The Case for Preserving Bears Ears

Ethics, Policy and Environment 21 (1):48-51 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In December of 2017, President Trump reduced the size of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante Monuments by 2 million acres. Conservatives rejoiced, and progressives railed. Yet neither side has clearly identified the moral facets of the situation. The crucial moral question is this: How ought public property be regulated to protect landscapes with cultural significance? We offer criteria for determining when something has cultural value and argue that the moral merits of the present case turn on whether the reduction adequately addresses the cultural interests at play.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-03-26

Downloads
81 (#212,073)

6 months
308 (#7,153)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Justin McBrayer
Fort Lewis College
Sarah Roberts-Cady
Fort Lewis College

Citations of this work

Genre View of Public Lands: The Case of National Monuments.Levi Tenen - 2023 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 81 (1):4-14.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights.Sue Donaldson & Will Kymlicka - 2011 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Will Kymlicka.

Add more references