![\"Your](\"https:\/\/explore.globalcreations.com\/theblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/header1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The Outdoor Industry Association recently released a poll they had commissioned. \u00a0The poll asked 500 likely voters in Colorado and 500 likely voters in Nevada a series of questions. \u00a0The questions were designed \u00a0to try to determine how important public lands are to people in those states and how this interest might play out in the presidential elections.<\/p>\n
![\"Rocky](\"https:\/\/explore.globalcreations.com\/theblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/Rocky_Mountain_National_ParkBIG.jpg\")
<\/a>Rocky Mountin National Park The poll then tried to ascertain the leanings of the participants by asking a series of questions about the importance and priorities of National Forests, National\u00a0Monuments, National\u00a0Wildlife Refuges, and other national public lands. \u00a0The poll found:<\/p>\n Stella Lake in the Great Basin National Park<\/p><\/div>\n I read this as saying that the people really want it all from their public lands. \u00a0Not only do they want these lands protected, they want them used. \u00a0Outdoor recreation is important, but so are extractive uses. \u00a0Ultimately the question is: Can the public get everything they want from the public lands?<\/p>\n It seems to me that these results suggest that if these lands are protected and available for recreational pursuits, the more extractive activities should also be pursued. \u00a0 That may seem impossible, especially with interest groups screaming that their way is the only way, but it really isn’t completely impossible.<\/p>\n Some lands may be better for one or the other activity. \u00a0For example the National Parks are managed to protect and conserve the resources\u00a0for future generations while also allowing a wide variety of recreational pursuits. \u00a0Since they are not mandated to be managed for resource extraction, the conflicts are not a huge as on other public lands. \u00a0Sometimes a recreational opportunity is sacrificed for preservation or vice versa, but that can work out ok. \u00a0That’s not to say that controversy is avoided as there are always people that are strongly at one end or the other of the issue.<\/p>\n
By Daniel Mayer (Mav) (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0<\/a>]<\/p><\/div>When asked: “Compared to other issues like the economy, health care and education, how important are\u00a0issues involving public lands, waters, and wildlife for you in deciding whether to support an\u00a0elected public official?” \u00a0these potential\u00a0voters strongly believe these issues are important. \u00a087% of the group from Colorado and 77% from Nevada said these issues were very or somewhat important. \u00a0Clearly these people care about these issues, but the direction of that caring is still open. \u00a0Do they want to sell off\u00a0public lands or acquire\u00a0more public lands? \u00a0If you think the issue is important, you could be in either camp.<\/p>\nWhy are public Lands important?<\/h1>\n
\n
<\/a>Get It All (Or a Lot) From Public Lands<\/h1>\n