Legislative proposals this session that would reduce protection for Minnesota's environment and slow conservation in the state might, if approved, pose significant costs beyond their adverse effects on the state's woods, waters, fields, fish and wildlife.
Put another way: Outdoors activities in Minnesota not only represent pastimes, and passions, for most people who live here, they're big business.
And every time legislation is passed that cuts protections of the state's environment or reduces opportunities Minnesotans have to pursue their interests in fishing, hunting, hiking, biking, paddling and otherwise enjoying themselves outdoors, Minnesota, and Minnesotans, lose money.
Potentially a lot. Consider what has happened in Utah.
For the past 20 years, summer and winter outdoors industry trade shows have been held in Salt Lake City, generating more than $45 million in annual economic activity.
But that tidy bit of business is about to end, apparently, because leaders in outdoors manufacturing and retailing businesses are fed up with environment and outdoor recreation policies the Utah legislature, and that state's congressional delegation, have proposed and/or enacted.
The conflict came to a head last month when leaders of the Outdoor Industry Association (OIA) — which represents more than 1,200 businesses nationally, including all the big names — held a conference call with Utah Gov. Gary Herbert.
Intent of the call was to "achieve a common understanding of the value Americans place on our public lands and our right to access those lands for recreation," the outdoors group said.