent of voters saying that the impact of mining on land and water is a serious problem in Arizona.
“Spending by Arizona hunters and anglers directly supports 21,000 jobs and generates $124-million in state and local taxes. This especially benefits rural communities like those surrounding the Grand Canyon. Why wouldn't we take steps to protect our parks, national forests, and wildlife habitat?” asked Tom Mackin, president of the Arizona Wildlife Federation and long-time resident of northern Arizona.
Arizona respondents to the survey also voiced lukewarm support for Gov. Jan Brewer, with just 47 percent saying they approve of the job she's doing. That was the lowest approval rating of any governor of the Western states polled.
“I’m not surprised with the poll results. In spite of what we hear from many Arizona elected officials, in my 35 years conducting and evaluating public opinion research in Arizona, it has always come across loud and clear that my fellow Arizonans (regardless of political affiliation) see themselves as conservationists and demand clean air, clean water and protections for the remarkable public lands that make our state so unique," said Richard Mayol of the Grand Canyon Trust.
And in Wyoming those contacted for the survey spoke about the importance of a clean, healthy environment to their economy.
“I think we’ve understood this here in Wyoming for a long time,” said Ken Cramer, owner of Cross Country Connections, an outdoor store in Laramie. “It doesn’t matter what your political party is. People live here because we care about the outdoors. People want to hunt, fish, have the outdoor experience – otherwise we’d leave.”
He added that the national forests, national parks, and public lands that lie within Wyoming's borders are key to the state’s economy.
“Tourism and outdoor recreation is the second-biggest industry in the state. We have three out of the top 10 destinations in the U.S. for snowmobiling," said Mr. Cramer. "Skiing, camping, rock climbing, hunting – it’s all huge here. We’ve got to have places to recreate and we’ve got to take care of them. Clean air, clean water and snow are vital to our activities and, of course, for our lives.”
At the National Parks Conservation Association, President Tom Kiernan said similar bipartisan support for national parks was evident last week at America's Summit on National Parks.
"One of the highlights (of the Summit) was seeing both Michelle Obama, Mrs. Obama, and Mrs. (Laura) Bush, seeing both (Interior) Secretary Ken Salazar and former Secretery Dirk Kempthorne, seeing both John Podesta and Mike Gerson ... time and again you saw at the Summit very different political views coming together around national parks and strongly endorsing the park idea and needing to advance it as we approach the (National Park Service) centennial," he said Monday. "The parks can and are playing a significant unifying role throughout the country, and that was visible at the Summit."
The pollsters also pointed out that the results "echo the sentiments of more than 100 economists, including three Nobel Laureates ... who recently sent a letter to President Obama urging him to create and invest in new federal protected lands such as national parks, wilderness and monuments. Studies have shown that together with investment in education and access to markets, protected public lands are significant contributors to economic growth."
“The depth and breadth of the connection between westerners and the land is truly remarkable -- when people are telling us that public lands are essential to their economy, and that they support continued investments in conservation, even in these difficult economic times,” said Lori Weigel, who for Public Opinion Strategies. “Westerners are telling us that we've got to find a way to protect clean air, clean water, and parks in their states.”
You can find the poll's results, (and other related survey details, such as support for elected officials, and more specific state results) at this site.
Comments
Anon : "Just to be fair what agency has been paying your ticket during your
career and retirement? Where do those funds originate? Setting aside the
extremes that you like give to support your arguments, it's a bit of
ingratitude (at least) to disparage the very source of your own income
and that of all government agencies. Just saying..."
The sources of my income are only two: Social Security (into which I paid for all my working years other than those in NPS) and state teacher retirement (into which I also paid a substantial portion of my income). I was not with NPS long enough to qualify for retirement.
Well, I guess there is a third source. A small investment in mutual funds into which I paid a whole lot of money only to see it seriously depleted by policies enabled by politicians who have very little interest in people like me (and you, probably) who are not wealthy enough to command their attention. If I sound a little bitter and disgusted, it's because I am.
I'm not disparaging taxpayers -- but I sure am disparaging some of the so-called leaders people are fooled into electing. And I live in Utah where a very small but powerfully wealth backed party machine is able to use propaganda to fool voters into re-electing them even though doing so is far from the best interest of many of those voters.
