Public Lands, Hope, Change, Hope It Changes!

When we first moved to Arizona in the 90's, one of the first things I noticed was all the public land.  We went all over the north and central part of the state, hiking, camping, and taking day trips.  Coming from Texas, I couldn't believe that you could do so much travelling without coming to a fence, locked gate, or No Trespassing sign. 

As someone who loves to camp, hike, and practice outdoor photography, I really enjoy the access to all the wild areas of the state.  Colorado also is home to large amounts of federally controlled land.  Take a look at the maps of the three states above.  Any part of that map that is not white is owned in some way by the federal government.  I'm not sure what percentage of Colorado and Arizona are federal land, but it is well over 50%.  Texas is just under 2%.  I read that Utah is over 90%, and Nevada is 98%!  I think the only part of Nevada not controlled by the government must be Las Vegas.  No wonder President Obama seems to hate Vegas! 

Recently the President used an executive order to "protect" parts of western Colorado to preserve habitat for wild horses.  Who doesn't want to protect the habitat of wild horses?  I don't know how he finds time for all his interests.  What with running Government Motors, Chrysler, all those banks, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, controlling excessive insurance company profits, and getting healthcare legislation passed in spite of the fact that most Americans don't want it.  I bet he watched the Disney movie Spirit, with his daughters last weekend.  And they said, "daddy, you've got to make sure those poor horses have a place to live!"  You know how persuasive little girls can be.  He probably looked at a map and figured that western Colorado would be a good place for some mustangs, I bet he watched an old Ronald Reagan Henry Fonda western that mentioned horses in Colorado. 

Surely it wouldn't be because of the shale deposits in the area that he decided to limit private company's access?  You know the shale that energy companies can extract clean burning, efficient natural gas from?  The same energy companies that would provide hundreds of high paying jobs to people who would then buy houses, cars, healthcare insurance, and pay taxes.  That's what President Reagan called "trickle down economics."  It does work.  It's the only thing that does work.  The problem that President Obama and his progressive friends have with trickle down economics is that private companies are making money.  And deciding for themselves how to spend it. 

I travelled regularly in the Grand Junction area last year and listened to a local radio station frequently.  They started with stories about tighter regulations on drilling in the area, making it more expensive to extract the natural gas, which was going down in price at the same time.  Then, later in the year, Haliburton announced that it was discontinuing operations in the area and laying off hundreds of employees.  Home construction in the area that had been booming for over a year, suddenly slowed to a crawl.  Construction workers that had been spending a good portion of their paychecks in the local stores moved on to jobs in other parts of the country (probably Texas with all its non-federal land).  Guess what?  Unemployment went from 3.5% in the summer of 2007 to 4.5% in January 2008 to 9.4% in today's report.  Oh yeah, with all those evil energy companies, their well-paid employees and their paychecks going elsewhere, sales in the area stores dropped dramatically, forcing more layoffs.  And to make matters worse, the drop in sales brings a drop in sales tax revenues.  So now the local governments are feeling the pain too.  Only the government could screw things up this bad and this quickly.  

So, the obvious solution?  Restrict development in the region even more!  Not what you would've thought?  Well, then you are obviously not a mustang loving Harvard graduate.  

To steal a line from Sarah Palin, "How's that hope-y change-y thang working out for ya now?"