What's new
By:

Outdoor retailers leaving Utah

♪alt13 said:
The BLM is the worst land manager in the state and I don't think it's even debatable. You can't use a national park as an example when were talking about BLM land. It really is apples and oranges. No one is talking about transferring Zions to the state of Utah. Which by the way was kept open by the state of Utah when the federal government shutdown. I am far from a fan of Utah legislature but let's not be vitriolic.

Personally I'm not in favor up transferring the lands to the state at this time but I do think that there are going to be some areas where that's the best thing to do.
Click to expand...

Good post.
 
Glad I got to go to the last ORS. I got so much free stuff, bummer that I probably will not go again. Politics aside it sucks its leaving Utah and this is a blow to SLC.
 
The Thriller said:
It's not rocket science, but on the public record as to how well "local control" works here in Utah. It's not good. Just a simple google search will provide a variety of cases of nepotism, corruption, negligence, and managing lands and other services. Hell, just visit a local state park and compare it to a national park. How the campsites are maintained is a night and day difference. Utah refuses to properly fund health care (Medicaid expansion), law enforcement, and public education.

So keep the land in the hands of the Feds.

Get Educated
Click to expand...
https://perc.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/150303_PERC_DividedLands.pdf

As stated, it is not a simple issue.
4
 
♪alt13 said:
The BLM is the worst land manager in the state and I don't think it's even debatable. You can't use a national park as an example when were talking about BLM land. It really is apples and oranges. No one is talking about transferring Zions to the state of Utah. Which by the way was kept open by the state of Utah when the federal government shutdown. I am far from a fan of Utah legislature but let's not be vitriolic.

Personally I'm not in favor up transferring the lands to the state at this time but I do think that there are going to be some areas where that's the best thing to do.
Click to expand...

Would you be referring to the republican government shutdown? Yes, it was pretty dumb for Lee and the boys to shut down the government costing Utah millions in revenue.

Get Educated
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
Congratulations on completely missing the point. You claimed that the quality of campgrounds in national parks vs state parks is proof of your claim that national management is better. It's not.
Click to expand...

I have yet to see any evidence that Utah can manage state lands better. Their record is terrible. Just ask any fisherman. Just a few years ago Utah passed a law banning access to rivers so only the richies would have access to them. Thank god that a judge found the law to be unconstitutional.

Seeing how the prison location was stuffed down our throats and the dominance of land developers in the legislature, anyone who thinks that Utah's legislature will properly manage lands and not just sell the lands to their buddies should buy beach front property from me.

Get Educated
 
The Thriller said:
I have yet to see any evidence that Utah can manage state lands better. Their record is terrible. Just ask any fisherman. Just a few years ago Utah passed a law banning access to rivers so only the richies would have access to them. Thank god that a judge found the law to be unconstitutional.

Seeing how the prison location was stuffed down our throats and the dominance of land developers in the legislature, anyone who thinks that Utah's legislature will properly manage lands and not just sell the lands to their buddies should buy beach front property from me.

Get Educated
Click to expand...
This is a much better argument than your claim about campground quality. Your "Get educated" tag is hysterical, though. You've consistently shown that you are only interested in the interpretation of the facts that supports your version of reality.
 
The Thriller said:
Would you be referring to the republican government shutdown? Yes, it was pretty dumb for Lee and the boys to shut down the government costing Utah millions in revenue.

Get Educated
Click to expand...

Uhhh I'm not a Republican. Despite their anti-federal rhetoric the Republicans very much represent what the federal government is. In fact right now they kind of Define it.
Besides being underfunded, the mission of the BLM is so Broad, vague, and flexible that it is susceptible to somewhat drastic changes in policy after an election. The marked shift towards drilling during the bush era being one such example. The situation does not create stable land use policy.
If the Utah delegation is right about one thing it is that a comprehensive plan is needed to address BLM land in Utah. And yes Utahns should be a part of that conversation.

