I really appreciated the well-researched and in-depth reportage on the presidential candidates’ public-land policies and how they would affect the Grand Junction, Colorado, community (“Grand Disjunction,” October 2020). This critical issue is often overlooked and under-covered. I did take issue with the voices that were highlighted. The two conservationists were well-spoken and versed in public-land policy, while the two Trump supporters interviewed were focused on hyper-partisan politics and unaware of the Bureau of Land Management’s move to Colorado. I understand having diverse voices, but I wonder if having this juxtaposition was helpful. Why not interview Trump supporters who work in oil and gas, or lobbyists within the extractive industry? Having this perspective would have given HCN readers a more nuanced perspective and a move away from the deep divide and stereotypes that were reinforced in this article.
Jacob Mandell
Bend, Oregon
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Energy, elections, public lands.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
