Food Fight: Article in the New Yorker about the Hell's Backbone Grill in Boulder, UT

[ramblinman]

This article was in a recent issue of the New Yorker magazine about the owners of the Hell's Backbone Grill in Boulder and their fight to protect the GSENM.

There's a good tradition on this site of not stirring up the political muck. While the subject of this article concerns the battle over protecting the GSENM, it's also profile of the owners and the area and it is not an opinion piece. I think is of interest to anyone familiar with the area.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/...mall-town-utah-decided-to-sue-president-trump

 

[fossana]

Thanks for posting. I'll definitely make it a point to stop there in the near future. I passed by there while riding the Burr Trail, but didn't realize it was a farm to table place.

 

[wsp_scott]

interesting article, thanks for posting

 

[Carcass]

The problem with GS is the federal govt. They don't do a good job at managing anything.

As for the natural resources, there isn't infrastructure in place to take advantage if it. It would cost way too much money to develop it. Coal there is the most abundant resource but it isn't needed. The underground coal fires in the Burning Hills is also a stumbling block to any miningThere is plenty elsewhere. Oil/natural gas was already drilled and prospected for in the area(Rush Beds specifically) and one well was built and then torn down. There just isnt enough. Same for uranium. The Shinarump has been prospected for uranium and while it is there, the deposits are very small. There is fine gold in the Chinle, but it is difficult to separate from the clay. Some small amounts of copper were mined as well but again, there ain't much there.

All in all, I just don't see any mining at all regardless of shrinking borders or not. The profitability just isn't there. Otherwise, thete would have been mines all over the place well before the area became a monument.

 

[fossana]

UT isn't going to do a better job at managing their own lands. People here don't want to pay taxes to cover public land maintenance/management, so there will be an inevitable sell off or industry leasing. WY woke up to the fact that turning federal lands over to the state would mean loss of access.

One of the main reasons oil extraction isn't profitable in places like UT is due to the cheap oil prices from overseas. There's enough volatility in the Middle East that that could change any day.

 

[slc_dan]

The problem with GS is the federal govt. They don't do a good job at managing anything.

While I certainly disagree with this sentiment, in general. I'll bite, and even take it to the specific issue we are looking at. Utah vs. US gov't in managing public lands.

I'll take any federal run land over any Utah State Park. When I go to some public lands, I don't want there to be anything there but the land. PLEASE don't pave the roads. PLEASE don't give me wifi, and connectivity to the grid. PLEASE, a place to take a warm shower isn't necessary. Just leave the land alone.

A great example of this is Kodachrome State park, vs Bryce, or even GSENM right next to it. In Kodachrome the most notable feature is covered by cows overgrazing. There are giant cut trails, there are signs on every feature ever named. They find the need to have full RV hookups, warm showers, paved roads, and fees to go along with all of it. Bryce might be over run, but you step off the pavement and it still feels out there, you don't have to push a cow aside to see the features.

Utah simply doesn't have the funds to manage the lands, and the Fed does. That isn't a bad thing, all americans enjoy the use of this land, let them help foot the bill.

As for economic viability of mining, the Canadian mining company Glacier Lake Resources disagrees with your statement. LINK

 

[Bob]

Sorry, ill pass.....expensive, not all that great except for not much around.

 

[Carcass]

While I certainly disagree with this sentiment, in general. I'll bite, and even take it to the specific issue we are looking at. Utah vs. US gov't in managing public lands.

I'll take any federal run land over any Utah State Park. When I go to some public lands, I don't want there to be anything there but the land. PLEASE don't pave the roads. PLEASE don't give me wifi, and connectivity to the grid. PLEASE, a place to take a warm shower isn't necessary. Just leave the land alone.

A great example of this is Kodachrome State park, vs Bryce, or even GSENM right next to it. In Kodachrome the most notable feature is covered by cows overgrazing. There are giant cut trails, there are signs on every feature ever named. They find the need to have full RV hookups, warm showers, paved roads, and fees to go along with all of it. Bryce might be over run, but you step off the pavement and it still feels out there, you don't have to push a cow aside to see the features.

Utah simply doesn't have the funds to manage the lands, and the Fed does. That isn't a bad thing, all americans enjoy the use of this land, let them help foot the bill.

As for economic viability of mining, the Canadian mining company Glacier Lake Resources disagrees with your statement. LINK

If I remember right, this company tried the same thing in Nevada, trying to convince investors there is a lot of gold to be recovered from an area that once had zinc and lead.