“Piece on Recapture does a disservice to readers”
Apr 14, 2015 | 5944 views | 0 0 comments | 134 134 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Dear Editor:

Misinformation in last week’s Recapture article:

I can’t spend the day in explanation, (those who are interested in the truth know where to find it), but last week’s piece on Recapture does a disservice to the readers of the San Juan Record, as did publishing Juan Palma’s letter the week before without publishing a counter position, (such as my corresponding letter to the City Council which was submitted and which you can find on my County Facebook page).

Those who believe that the protest was over the closure of the Recapture Trail have not been paying attention; not once has that been stated as the reason for the protest. In fact, in almost every statement I made, I said that the protest was not about Recapture, and most certainly not about ATV’s.

More than anything else, the protest was and is about the clandestine relationship that the federal agencies, including our own local BLM, have with non-governmental organizations whose objectives are contrary to the health, happiness, safety, peace, and prosperity of our communities.

It is interesting how so much has been written about the Recapture protest from the perspective of the BLM. Why does the San Juan Record piece not talk about Judge Shelby’s decision to reschedule a “James Hearing,” and his admission that cancelling that hearing, which was requested by the defense, was a mistake?

Why does the piece not mention County Road 5314, or the County right of way that has existed on the pipeline for decades; or the unauthorized trail deconstruction on the part of the BLM, including moving of large boulders and huge mounds of dirt, in direct defiance of the County’s directive and without first completing their own Environmental Assessment?

Why does it not discuss the string of broken promises of action on the part of the BLM? Why does it not contain any statements by those charged or by their representatives?

The article says that, in connection with the protest, “more than 50 (people) rode motorized vehicles on a new trail carved through a portion of the canyon.” Please provide some sort of evidence to support that statement; pictures of a “new” or “carved” trail; anything.

For a local paper, the coverage of Recapture has been painfully one-sided. 

Phil Lyman

Commission Chairman

San Juan County, Utah
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
The San Juan Record welcomes comments on our stories. Please be civil, respectful, focused and humane. Postings are not edited and are the responsibility of the author. You agree not to post comments that are abusive, threatening or obscene. Postings may be removed at the discretion of sjrnews.com