I was recently invited to ride in Moab, Utah. The folks at Patagonia were going to demo some of their 2018 mountain bike range and, “Oh, by the way, we’d like to take you on a tour of Bears Ears National Monument while you are there.”
I’ll rarely pass up a chance to revisit Moab. I was more excited, though, to experience Bears Ears and the Lockhart Basin. I’ve studied the place from the air and from distant vantage points, but I had never been on the ground there. This was an easy decision.
I’d ridden bikes with the Patagonia crew before. It’s a different experience. Everyone, it seems, crosses between sports, so you may be following a Bikram Yoga instructor up a sandy climb, or the guy who gave you a fist bump for cleaning a dicey boulder drop could have recently returned from a first ascent in the Himalaya. I’ve listened to a lot of hubris about “living the adventure.” It turns out that those who actually do, are a humble group – and many of them can shred.
Patagonia’s Moab presentation was as chill as they come. We formed a rough circle, with the clothes and gear laying on the ground in the center, talked details for fifteen minutes and that was it. An hour later we were at the trailhead of Captain Ahab, where Patagonia’s climbing contingent were already dots on the rock, a few pitches up “the Tombstone” - the dominant wall across the road.
It was an off-day for me. Clear skies and cool October temperatures failed to breathe life into my legs, but suffering up some climbs was small price to pedal one perfect day in paradise aboard one of my favorite bikes (Pivot Switchblade, thank you Poison Spider). Buoyed by some of the best technical singletrack on the planet and surrounded by Patagonia’s high-spirited group, I enjoyed my best-ever, worst day on the bike.
We caravaned fifty miles South, down Highway 191 to Montecello, where we bunked up at
Four Corners School of Outdoor Education. Patagonia has been a staunch supporter of National Monuments in the Southwest, so we would spend the second half of our trip exploring Bears Ears National Moment - and
learn why it has fallen into the cross-hairs of this country’s current President. If you're curious, I’ve since done a fair bit of research on the subject and found
this article to be the best assessment of the conflict as it stands.
Again, the climbers were up and gone before we had our bikes loaded in the trucks. Bears Ears is too large to see in a month, much less in a day. We descended into the canyons to sample the North end of the Monument above the Indian Creek climbing zone, where the landscape abruptly opens wide with 40-mile vistas to the North and West.
| Our guide, Poison Spider mechanic Aaron Lindberg, said that the route used to be traveled by trucks hauling uranium during Moab’s mining boom. |
It was an easy out and back - twenty miles of rolling dirt road that traversed along the base of towering rust-colored cliffs above Lockhart basin. Our guide, Poison Spider mechanic Aaron Lindberg, said that
the route used to be traveled by trucks hauling uranium during Moab’s mining boom. Lindberg pointed to a thin green layer mid-way up the cliffs. “That’s where it all is. The dinosaurs are in that layer too.”
We ate lunch on a ledge of chocolate colored stone near the turnaround point, which offered me a chance to digest the rainbow of pastel-washed buttes that stretched to the horizon. Enfolded in the canyons below them are some of the desert’s most closely guarded secrets, and those of the Native Americans who once thrived here. On the trek back, I noticed a rock cairn marking a path that descended into a promising drainage. It had been a while since I felt this hungry to explore.
Over dinner the night before,
Conservation Lands Foundation’s Charlotte Overby said to remember that Federal land belongs to us. When we discover a place like Bears Ears, when we make it into a National Monument, we’re saying, “Hey, this is an outstanding place. Let’s keep it the way it is for the next people who visit. We don’t add anything. We don’t take anything away. Ranchers can still ranch, existing mines, businesses and residents can still continue on. Monument status offers users more freedom than any other form of protection we have.”
I like that. Preservation is rarely spoken in the context of inclusiveness. A lot of people must agree. Reportedly, Bears Ears earned more support from US citizens and tribal nations than any National Monument since Teddy Roosevelt created the first in 1906. It was hard to imagine then, that only a month after my visit, our President would slice Bears Ears to pieces and feed them to the Governor of Utah.