I get the impression that if the federal government doesn't stamp it's brand on a piece of land that you assume that it falls under State Control. I'm including a link to a map of land ownership in Utah. You can see that most of the land is BLM land.
https://extension.usu.edu/utahrangelands/htm/land-ownership-of-utah

Most of the problems we have is because we have land in limbo and a toxic political discussion on what to do with it. As babe pointed out many of the environmental groups seek a no-man's land type of protection over most if not all of the land. The southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, when assessing the Utah public lands initiative, spoke out about ATV use, bicycle use, grazing , hunting, and fishing. Rather than work with the groups who in many ways should be natural allies with whom they can find many places of agreement and easy compromise in the places they don't agree, they have drawn an almost militant Line in the Sand. It seems to me that the only reason they have done so is because of a cultural difference that actually has nothing to do with land use or conservation.

Again, I would just like to reiterate this, you seem to be a victim of Republican rhetoric. The federal government doesn't represent your liberal ideals especially agencies that don't have a clear mission, responsibilities, or adequate funding. The federal government in many ways just represents whoever won the election. Right now that's pretty much a hundred percent Republicans( Chief among them being a straight-up maniac). There's a better way to deal with our land.
 
Last edited:
♪alt13 said:
Uhhh I'm not a Republican. Despite their anti-federal rhetoric the Republicans very much represent what the federal government is. In fact right now they kind of Define it.
Besides being underfunded, the mission of the BLM is so Broad, vague, and flexible that it is susceptible to somewhat drastic changes in policy after an election. The marked shift towards drilling during the bush era being one such example. The situation does not create stable land use policy.
If the Utah delegation is right about one thing it is that a comprehensive plan is needed to address BLM land in Utah. And yes Utahns should be a part of that conversation.

I get the impression that if the federal government doesn't stamp it's brand on a piece of land that you assume that it falls under State Control. I'm including a link to a map of land ownership in Utah. You can see that most of the land is BLM land.
https://extension.usu.edu/utahrangelands/htm/land-ownership-of-utah

Most of the problems we have is because we have land in limbo and a toxic political discussion on what to do with it. As babe pointed out many of the environmental groups seek a no-man's land type of protection over most if not all of the land. The southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, when assessing the Utah public lands initiative, spoke out about ATV use, bicycle use, grazing , hunting, and fishing. Rather than work with the groups who in many ways should be natural allies with whom they can find many places of agreement and easy compromise in the places they don't agree, they have drawn an almost militant Line in the Sand. It seems to me that the only reason they have done so is because of a cultural difference that actually has nothing to do with land use or conservation.

Again, I would just like to reiterate this, you seem to be a victim of Republican rhetoric. The federal government doesn't represent your liberal ideals especially agencies that don't have a clear mission, responsibilities, or adequate funding. The federal government in many ways just represents whoever won the election. Right now that's pretty much a hundred percent Republicans( Chief among them being a straight-up maniac). There's a better way to deal with our land.
Click to expand...

No one outside of a few greedy Utah politicians who chased the retailer to leave, claim that Utah isn't already part of the conversation.

Look, google the history of Bears ears. Obama gave bishop and chaffetz 3 years to resolve the issue. Utah had their shot! They blew it.

Utah already is part of the conversation. But if all they're going to do is bend over for big oil and refuse to work with the president because of his/her race and/or political affiliation, then don't cry when the president uses the antiquities act.
 
This is a very interesting and unfortunate turn of events for SLC, SLCo, Ogden, and Utah. As someone very close to this situation, I can tell you this will have a very negative impact more so on SLC and SLCo. Many downtown businesses, mostly small businesses, rely on the revenue from OR. This will impact them greatly. From a marketing perspective, OR was a huge feather in our cap. We have a major perception issue nationwide, and this only hurts us further. The spin off from OR, such as business recruitment and retention, will take a big hit as well. Utah is lucky to have such a strong standing in the Outdoor Recreation economy, its a niche we are highly competitive in, and losing this show is a big blow to that. Colorado has been gunning for us for a few years and they just got a massive, massive win. Their Governor just spoke at SIA and strongly spoke about his commitment to public land protection, and the industry is listening. We will see an exodus of companies who feel strongly about the issue, and want to cluster around a like-minded business ecosystem. Amer Sports, parent of Arc Teryx who left the show early with Patagonia, is a lynch pin in Ogden's outdoor rec cluster. The industry is a huge pary of Ogden's fabric and losing them would be catastrophic to an already fragile city economy.