Here is an example of some of that propaganda fresh off Utah Senator Mike Lee's website this morning:
The Uranium Mining Ban
Thank you, Rick. Your knowledge and support are much appreciated.
Yes, I fall into that "not wealthy enough" category to have significant sway in policy unlike those campaign contributors that got put ahead of the tax payers who, without a choice, contributed billions to neat but deeply flawed projects. Likewise with the GM bailout where private investors were subjugated to union interests. So what would be the issue that would have NPS thrown under the bus in order for job security (election). I'm referencing the Keystone decision against the Unions but that's a story in itself.
What would be your reaction to this? Would it be straight environmental ideology that all mining is not tolerable in general regardless of the needs of even green projects, in this case the wind power industry?
http://energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Hearing&He...
As someone who values our parks and wildlife way more than urban sprawl, and who just happens to be living in southern Arizona, I would like to see some suggestions on how to keep trash (litter) from spoiling the beauty of what God created. I grew up in Georgia and Alabama before we had the EPA and saw a lot of my woodsy playgrounds spoiled by people who thought dirt roads = okay to dump trash.
Lee, have you heard about a West Jordan lawmaker who is introducing a bill that will force the federal gov't to give all public land back to the state by 2014? Rep. Ken Ivory (R) is also supporting it.
No, RangerLady, I hadn't heard about that one yet. But the annual legislative circus is just beginning. Ken Ivory is one of the biggest developers and home builders in the state. Something like 83% of our state legislators are involved in real estate, home building, or land development in some way. But there's no conflict of interest there. Nope. None.
It'll be fun to see just how they plan to "force" the government to do that, especially since there is a clause in the State Constitution that cedes "unpatented land" at the time statehood was granted to the Federal government.
Well --- the Salt Lake Tribune just posted an article about this year's anti-Fed blustering in our state legislature. Here's a snippet:
Utah lawmakers are again making noise about
taking over federal lands in the state, with one proposal calling for a
court battle to control almost all such lands.
Rep. Ken Sumsion, R-American Fork, has
introduced a bill that would direct the attorney general to file for
declaratory judgment in U.S. District Court on grounds that Congress
promised in the 1894 Utah Enabling Act that it would dispose of its
lands in the state and give Utah schools 5 percent of the proceeds.
“We had a contract,” Sumsion said of the law
that ushered in Utah’s statehood. “It’s been violated. We’re looking
for a remedy.”
Sumsion’s claims — that there was a contract
or, especially, that there’s any legal remedy — are disputed by
constitutional scholars, who expect the state to make no headway in
court. But the lawmaker said the time may be right to challenge those
assumptions, with a U.S. Supreme Court that tends to swing more
conservative than in decades past and is perhaps friendlier to states’
rights.
“It’s more plausible we could get a favorable ruling [now],” he said.
And a little more:
"Sumsion, a gubernatorial candidate, would not favor selling Utah’s five
national parks, but instead would make them state parks. He said other
lands, such as the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, contain
billions of dollars in mineral deposits that the state could exploit."
You can read the entire mess at:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/53423437-90/lands-state-utah-act.h...
It would really be interesting if the Feds would simply withhold Federal funding for all the things they spend for in Utah. Utah receives something like $2.50 for every $1 it sends to Washington. But these guys have to try to please the small group of party powerfuls who pull the strings at state caucuses where candidates are selected for the ballot.
And from the Utah State Constitution:
Utah Constitution, Article 3, Section 2:
The people inhabiting
this State do affirm and declare that they forever disclaim all right
and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries
hereof, and to all lands lying within said limits owned or held by any
Indian or Indian tribes, and that until the title thereto shall have
been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain
subject to the disposition of the United States, and said Indian lands
shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the
Congress of the United States. The lands belonging to citizens of the
United States, residing without this State shall never be taxed at a
higher rate than the lands belonging to residents of this State; but
nothing in this ordinance shall preclude this state from taxing, as
other lands are taxed, any lands owned or held by any Indian who has
severed his tribal relations, and has obtained from the United States or
from any person, by patent or other grant, a title thereto, save and
except such lands as have been or may be ranted to any Indian or Indians
under any act of Congress, containing a provision exempting the lands
thus granted from taxation, which last mentioned lands shall be exempt
from taxation so long, and to such extent, as is or may be provided in
the act of Congress granting the same.