This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2017, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Garfield County has recently joined the Utah Legislature in passing a resolution in support of shrinking the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument by nearly 75 percent. More recently, President Donald Trump has heeded the call and ordered the review of all national monuments designated since 1996. This date is no accident; it is the year the Grand Staircase was designated.
In its resolution, Garfield County not only ignores the groundswell of local support for leaving the monument intact; it also fallaciously cites the decline in the student enrollment, particularly at Escalante High School, to support the claim that the monument has been catastrophic for the county's economy.
I am from Garfield County, I was part of that student exodus, and the county's use of it to justify gutting the monument feels an awful lot like a red herring and smacks of manipulation.
I was born in Panguitch, the county seat, in 1988 and later that year moved to Boulder, Utah, now the gateway to the Grand Staircase-Escalante. Two of my four siblings attended Escalante High School. Around the time my oldest brother graduated from Escalante High, my parents decided to look for a broader academic curriculum with greater opportunity for the rest of us. My mother moved us to northern Utah where there were more options. In other words, three of my siblings and I were part of the exodus of students from Garfield County in the late '90s.
I know several other families in and around Boulder who decided to send their children elsewhere for school as well. In all cases of which I am aware, the decision had nothing to do with the designation of the monument. Even in Boulder today the majority of children are homeschooled, hardly what one would expect if the decline in student body were due to families fleeing the monument.
This is not to disparage Garfield County schools or the efforts of those who have committed themselves to enhancing student opportunities; my siblings and I have many fond memories of Boulder Elementary. This is simply to offer the perspective of one student who was part of the exodus being used as a red herring to justify shrinking the monument. It wasn't about the monument; it was about education.
Indeed, it is only because of the national monument that many folks have been able to return Garfield County after finishing school elsewhere. My family calls Boulder home and we are thankful for the opportunities the monument has given us to maintain our roots there. We own and operate a bed and breakfast which is booked to capacity for six months of the year. My sister works for the Burr Trail Grill, a restaurant in Boulder that flourishes due to its proximity to Grand Staircase-Escalante. Neither of these operations would be possible without the influx of money the monument brings into the community. This isn't the only example of students who left Boulder for school and were able to return later thanks precisely to the effects the national monument has had on the local economy.
The county cites access to coal as a major reason to shrink the monument. However, the coal industry is quickly becoming obsolete. Take for instance the recent decision by the Navajo Power Plant and mine to shutter their operations due to current market trends. These market trends have very little to do with burdensome regulations and are unlikely to be reversed by any efforts at deregulation. It makes no sense to jeopardize the robust economy the national monument has created in favor of a defunct industry. My family's experience attests to that.
Ira Pollock is from Boulder, Utah. His family owns and operates Lower Boulder Bed and Breakfast.