{"id":1407,"date":"2007-08-02T10:39:42","date_gmt":"2007-08-02T15:39:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.tommangan.net\/twoheeldrive\/?p=1407"},"modified":"2008-01-28T07:24:33","modified_gmt":"2008-01-28T15:24:33","slug":"value-of-recreation-vs-cost-of-mining-drilling-cutting","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.tommangan.net\/twoheeldrive\/index.php\/2007\/08\/02\/value-of-recreation-vs-cost-of-mining-drilling-cutting\/","title":{"rendered":"Value of recreation vs. cost of mining, drilling, cutting"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Sierra Club seems to have hired a few economists to demonstrate that our tree-hugging tendencies are actually good for the economy. From a report released yesterday called “The New Economy of the West: From Clear-cutting to Camping<\/a>” (Note, the link is a PDF file): <\/p>\n

\nThe last several years have seen a radical shift in the way America’s public lands
\nare managed. The oil, gas, mining and timber industries are chomping at the
\nbit to pursue resources in previously unspoiled areas like Wyoming’s Red
\nDesert, Colorado’s Roan Plateau and Alaska’s Tongass National Forest.<\/p>\n

\nBut oil and gas resources in the Rocky Mountain West are limited, while recreational
\nopportunities are endless. In fact, according to U.S. Department of
\nEnergy estimates, the Rockies hold enough oil to supply the United States for
\njust over three months. Even if oil prices skyrocketed beyond their current levels,
\nrevenues would only be generated for a brief window of time. In contrast,
\nprotecting western public lands for recreation would ensure revenues of more
\nthan $65 billion a year for years to come.<\/blockquote class=\"q\">\n

A Sierra Club publicist sent me few more facts from the report: <\/p>\n