We just got a lot less cooler, and believe me folks, the future of our economy depends on talent wanting to live, work, build companies, create jobs, and invest in Utah. Our State government is being stubborn and politically short sighted. They view the outdoor rec community as a liberal nuisance and they don't think they need them. Oh how they are so wrong.

It is true that these bigger retailers are seeing less value in OR, everyone knows the show is time for the outdoor community to come together. A friend, equated it to the LDS General Conference. Its a time to renew your passion for the industry, spend time with friends, and enjoy Utah. The outdoor rec community is tight nit and unique. You see an amazing combination of art, film, music, entrepreneurism, tech, and manufacturing all mashed into one business sector. Smaller companies are able to sell product and still find value in the the show as well. It helps support small, emerging companies and technology, and promotes innovation.

This is a huge loss for Utah, and it will feel it for years to come as a GROWING $400 billion industry will avoid Utah on principal. I applaud the sentiment from OIA and its large corporate partners, its an important issue and its great to see industry stand up for what they believe in. But I do think the move is short sighted and will do more damage then good to SLC and SLCo. I'm hoping Herbert caves and we just move on, because OIA will not accept anything less than complete protection. While Utah will survive without the show, the collateral damage hurts our capital city and others, which our State government apparently could give two ****s about.
 
♪alt13 said:
Uhhh I'm not a Republican. Despite their anti-federal rhetoric the Republicans very much represent what the federal government is. In fact right now they kind of Define it.
Besides being underfunded, the mission of the BLM is so Broad, vague, and flexible that it is susceptible to somewhat drastic changes in policy after an election. The marked shift towards drilling during the bush era being one such example. The situation does not create stable land use policy.
If the Utah delegation is right about one thing it is that a comprehensive plan is needed to address BLM land in Utah. And yes Utahns should be a part of that conversation.

I get the impression that if the federal government doesn't stamp it's brand on a piece of land that you assume that it falls under State Control. I'm including a link to a map of land ownership in Utah. You can see that most of the land is BLM land.
https://extension.usu.edu/utahrangelands/htm/land-ownership-of-utah

Most of the problems we have is because we have land in limbo and a toxic political discussion on what to do with it. As babe pointed out many of the environmental groups seek a no-man's land type of protection over most if not all of the land. The southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, when assessing the Utah public lands initiative, spoke out about ATV use, bicycle use, grazing , hunting, and fishing. Rather than work with the groups who in many ways should be natural allies with whom they can find many places of agreement and easy compromise in the places they don't agree, they have drawn an almost militant Line in the Sand. It seems to me that the only reason they have done so is because of a cultural difference that actually has nothing to do with land use or conservation.

Again, I would just like to reiterate this, you seem to be a victim of Republican rhetoric. The federal government doesn't represent your liberal ideals especially agencies that don't have a clear mission, responsibilities, or adequate funding. The federal government in many ways just represents whoever won the election. Right now that's pretty much a hundred percent Republicans( Chief among them being a straight-up maniac). There's a better way to deal with our land.
Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of this. I just don't trust the Utah government to be the ones to manage it. I totally agree that blm policies need sweeping reform.

Also, what you said about southern Utah wilderness alliance could not be more true. When I was at the university of Utah I did an internship with SUWA, and my job was to create relationships with the boy scouts. They talked about how awesome it would be if they had boy scouts buy in to protecting the land, and did leave no trace training, but when it came down to it, they could not stop judging the scout groups on their perceived downfalls.

Suwa is pretty much an elitist group who thinks they are the only ones with the answer to protecting public lands.
 
Revenue generated by outdoor rec < revenue generated by energy production

Short term, profit driven decision making. The slow death of fossil fuel jobs continues.
 
BabyPeterzz said:
Revenue generated by outdoor rec < revenue generated by energy production

Short term, profit driven decision making. The slow death of fossil fuel jobs continues.
Click to expand...

This is the most tragic thing to me. The resolution from the state does nothing for the future. We don't need oil and gas development. We have enough of that. Oil prices are low. Hell, even investment in nuclear would be better, even though it brings uranium disposal issues.

It's a crappy situation.

Good post above by the way.

My close friend works at Amer sports, and shared a lot of the same sentiment.
 
