Pros And Cons Of Wilderness Designation

There’s rather a lot of controversy today about how we should use lands that have the government designated as wilderness. For some, these wilderness can be the best treatment to unwind after a day of hard work. For others, we can use the wilderness to relieve the stress placed on our government. Despite this debate, there are certain events that could have been avoided had the government addressed some key issues when designating a wilderness. In order to target land for wilderness designation, key issues must first be considered, such as the effect on the nation, the effect on the people, and who will get the final say about the use of the wilderness. As of 2009, “the United States imports sixty two percent of its oil from other nations” (Source C). The key issue here, consequently, is wilderness designation has affected the nation’s dependence on natural resources. “In Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming hold the equivalent of as little as 1.8 trillion barrels of oil…” (Source C). Such dependence on foreign countries has caused the government to
Although a wilderness designation can be beneficial to the people, nevertheless there are still adverse effects that may occur. “... I cannot support the overall package (Omnibus Public Lands Act) and urge my colleagues to vote against this rule that did not allow a vote to save eighty thousand jobs and over two million dollars in income in California…” (Source B). During an intense drought, land that we could have used to relieve the people of California was inaccessible as it was deemed a wilderness. However, due to the inability to relieve California from the drought, eighty thousand people lost their jobs. Imagine how little that number would have been if only there was land California could touch. When the time comes, take into account the possible negative effects that will manifest when labeling a piece of land as