Bill Overview
Title: Great Bend of the Gila Conservation Act
Description: This bill establishes the Great Bend of the Gila National Conservation Area and the Palo Verde National Conservation Area in Arizona. The bill designates in Maricopa County in Arizona approximately 9,809 acres as the Gila Bend Wilderness, approximately 23,464 acres as the Red Rock Canyon Wilderness, and approximately 23,712 acres as the Ringtail Wilderness.
Sponsors: Rep. Grijalva, Raúl M. [D-AZ-3]
Target Audience
Population: People who live in or near the designated conservation areas in Arizona, or use these areas for various purposes
Estimated Size: 500000
- The bill establishes protected areas in Arizona, which implies that the primary impact will be on those who live in or near these areas or who frequently use them for recreational or commercial purposes.
- Arizona's total population is over 7 million, but the direct impact is more likely to be on those within the counties where the designated areas are located.
- Recreational users from other states and countries may also be impacted as they may visit these areas for tourism and outdoor activities.
- Local communities may experience changes in land use policies and economic opportunities related to tourism and conservation efforts.
Reasoning
- The policy mainly impacts local residents, businesses, and recreational users in and around the designated conservation areas. Thus, the simulated interviews will focus on a diverse group from these populations.
- Maricopa County, being a significant area for the implementation of the policy, will see a variety of impacts, such as economic changes due to tourism, conservation efforts, and changes in land use policies.
- The policy's budgetary constraints mean that while conservation efforts will be significant, they may not be able to address all potential issues or take advantage of all opportunities within the first few years.
- Including a range of perspectives gives a fuller picture of the policy's potential impacts, from those who see no change to those who may experience significant impacts due to changes in their local environment or industry.
Simulated Interviews
Retail Store Manager (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the conservation areas are a good idea. They'll help preserve nature for my kids.
- I'm a bit concerned it might limit access to some of my favorite hiking spots.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Rancher (Gila Bend, AZ)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could restrict my land usage, which worries me.
- Preserving the land is important, but it shouldn't affect local businesses too much.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Environmental Scientist (Tucson, AZ)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a step in the right direction for environmental conservation.
- I believe it will create more awareness about preserving nature.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Tourism Developer (San Diego, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy will likely boost eco-tourism, which can be a boon for the industry.
- We need to ensure sustainable practices are prioritized.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Elementary School Teacher (Yuma, AZ)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More conservation areas are beneficial for education and community engagement.
- It could inspire children to appreciate and protect nature.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Wildlife Photographer (Flagstaff, AZ)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Preserving these areas will ensure they're there for future generations to capture.
- We need more regulations to prevent disturbances in these zones.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Tech Entrepreneur (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It could create new avenues for eco-friendly business models.
- Policies like these often stimulate innovation and growth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Student (Maricopa, AZ)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act is progressive and can serve as a model for other states.
- I hope it increases research funding opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Construction Worker (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might slow down construction jobs temporarily, but might open up new opportunities too.
- Long-term benefits might include more stable projects focused on eco-development.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired (Scottsdale, AZ)
Age: 64 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm excited to visit these new conservation areas.
- It means a lot to see Arizona leading in environmental conservation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $30000000)
Year 2: $18000000 (Low: $14000000, High: $25000000)
Year 3: $17000000 (Low: $13000000, High: $23000000)
Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $20000000)
Year 10: $12000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $16000000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)
Key Considerations
- The impact on local economies, particularly those currently reliant on commercial land use, should be assessed.
- Investment in infrastructure to manage increased tourism is essential to mitigate environmental impacts.
- Coordination with local, state, and federal entities is crucial for successful implementation and management of these areas.