BabyPeterzz said:
This is a very interesting and unfortunate turn of events for SLC, SLCo, Ogden, and Utah. As someone very close to this situation, I can tell you this will have a very negative impact more so on SLC and SLCo. Many downtown businesses, mostly small businesses, rely on the revenue from OR. This will impact them greatly. From a marketing perspective, OR was a huge feather in our cap. We have a major perception issue nationwide, and this only hurts us further. The spin off from OR, such as business recruitment and retention, will take a big hit as well. Utah is lucky to have such a strong standing in the Outdoor Recreation economy, its a niche we are highly competitive in, and losing this show is a big blow to that. Colorado has been gunning for us for a few years and they just got a massive, massive win. Their Governor just spoke at SIA and strongly spoke about his commitment to public land protection, and the industry is listening. We will see an exodus of companies who feel strongly about the issue, and want to cluster around a like-minded business ecosystem. Amer Sports, parent of Arc Teryx who left the show early with Patagonia, is a lynch pin in Ogden's outdoor rec cluster. The industry is a huge pary of Ogden's fabric and losing them would be catastrophic to an already fragile city economy.

We just got a lot less cooler, and believe me folks, the future of our economy depends on talent wanting to live, work, build companies, create jobs, and invest in Utah. Our State government is being stubborn and politically short sighted. They view the outdoor rec community as a liberal nuisance and they don't think they need them. Oh how they are so wrong.

It is true that these bigger retailers are seeing less value in OR, everyone knows the show is time for the outdoor community to come together. A friend, equated it to the LDS General Conference. Its a time to renew your passion for the industry, spend time with friends, and enjoy Utah. The outdoor rec community is tight nit and unique. You see an amazing combination of art, film, music, entrepreneurism, tech, and manufacturing all mashed into one business sector. Smaller companies are able to sell product and still find value in the the show as well. It helps support small, emerging companies and technology, and promotes innovation.

This is a huge loss for Utah, and it will feel it for years to come as a GROWING $400 billion industry will avoid Utah on principal. I applaud the sentiment from OIA and its large corporate partners, its an important issue and its great to see industry stand up for what they believe in. But I do think the move is short sighted and will do more damage then good to SLC and SLCo. I'm hoping Herbert caves and we just move on, because OIA will not accept anything less than complete protection. While Utah will survive without the show, the collateral damage hurts our capital city and others, which our State government apparently could give two ****s about.
Click to expand...

Hopefully they get that Convention Center Hotel built so they can bring in more shows. Lack of Hotel space keeps Salt Lake from getting a lot of shows.
 
Wasn't this part of the issue when that Bundy guy and his citizens militia friends were occupying that federal wildlife refuge in Oregon? And another faction of the same group staged an armed takeover of federal land in Nevada or Arizona? I'm not sure how their actions came across to those outside of their movement. My guess is it was viewed in a more negative light than positive.
 
No, BP. OR or OIA are outta touch with Utah.

Sure, companies that put political agenda first will have some partisan backers cheering. For sure, a lot of the gear market is trendy hip liberal idealists.

But there are partisans on the other side who when they see the political grandstanding, will be glad to look for other brands to buy.

Utah retailers could make a bundle advertising their commitment to Western Outdoor lifestyles in opposition to the public being run off the land by Eastern politicians.
 
moevillini said:
Wasn't this part of the issue when that Bundy guy and his citizens militia friends were occupying that federal wildlife refuge in Oregon? And another faction of the same group staged an armed takeover of federal land in Nevada or Arizona? I'm not sure how their actions came across to those outside of their movement. My guess is it was viewed in a more negative light than positive.
Click to expand...

You're talking about the Ammon Bundy protest against general Federal reserve/management of land, staged at the wildlife reserve near Bend, OR.

The lying mainstream media, as some see it, might have smeared the protesters with about as much accuracy as the same media smeared the cops in "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" Missouri, except the man shot by the law enforcement officers in that event did have his hands up. Ranchers in the west are calling it murder. The protestors arrested were acquitted, and a wrongful death lawsuit is under way.

There are lots of folks in the West who want to know which brands are politically backing the Federal push to run folks off the land, not just for commercial use but recreational use as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top