noharleyyet
Well-known member
Yep, disrespectful......to pigs.
The Monuments Men
- Thread starter Ben Lamb
- Start date
Yep, disrespectful......to pigs.
JWP58
Banned
So what will happen to the 3.2 million acres? Sold to the oil companies or Wilkes? Or will those 3.2 million acres continue to be public land under a different designation?
Or does it not matter they will continue to be public land? Does it only matter they won't be classified as a national monument?
You know I wondered what Zinke did today to ruin everything, come over to hunttalk and I wonder no more......
Or does it not matter they will continue to be public land? Does it only matter they won't be classified as a national monument?
You know I wondered what Zinke did today to ruin everything, come over to hunttalk and I wonder no more......
Last edited:
It's still speculative until action is taken, but the memo seems to prioritize oil, gas, mining, logging and grazing on the 10 monuments, while rescinding parts of 4. If that is enacted, then it would be still public, but with little to no guarantees for wildlife or recreational values as those values have been cast aside already, or in the case of the Sage Grouse plans, are expected to be soon.
one ate E grain
Active member
I would suggest actually reading Zinke's memorandum. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4052225-Interior-Secretary-Ryan-Zinke-s-Report-to-the.html its not that long and the quality of the writing is ok. I can tell not many did a careful read as he specifically addresses the issue of the 98% positive comments in his memorandum.
The Wapo is a good newspaper, don't get me wrong, but with such a short original source it's just as easy read it yourself rather than the interpretation of some reporter from DC who might or might not have read it as carefully as you would.
The Wapo is a good newspaper, don't get me wrong, but with such a short original source it's just as easy read it yourself rather than the interpretation of some reporter from DC who might or might not have read it as carefully as you would.
Easy. That is VERY rarely true.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
Your posts have the consistent flavor of taking a bite of a shit sandwich. Are you always a positive problem solver?
Thanks for posting that. I grabbed the best of the early articles I saw.
My take is that it shows a remarkably uninformed view of the act and what it was originally supposed to do. Almost like a wiki entry in some places, with the false narrative that these lands should only be protected if they have cultural antiquities. That was never the case, as the Grand Canyon NM designation shows.
It's also his justification to remove protections in favor of expedited drilling & mining as outlined in the energy SO the Secretary signed earlier in the year.
If you, through the proclamation, enable the very activities that denude the landscape and the cultural aspects of their value, then you are simply denuding the status, and offering protection in name only.
And honestly, allowing commercial fishing in the marine monuments, especially in light of the value for fisheries those places hold, is incredibly short sighted and ignores collapsing fish stocks across the globe, and certainly within the areas these monuments provide a nursery for.
JWP58
Banned
About as much as the Zinke bitchers, thanks for noticing and taking the time to express your opinion.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
Maybe you could respond with thoughtful dialogue instead of bitching about the folks who don't like Zinke, or rather are willing to call him out? Your posts on Rokslide have had the same tone, someone posts an article and you respond with your typical "full of could, would, yada yada". Just because people have their eyes wide open doesn't mean they are necessarily chicken littles.
Carry on.
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
I believe it definitely makes that 3.2 more likely to be sold in the future.
Public land transfer Advocates are always saying things like we're not going to sell/transfer national parks or the National Monument. So step one is to minimize the size of these politically untouchable spots effectively opening them up to future development, sale or transfer.
The portion that irks me, the National Monument issue is becoming combined with the Public Lands issue by those protective of our public lands AND by those who see Feds transfer to States. It will collide and when it does, we will see to whom the spoils go.
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right... here I am stuck in the middle with you. Many of us Public Hunters and Anglers Want our lands to stay in public hands. Many of us also believe the Antiquities Act has become a partisan hack toy and we would like to see some order restored.
The problem, and this is where I disagree with Randy, et al, it is a politically charged pissing match! The two sides are declaring, "If you’re in support of anything other than our thoughts, then you ARE supporting their thoughts." And, yep... blood in the water - Political bodies are ere, shark fins and all. This IS political.
Bah, I want Fed lands to stay in our hands. I want Americans back to supporting our American children within, at one time, employed logging families. I want integrity brought back to the reason Congress passed the Antiquities Act. But, wait - there's more... (parody drum roll) But then hey... it's just an internet forum, right???
Not viewing any below as standing on one side or another, rather a post inclusive of some objectivity.
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right... here I am stuck in the middle with you. Many of us Public Hunters and Anglers Want our lands to stay in public hands. Many of us also believe the Antiquities Act has become a partisan hack toy and we would like to see some order restored.
The problem, and this is where I disagree with Randy, et al, it is a politically charged pissing match! The two sides are declaring, "If you’re in support of anything other than our thoughts, then you ARE supporting their thoughts." And, yep... blood in the water - Political bodies are ere, shark fins and all. This IS political.
Bah, I want Fed lands to stay in our hands. I want Americans back to supporting our American children within, at one time, employed logging families. I want integrity brought back to the reason Congress passed the Antiquities Act. But, wait - there's more... (parody drum roll) But then hey... it's just an internet forum, right???
Not viewing any below as standing on one side or another, rather a post inclusive of some objectivity.
Jabber, I don't doubt that this number is close to correct. Think of it: when something "good" happens you don't call and write..... when something that you are "opposed" to happens then people call and write. As stated previously... when did 98% of America agree on anything
good luck to all
the dog
JWP58
Banned
Right back at you
JWP58
Banned
Well in that case, let's just advocate for all public land to be titled national monuments. Why not, they can only be positive, and can be made so by the stroke of a pen. Let's get this going....rally the lobbyists!!!
Ranches are wilderness, everything else is national monuments. 360 win.
LopeHunter
Well-known member
I used to deal with government agencies that often would ask for public input including town meetings where you sign up and get 3 minutes. I did not always know the people making the decision after gathering all the public input but those times I did then decision was locked in before the first letter, email or speaker spoke. The sign-up sheets would be filled with favorable friends of the agency who got access before the doors opened for the town meeting so if you were first to the sheet you were #20 or so to speak and often "due to time limitations, the event will end in 1 hour" of which maybe 20 minutes was set aside for comments. Doing the math, zero public input was going to occur. This is not something new nor limited to R or D but is prone to happen anytime a powerful, glacial bureaucracy wants to rig the game. Sure, they asked for public input but even with a landslide of comments opposing the reclassification the process most likely reserved 90% of the decision weighting to be on local and expert input which were hand-picked to be yes-men that know that if they do not fall in line then no future grants or contracts. Is no accident that the Stimulus Spending Bill was heavily skewed to D communities by a D President. No surprise the local prison was put in the community that voted most heavily against the Governor during re-election even when a rural community was begging for the jobs a prison would provide. Not much can be done at the ballot box.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
I've also seen planned actions change due to public input.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
I'm struggling to find what positive aspect you bring to this forum. I certainly hope you don't act like this when you're on duty.
JWP58
Banned
Always.
My first post was a legitimate question regarding the actual ownership status of property removed from national monuments, and a joke about darth Zinke.
You chose to get the red ass and call me out with your shit sandwich comment.
Get over yourself.
Last edited:
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
This +1
Similar threads