Dismantling Bears Ears, and nearby
Escalante-Grand Staircase National Monuments was the result of a pissing match between past and present presidential administrations, and it was a trophy, ceremoniously delivered to the country's Western Sates, which contend that the Federal government should not own or control lands with their boundaries.
While that may look great on paper, the reality is that this country's leaders didn't figure out that setting aside large tracts of common land may have been a wise idea until the Western half was being occupied. Federally owned lands in western states are hugely disproportional to those in the East, but the benefits cannot be argued. The West has a proliferation of National Parks, unparalleled recreational freedom, and abundant habitat protections. Pull up Google maps and compare those opportunities in states east of the Mississippi, where, from their inception, almost every acre of land was parceled to private ownership and municipal governments.
Every state has archaeological and natural wonders that exist nowhere else, and every state has been guilty of trashing one or more of them at some point - most often to exploit resources. Ironic then, that it was the States (Congress) that created the Antiquities Act, which Teddy Roosevelt then employed to proclaim the first National Monument as a means to federally protect ancient Native American dwellings from wholesale looting, because the State of Colorado did not.
Anasazi didn't erect their dwellings in the alcoves of North Carolina. There are no manatees swimming in Utah's Great Salt Lake. No redwood forests grow in Texas, and there is nothing like Bears Ears where I live in San Diego - which makes me glad that fifteen out of the sixteen presidents who have wielded the power of the Antiquities Act, did so as a quick and decisive method to place such treasures in trust for our entire nation. One president did not, and I'm certain that if Teddy Roosevelt were here to comment, he would call him a looter, not a leader.
I believe Mr. Trump is reversing this because of complaints from Utah residents and their elected officials representing them.
It's frustrating living in Utah, having people visit from out of state, be impressed, then enact legislation that affects those of us who live here the most. We already have 5 national parks, too much tourism, and 70% of the state is federal land. The National Monument designation outlawed several of my favorite backcoutnmry 4x4 and bikepacking routes. Now, to people outside of the state who just want to hit a 2 day overview tour, they'll never feel these impacts, but us locals definitely feel it. Not only that, now the Bears Ears area is on everyone's radar and added to their "must see" list. Prior to the designation, the Bears Ears area was one of the least visited area of Utah, and it wasn't in danger. It was already federally protected land.
It's no surprise Patagonia's trip had a political slant to it. There was absolutely no reason to designate so much land to begin with in the first place. Yes, it's beautiful. Yes, I want to keep it pristine. No, it doesn't need to be a national monument to do so.
1. Who Makes the Decision? – You say that all of this stuff is being decided by people outside of Utah. But where would you draw the line? You live in Lehi, but I live 40 miles from the Utah border in Mancos, CO. I’m far more likely to be personally affected by Bears Ears than you as its less than a 90 minute drive for me. Maybe I should have more of a voice than you. What about the tribes who actually live in San Juan County? They are more than 50% of the population of that county, but have only 1/3 political representation because of gerrymandering (they are suing over this). Finally, this is FEDERAL land. It is owned by ALL AMERICANS. Just because it happens to fall in the borders of a particular state shouldn’t mean it should be governed by that state.
2. Was it protected land before monument status? NO. It was general federal land only subject to general federal land statutes. It did not have any specific protections against sale, leasing, agriculture and natural resources extraction.
3. You lost some of your favorite 4X4 and bikepacking routes? Which ones?? You need to provide facts here. I’ve seen nothing in the monument designation or subsequent regulations closing any existing lawful 4x4 or bike trails in the monument.
4. Too much tourism? I understand the frustration, but pull your head out of the sand. The reason they are trying to reverse this isn’t to keep it pristine and hidden. Its to open it to natural resource extraction interests.
But I do agree with you, I'm not convinced Trump was just trying to stick it to Obama in undoing the NM designation, there was legitimate anger from Utah's representative/citizens from my limited time talking to ppl about it. And using Mesa Verde as an example again, look what that place has become... it's extremely touristy and gets a lot of traffic, just like most national parks. I'm glad it was protected (it was literally being looted) and that my kids can see it, but it's similar to the Wilderness issue we always talk about with mtb - NM designation is a pretty heavy hammer to be swinging around when a lot of these areas appear to be under no imminent threat. But in the same way we want to protect the really incredible places, maybe we also need to keep some secret. Those who are motivated will discover and love it, those who want a whirlwind tour of highlights won't even know it's there.... and that's okay.
