Help support alternative media by visiting our Allies

Selkirk Mountain Real Estate

“WILDERNESS” Designations Have Negative Impact On Local Economies

Wilderness counties are at an economic disadvantage to their non-Wilderness counterparts.

"WILDERNESS" Designations Have Negative Impact On Local Economies

“WILDERNESS” Designations Have Negative Impact
On Local Economies

*Editor’s note: Federal Land designations are currently a hot topic throughout the country, primarily in the west. Due to the importance of the issue, we are reprinting this article from a few years back. The information is just as relevant today as it was then.

By Dave Halsey, NOHVCC

(Snowest) – Of all federal land-use designations, “Wilderness” is the most restrictive. It prohibits roads, road construction, motorized travel, mechanized equipment, logging, mining, telecommunication towers, transmission lines and energy pipelines. Environmentalists often claim that “Wilderness” attracts tourism and boosts local economies. According to a recent study by Utah State University, very often the opposite is true.

“The argument often stated by the environmental community that Wilderness is good for local economies is simply not supported by the data,” states the summary of “The Economic Costs of Wilderness.” Released in 2011, the study was written by Brian Steed, Ryan Yonk and Randy Simmons, of the JohnM. Huntsman School of Business at Utah State. 

Conclusions from the study–and useful talking points for OHV advocates to bring to meetings that involve the Wilderness designation–are important to note:

  • When comparing Wilderness and non-Wilderness counties, Wilderness counties are at an economic disadvantage to their non-Wilderness counterparts. Accordingly, if the test for whether or not to designate Wilderness is economic, Wilderness fails.
  • Economics did not underlie the Wilderness Act or any of the Wilderness Areas established since the Act was passed (1964). Wilderness is established for emotional, ecological and cultural purposes. Results show that those purposes are accomplished at a cost to local economies.
  • Controlling for other factors influencing county economic conditions, the Wilderness designation is significantly associated with lower per capita income, lower total payroll and lower total tax receipts in counties.
  • Despite these differing views, Congress has continued creating Wilderness Areas. There are 759 Wilderness Areas currently in the United States, totaling 109,663,992 acres.
  • Wilderness is managed by four federal agencies: the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Land Management.
  • Only six states contain no Wilderness: Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland and Rhode Island.

The Economic Costs of Wilderness” will make an excellent addition to the NOHVCC on-line library, which contains many studies showing the positive impact OHV recreation has on state and local economies.



Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here:

1 Comment on “WILDERNESS” Designations Have Negative Impact On Local Economies

  1. So let us just burn down all the world’s forests just so our precious GDP figure can carry on growing and growing. The economy is the only thing that matters, right?

    Just because something is good for the economy doesn’t mean that it is unquestionable good. Liberals also cite the economy as a reason to support mass immigration, if you remember.

    Conservatives should really stop being opposed to environmental protection just because lefties support it. I consider myself conservative on immigration yet also support environmental protection.

Comments are closed.