Introduction

Over the last three Presidential Administrations, the Bears Ears National Monument has become the center of a heated debate. With some fighting for size reductions and others calling for full size restorations, both sides have presented a variety of compelling arguments. You can read more about the Bears Ears controversy here.

Although there are many different arguments surrounding Bears Ears, the economic impact of the monument is one of its most hotly contested issues. Some say that the monument’s designation would support local economies through increased tourism revenue, while others argue that the monument would be largely harmful to the surrounding communities because of limitations on resource extraction and job creation. 

Economic Trends of National Monuments

The United States is home to over 100 national monuments. With designations occurring as early as 1906, the long history of national monuments allows researchers to observe trends in their economic impacts.

A 2020 study found that national monuments usually result in positive economic impacts. The research spanned 25 years and examined links between national monument designation and economic impact throughout the western United States. Although average wages saw no change from monument designations, data collected during the study indicated that monuments generally lead to increased numbers of businesses and jobs in the surrounding areas. Furthermore, it was discovered that these new businesses succeeded more frequently and held relatively more staying power.

Researchers have observed many examples of national monuments supporting local and state economies. On a state level, Nevada’s outdoor recreation industry sustains almost 90,000 jobs and generates over $12 billion in yearly consumer spending. In Maine, $2.2 billion in wages and over 75,000 jobs stem from outdoor recreation. In New Mexico, the outdoor recreation industry creates thousands more jobs than mining and energy combined. For local economies, the number of service jobs within the Giant Sequoia National Monument region increased by 35%. Arizona’s Vermillion Cliffs National Monument increased the neighboring county’s per capita income by 24%, grew the population by 18%, and increased jobs by 25%. The San Gabriel Mountains Monument increased average incomes in the region by $1,099 each year.

However, the economic issue is not clear-cut. A Headwaters Economics review of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument reported increases in population, jobs, personal income, and per capita income from the years 2001-2015. However, some locals claim that the economic boost from resource extraction industries would easily surpass any benefits brought in from tourism. They argue that the tourism industry is largely seasonal and lower-paying, but resource extraction industries provide stable, higher-paying jobs at all times of the year.

Economic Impact of the Bears Ears National Monument

The Bears Ears National Monument is located in San Juan County, Utah. After its national monument designation in 2016, then-Utah Governor Gary Herbert expressed disappointment and concern due to its potentially harmful effects on local economies. Herbert, along with other Republicans, supported a resolution claiming that the Bears Ears Monument would “forever remove the possibility of economic development and decimate the economy of the region.” The resolution further claims that the monument’s resulting tourism increase will not be enough to sustain its local communities. 

Despite fears of harmful economic repercussions, Bears Ears generally helped grow local businesses since its designation. One example comes from Persephone Black, a San Juan County resident and small business owner, who saw her income increase after Bears Ears’ monument designation. A member of the Navajo tribe, she sells traditional jewelry made from glass beads and juniper seeds. She, along with other indigenous business owners in the region, benefited from increased rates of tourism, as visitors often spend money by purchasing souvenirs, food, recreation services, and more. Specifically, those interested in cultural tourism support local indigenous businesses by attracting visitors who wish to engage with the unique cultural heritage of the Bears Ears region. 

Those in favor of restoring the Bears Ears monument to its original size also explain that tourism will be better for the economy in the long-run, as visitors will bring in a comparatively sustainable stream of income. Contrasted with the “boom and bust” cycles commonly observed in resource extraction industries (i.e. oil, gas, uranium mining industries), tourism in Bears Ears can be maintained over a longer period of time with less harm to the natural environment.

By protecting the natural environment of Bears Ears, surrounding communities can experience even more economic benefits outside of outdoor recreation. A 2017 assessment of Bears Ears’ natural value concluded that the monument provides over $1 billion in ecosystem goods and services every year. Ecosystem health ultimately benefits humans through goods such as water, timber, and wildlife, and through services such as aesthetic value, water filtration, and flood protection. Therefore, many environmentalists argue that damages to the environment through natural resource extraction would prevent humans from receiving these free rewards, and ultimately cause more economic harm than good in the long-run. 

Conclusion

While the economic consequences of the Bears Ears National Monument are important to take into account, they are not the only factors to consider. The debate surrounding Bears Ears is complex, with both sides presenting a variety of logical arguments. As a voter, it is up to you to decide which factors you value most, and ensure your voice is heard. 

Here are a few ways to engage with the Bears Ears Monument controversy:

• Staying educated and continuing to learn more about the Bears Ears controversy is an important first step. For further reading, visit ACE’s other briefs on 1. The history of the Antiquities Act, 2. An introduction to the Bears Ears controversy

• Elected officials want to hear from their constituents. Because constituents’ thoughts and perspectives are often taken into account, contacting one’s representatives allows voters to enact real change. 
• Supporting relevant organizations through volunteering and/or donating is a powerful way to make a difference. The Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition, the Utah-Dine Bikeyah, and Outdoor Alliance are a few examples of such organizations. 

Voting allows citizens to elect representatives who share similar views on a particular issue.