Idk, it's a tough one. Locals didn't want Yellowstone or the Tetons to be protected either at the time, and ultimately I think that's been a huge net positive for the nation (possibly the region too?). Maybe Bear's Ears could be that important too, not sure. But it's easy for Patagonia and others to show up and advocate for something when they don't have to live there. I've never been to Bear's Ears and I can't say what the right decision is, but I'm pretty confident it's not as black and white as Patagonia and others have made it.
From the Enabling Act Section 3 Condition 2:
"That the people inhabiting said proposed State do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof; 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;"
Full document here: archives.utah.gov/community/exhibits/Statehood/1894text.htm
Another thing. For this same essay I went down to this area (Monticello.) I conducted an interview and got the basic opinion of the locals. They didn’t want it. Not even the business wanted it. Every single business, except for one, had a #nomounument sticker on their windows. The author was definitely not very well informed. Though his article sounded good and all, it forgets the say of the locals. Those that live in Utah, and more specifically in South Eastern Utah.
I’m probably going to get slammed for this, but I think Trump did the right thing for those locals. And as a Utahan is pisses me off when people that don’t live in Utah tell me how my home state should be.
And yes, I understand that different places have different restrictions. My point is that 1.3M acres is a shitload of land. There's a very obvious reason for GCNP to be as large as it is - the Grand Canyon is a huge, distinct geographical feature. I understand that Bear's Ears had tons of cool/valuable landmarks and cultural sites dispersed throughout, but it's not as if it was about to be flooded/demolished before it was designated a Natl Monument, and Utah is full of mesas and canyons. Why not just protect the most significant archaeological sites?
Finally, regarding having "outsiders" impact your local area, I don't want to hear shit about it until DC has full representation in congress and complete home rule.
I don't say this to dismiss your concerns or defend the monument designation, but it's worth understanding why these "outsiders" don't show sympathy for setting aside land out west.
Its totally unfair the federal government from out of state tries to keep people from f**king it up, spilling oil all over the place, and polluting it with even more radioactive waste from uranium mining!
I am Californian and we have a long history (as longa s history can be on the west coast of teh US) of great oils spills, man made droughts, empty lakes and rivers, and overpopulation.
I totally understand that you want for your state too!
I guess government overreach is only acceptable when it's fueled by xenophobia. The real locals (the ones who live there and who's families have lived there for more than 200 years) overwhelmingly support this.
That's funny. Thanks for that.
I was there recently and the funniest thing was talking to the volunteers at Kane Gulch saying they get asked 'Where can I see the Bears Ears' with them easily in sight from the highway right there.
Missing from the conversation are the Hopi, Navajo, Ute, and the many other tribes who literally have ancestors buried throughout each canyon and have ceremonial sites still preserved in hidden canyons.
What's also dumbfounding is how Arches, Canyonlands, and views of Escalante and Zion are plastered in airports around the world, yet all of these were fought at one point too. So which is it? Iconic, worth protecting? Or simply just a marketing scheme and you'll destroy it when you see fit?
Nothing personal, Ive never had the forum to properly unpack my undying fury with that pompous, stupid phrase. Thanks ,...again, Nothing personal.
Now that should get @chasejj and @therealtylerdurden oiling ip their ar15s
Bwahahahaa
Gotta love sweeping generalizations.
When Bill Clinton designated Grade Staircase he said that Native Americans could still hunt, and graze livestock like they’d done for hundreds of years. So much for that promise. And yeah I am open minded. For a while I even thought like a lefty. Then I grew up and started listening to reason. I’ll stll listen to you guys. But in the end I need to choose out of the very ill informed people online or simple logic. I chose simple logic.
And I'm happy you speak on behalf of all the Native Americans.
Just at an anecdotal level, look at Island in the Sky, there's two BLM campsites that are actually difficult to sleep at now because you hear a constant droning of the oil pumps they installed 3 years ago. when's enough enough?
