Bill Overview
Title: Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2022
Description: This bill creates a buffer zone around the Chaco Culture National Historic Park in New Mexico by prohibiting certain leases on federal land for the development of mineral resources or geothermal energy within the buffer zone. Nonproducing oil and gas leases in the buffer zone are terminated.
Sponsors: Sen. Lujan, Ben Ray [D-NM]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in and around Chaco Culture National Historic Park
Estimated Size: 8000
- The Chaco Culture National Historic Park is located in New Mexico, USA, and is of significant cultural importance to Native American tribes particularly the Pueblo peoples.
- The bill will impact entities involved in or planning to engage in mineral resources or geothermal energy development in the Chaco buffer zone due to lease prohibitions or terminations.
- Local communities including Native Americans who have cultural and historical ties to the land will be impacted by the preservation efforts of this bill.
- The bill will impact environmental organizations and advocates working towards preserving historic lands and reducing fossil fuel exploration.
- The number of people directly depending on the oil, gas, and geothermal sectors in and around the Chaco buffer zone may face economic impacts.
- Tourism might be positively affected as the preservation of the Chaco Culture buffer zone maintains and enhances the cultural and historical significance of the area.
Reasoning
- The policy directly affects a relatively small population segment, primarily involving Native American tribes, the oil and gas industry, landowners, and environmental advocates within or closely linked to the Chaco Culture National Historic Park area.
- The budget constraints suggest a limited scale for financial initiatives, likely focusing on education, litigation, and enforcement of the buffer zone, as well as possibly subsidies or transition programs for affected industries and communities.
- Many of the population affected are concentrated in the New Mexico region, and the cultural preservation aspect is significant, suggesting a focus on maintaining cultural heritage.
- Economic impacts may include shifts from energy development to tourism or conservation opportunities, which may affect local economies.
- There's a need to balance economic repercussions for industry workers and benefits in cultural heritage and environmental conservation.
Simulated Interviews
Tribal Liaison (Farmington, NM)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a positive step in preserving our historical lands.
- I am concerned about potential job losses for my community.
- I believe it will increase public awareness about our cultural heritage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Oil and Gas Worker (Gallup, NM)
Age: 51 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about job losses due to the termination of leases.
- The policy could have been more balanced with job protection measures.
- It's important, though, to preserve cultural sites.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 4 |
Environmental Advocate (Albuquerque, NM)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a vital victory for environmental conservation and heritage preservation.
- I believe it will set a precedent for further protection acts.
- It's crucial to consider economic transitions for affected workers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 7 |
Tourism Operator (Santa Fe, NM)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The preservation act is likely to increase tourism.
- I'm hopeful it will enrich the cultural narrative for tourists.
- There might be initial economic disruptions, but long-term gains are expected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Energy Executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy restricts new opportunities, but adaptational change is necessary.
- We expected shifts like these and are adjusting our business strategies accordingly.
- It's critical to liaise with local communities for sustainable solutions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Cultural Historian (Window Rock, AZ)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's encouraging to see legislative steps towards protecting sacred sites.
- This could foster educational opportunities both for locals and tourists.
- Sustaining the cultural landscape is invaluable for future generations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Investor (New York, NY)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy restricts some investment opportunities in geothermal developments.
- We hope for future alternative programs or incentives for renewables.
- Understanding local cultural significance is important for projects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Student (Santa Ana Pueblo, NM)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am excited about what this policy means for my studies and future work.
- There's genuine concern over economic impacts for workers in the area.
- I hope to contribute to sustainable development solutions.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Geologist (Los Alamos, NM)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy limits some research initiatives, but promotes conservation.
- It's essential to balance resource management with preservation.
- This legislation might open new areas of study in sustainable resource use.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Ranger (Chaco Canyon, NM)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act will significantly aid in the preservation efforts we strive for daily.
- It helps us engage more with visitors about cultural importance.
- The change might demand adjustments in park logistics and staffing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $73000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $76000000)
Year 5: $59000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $82000000)
Year 10: $71000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $99000000)
Year 100: $180000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $240000000)
Key Considerations
- Legal challenges and compensations related to terminating leases could arise, influencing costs.
- Price fluctuations in the oil and gas markets may affect the economic impact of the policy.
- The effectiveness of the policy in enhancing tourism and preserving cultural heritage should be regularly assessed.