But the report will take a more holistic approach, looking at, for example, federal jobs that might be lost and whether they will be replaced with state workers.
"There are a lot of interesting questions," Clarke said, "and I think you'll find the depth and breadth of this study is going to lay a foundation, not for giving decisions, but giving you data by which to make well-informed decisions."
Utah has spent nearly $547,000 thus far, mostly on staff salaries for items such as mapping projects, a review of public lands revenue, an analysis of current activities on federal land, and interacting with counties.
"It's not an inexpensive study," Clarke said, "but it's a lot of work."
The state has demanded Congress turn over tens of millions of federal acres excluding national parks, monuments and some other protected areas and notify Utah of its intention by December of this year. If Congress does not respond, the state may go to court and demand the lands.
The Legislature passed a bill in 2013 calling for a study of the economic impacts of such a transfer. Supporters of the shift have said developing those lands could mean hundreds of millions of dollars for education, but environmental advocates say that would mean drastically increasing extraction and development of some of Utah's pristine areas.
Nevada contracted with a private company to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of that state taking control of public land. That report, released last month, estimated that if Nevada controlled the federal lands, it could bring in between $31 million and $114 million to the state.
Clarke said Utah's team has looked at the Nevada report, but believes the Beehive State's product will be much more comprehensive.