I wish everything was so black and white that generalizations on 'all the locals i talked to' and 'all the natives i talk to' allow me to write it off. But it's not. And at the end of this there's this fear mongering by both sides that just plain innaccurate. I'm still waiting to hear exactly what was closed off at Bears Ears? Shit, at Escalante, a local politicain is already talking about paving the 4x4 route to Hole in Rock and making it a State Park. I'm sure you're 4x4 buddies love that idea too, right?
Listen buddy, the land was already protected under laws to not disturb archeological sites. Their were no Uranium mines there in the first place, so why would that change now? Nothing ruins wild places then having flocks of tourists and litter from them. I went down there many time before. We had so much fun being all alone and having no tourists like in Moab. Well so much for that. As I said again, I think that the locals voice should matter more then your’s. Just saying.
And by the way, I don’t go four wheeling that often, and neither do my friends. Stop generalizing.
I'm with you, I wish this whole damn mess never happened to begin with. Just the changes in visitation this last year was horrendous and the never-ending social media postings of sensitive sites. No win scenario, it feels like.
Put your hands behind your f*cking head!!!!!
Ah hah ha ha.
Uranium, and there are lots of mines down there. I had a customer come in who works for the Department of Energy and who was conducting an inventory of closed uranium mines within the original monument boundaries. She said that she had found 150 on her own, mostly completely unmitigated. The companies find it cheaper to declare bankruptcy than to clean up. Moab has some experience with this in the form of the UMTRA site on the way into town. The mining companies often leave piles of radioactive garbage (tailings piles) essentially open to the elements to find their way into the air, the water, the animals, what have you.
Between protecting indigenous cultural artifacts (from those very folks in Blanding you talked to) and opening more uranium mines, I'd rather have somewhere that hasn't been irradiated to bike, thanks.
"most people from Utah on this comment section don’t support more parks/monuments. Those defending parks/mounuments aren’t from Utah. I know you guys are entitled to your opinions, but those of us that actually live in Utah don’t want more government regulations."
As a Utahn, you don't speak for me, but thanks for the concern.
@Matt115lamb: what a fitting user name! f*cking sheep.
Everybody I know loves the Trumpster, lots of them are very highly educated and not by any definition incompetent masses.
Your elitist perception are why he won. Thank GOD. The winning doesn't get old.
MAGA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And tired of the notion that "regulations" are evil.
Have you ever lived outside of the US? Ever lived in a country with no regulations? I have. Its not that great. Strip and acid mining anywhere, garbage dumping anywhere, deforestation everywhere, etc.
The land doesnt belong to Utah residents, thats not how it works.
And go ahead and turn down your nose at tourism, but last time I checked it was a major part of your economy, whether you are involved in it directly or not. Utah doesnt produce much else.
We in Colorado were more than happy to take the Outdoor Retailer show, and its multimillion dollar impact, off your hands. Expect more companies and tourists and yes, bikers, to vote with their wallets and not support a state so anti-environment.
But more than anything else, I just dont understand people who think we have too much wilderness and solitude. Bro have you taken a look around lately?
And how do you propose to get to your riding area and what are you going to ride without mines and oil extraction?
The government bureaucracy is our friend. They have no reason to do anything that doesn't benefit us. (extreme sarc)
Dang! You found me out... But what will happen to me if the KKK discovers I go to synagogue on Shabbes?
The obvious answer is that resource utilization needs to be done in a way that limits the impact on the area being developed. Roads can be built to minimize erosion. Waste products need to be minimized and managed.
Too many people buy into the "ecofascist" agenda or the NIMBY attitude. I have seen it happen more times than you would care to imagine. People move to an area where farming or logging or mining or what ever is the prime economic engine. Then, they demand that it be stopped because it is noisy or dirty or it is frightening the Pileated Woodpeckers. SIGH!!!
Where do you think the companies that will make the profit from this are from? All local businesses?
In all honesty, to the "cut the politics talk" people - it's time to grow up and realize that civil discourse about thing that impact our passion of BIKES (F-YEA!) and outdoors is a good thing!
So, COME CORRECT with some facts to back up your BS, not some robot sheeple talking point you were fed by Bannon, Fox, truthout or MSNBC. Do some research for yourself, maybe using sources that might put you a bit outside your comfort level. Learn to see thru the politics and recognize that this shit is important and impacts what you love to do.
Thank you for turning it back to mountain biking. Public lands is not a pertinent mountain biking issue, but news sources definitely is.
Fortunately, it was a well organized community with several politically savvy residents, and the protests raised were able to prevent this designation.
The author seems to think that development and recreation and scenic beauty are not compatible, while noting that he drove out on roads built to support mining activity. And he doesn't even seem to see the irony in what he wrote.
If you want to see what the protectionist mind set yields, look at what is happening in Portland Oregon today with Forest Park. Richard, you are incredibly naive if you think the government is your friend.
And for those pissed that the state of Utah might sell it to ranchers or miners, where the hell do you think all your shit comes from?? Thin air?? Every single material found on our bikes was mined, and all the food that magically appears in your Whole Foods, was grown. You wanna get all preachy without any education on the subject or ever having visited the land, grow your own food and quit buying things that come from mined materials...good luck.
Are you seriously trying to use Zion as an example? Please tell us what things were like there before it became a monument.
What President Trump has done in Utah should be commended by every rational free-thinking American. While I don’t have any fundamental issue with the Federal Antiquities Act, it was clearly abused in this case. Its use under President Obama is tantamount to neo-colonialism and that’s deeply anti-American if not deeply concerning. Policies of an autocratic centralized government seeking to extend its authority over other people or territories in direct conflict of those living in there should be fought vigorously and without end. The intent of the law is “the protection of objects of historic and scientific interest” and the aim is to “protect all historic and prehistoric sites on United States federal lands and to prohibit excavation or destruction of these antiquities.” That is not what happened in Bears Ears and the Escalante-Grand Staircase and to think otherwise is daft. This was an immoral land grab by unilateral presidential decree pure and simple. This is still federal land, right? So let the locals of Southeastern Utah lobby the Feds and let them decide what they want done with the land….. and tourist be damned.
What?? Have you flown over the Rockies? The Cascades? The vast expanses of empty desert in the southwest? Even in the metro Denver area it's not hard to find some solitude for a weekend - drive a couple hours, hike a little ways, and you can avoid seeing people/roads/etc for days at a time. I've never driven through Wyoming or Montana and thought "man, this place is packed".
Not to mention, once you set foot of a well-defined trail (actual wilderness), 20 miles becomes WAY longer. I've been on bushwacks where we were working our asses off going maybe 1/2 mile per hour.
Unless you're the self-reliant survivalist type, "easy access" is antithetical to wilderness. It's nonsensical to think that I/you could live anywhere near a major population center and NOT have to drive an hour or two to wilderness. Without that network of roads you see from the plane, we'd never even be able to see or experience most of the spectacular landscapes we have. If you're not willing to drive a couple hours and hike, you're damn sure not about to hoof it dozens of miles into wild country to find some peak/canyon/lake/butte/etc. You can keep it pristine or you can experience it, but almost never both. Conservation has always been this kind of balancing act.
All you have to do to find wilderness and solitude is drive/hike a little farther than the next guy. If you live virtually anywhere in the west you live near enough good hiking/biking/fishing/hunting/etc to keep you busy your whole life, as long as you're motivated. I just moved back home to CO from the northeast, where it's actually crowded. In terms of wild country we don't have much to complain about.
There are def parts of the US where truly wild country is easily accessed (30min), but they're nowhere near big cities.
That's a bold statement.... I definitely believe that you can walk 15-20 miles per day in alpine terrain. That's not even remotely the same thing as covering 20 linear miles in the same time. Obviously you're an experienced hiker/navigator, but unless you're just straightlining up/down every single ridge that 20 miles turns into ~30 miles pretty quick when you're following the contours of the land, avoiding slow/dangerous terrain, etc. In heavily wooded terrain, I've taken half a day to make it just a few miles. Worse if there's snow.
And even if you're a god-level hiker who CAN get anywhere in the lower 48 in a day.... is that bad? Is the land less wild because there's a road a day's walk away? Is it crowded? Is there not more terrain there than you could possibly explore in a lifetime?
nice post Richard. Thanks for doing the piece and exposing the dismantling of public lands. Ted Cruz has led the conservative charge of writing legislation to start selling off western land; making Trump seem like a moderate conservationist in at least keeping the bears ears within the BLMs control. That is their thinking - private ownership and the state has no business owning any commons. I bet most readers here on pinkbike ride their bikes on some sort of public land, which the very idea of is being disputed by right wing circles.
What he fails to mention is that Bears Ears was enacted as Obama was running out the door as a vindictive strike against his political foes in Utah. Not because it was the right thing to do.
The fact is Utah already has way too much land under Fed control and the designation basically wiped out Utah residents from making a living in the area swallowed up by the NM designation. The artifacts will be protected and the boundaries revised and reestablished once input from the native Americans who want to co-manage the area and Utah residents is heard and balanced.
Unbelievable how a bunch of California residents and others from other states will demand the shutting down vast tracts of lands that they will never see or only go to when they want to make a political point.
Liberalism/Socialism is a disease that tramples freedom everywhere it touches.
Patagonia is playing games courting MTB opinion shapers, vulnerable and wanting to join their anti-access club. RC is a stooge being used by these folks and will be discarded once they have to take a stand to allow MTB access to areas currently shut down.
Why do I owe people in Utah the ability to make a living off MY federal land. As a resident of one of those commie blue states, I pay more out in federal tax dollars than I get back. Utah gets more back than they pay in. They are a bunch of mooches.
They should keep the land free and undeveloped so all of us have the opportunity to enjoy it if we want. If the locals want jobs they can move someplace else like I did or find away to do it without destroying federal land that belongs to all of us.
And this same scenario had been repeating itself over and over again, not just in Utah, but damn near every other state out here in the west where there's dedicated OHV areas. The Sierra Club has been the enemy of public use of our land(s), and wants it shut down to everybody but themselves.
Of course the liberal are employing their usual tactic of doom and gloom, in an effort to get people to actually tell congress to NOT let the public to get involved. This country was founded on many freedoms, one of which is US being in charge of OUR LAND! Thousands of people have fought and died to keep our rights to our land, and you have the liberals led by the Sierra Club shitting on their memories by advocating a government SERVED by the people, instead of of the other fricken way around, which is exactly what's written in the Constitution and Bill Of Rights.
The hillarity of this article, is the writer deciding he doesnt' like President Trump because the President wants to put US-INCLUDING THIS IDIOT WRITER- back in charge of OUR land(S), and he's professing this from aboard a mountain bike riding through an area that would be CLOSED DOWN TO BIKING, and every other form of human recreation, had the previous President-the one who took MILLIONS in campaign 'contributions' from the Sierra Clubs of the world been able to finish the single LARGEST LAND-CLOSURE that he started.
Funny this writer didn't bother to mention this little tid-bit of info.
When you have people of such ignorance pretending to be 'experts' on such a subject, and preaching to the very people this issue will effect,HUGE amounts of damage can be don
Luckily there's groupe like CORBA representing the off-road biking community, that actually EDUCATE themselves on the land closure issues affecting MTB'rs, and also SEMA, CORE, and the Blue Ribbon Coalition(Just to name a few) fighting for our RIGHTS to ride on OUR land.
It's truly sad, that for once when we finally get a President that actually GETS IT, idiots come out of the woodwork and spout off against him because they think the rest of the left-wing media and the sexual deviants of American, errrrr,,, uhhhhh, I mean HOLLYWOOD will give 'em an 'atta-boy', when in fact for the first time in a very long time, we actually have a president who's doing things because it's the RIGHT THING TO DO.
I did look up the organizations you noted, and of the actual relevant examples, CORBA says this: "We are dedicated to preserving open space, maintaining public access to public lands, and creating more trail opportunities for all to enjoy." It's incredible folly that so many mountain bikers look at access as the only issue to be concerned about. Ask the Canadians if their trail access is more greatly affected by government or by industry.