Former national monuments shrunk by Trump to be opened for mining claims

This one from the Guardian is for all you Zinke water carriers who said removing the National Monument designations was no big deal - "only changed the land status". It is for the ones who were "shocked" that Patagonia put up a banner page saying the president stole your land.

Well, guess what, Zinke and the presidents actions have consequences and they are bad - period.

Sportsmen who defend Zinke, sportsmen who defend this administrations actions against OUR Public Lands are really kidding themselves about their own commitment to Public Lands.

You can not have it both ways.

You have to decide, what side will you be on? How committed are you really? Are you brave enough to challenge your own political beliefs to get on the right side of this Public Lands fight?

I hope you are brave enough.........

And now the article from the Guardian:

Presidential order reduced protections for land once part of Utah’s Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante monuments.

Trump downsized Bears Ears national monument with a December order.

Hundreds of thousands of acres of land that were part of two US national monuments shrunk by Donald Trump are being opened on Friday to mining claims for uranium and other minerals.

It is a symbolic step in a broader conflict over the fate of America’s public lands, on which Trump hopes to encourage greater access for extractive industries.

In December, Trump ordered that Bears Ears national monument and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monument, both in southern Utah and home to ancient Native American sites, spectacular landscapes and rare flora and fauna, be downsized by a total of 2m acres.

How Trump's cuts to public lands threaten future dinosaur discoveries.

His proclamation judged that large portions of the monuments were not unique or of particular scientific or historic interest, a point fiercely contested by environmentalists, Native American groups and scientists, who have brought five lawsuits.

Today is when “the Trump administration is no longer stopping itself from opening up those lands to development”, said Dan Hartinger, national monuments campaign director at the Wilderness Society.

A prospector for uranium, gold or other minerals would merely have to hammer poles in the ground or build rock piles demarcating the area they would like to claim, an archaic-seeming approach derived from an 1872 law. For oil and gas it is a lengthier process that, in theory, could see land auctioned off on EnergyNet, a website dubbed “the eBay for public lands”, later this year. Some of the excluded land is still protected under other regulations.

“There is no opening of extraction within the monument boundaries,” noted the interior department spokeswoman Heather Swift.

Grand Canyon at risk as Arizona officials ask Trump to end uranium mining ban.

Public land belongs to the American people, but private interests can obtain rights to graze, mine or drill on them. According to an estimate by the Center for Biological Diversity, about 800,000 acres of public land – a total larger than the state of Rhode Island – were leased for oil and gas drilling last year.

The prospect of a uranium rush in southern Utah seems unlikely, suggested Sarah Fields, founder of the local watchdog Uranium Watch, because “the price of uranium is so low”.
Energy Fuels Resources, which operates a uranium mill east of Bears Ears, told the Guardian it had no plans to mine anywhere on the former site of the monument.

Cheers,

Mark

Ye Shall Be Free To Roam.......

I just posted a thread here similar. Doesn't matter who posts, this is a travesty to our Public Lands.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...hrunk-by-trump-to-be-opened-for-mining-claims

Could the 1872 law be used anywhere?

Zach said:

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...hrunk-by-trump-to-be-opened-for-mining-claims

Could the 1872 law be used anywhere?

Click to expand...

That was one of my thoughts too. If i were looking for a nice 20 acre piece to claim, it would be on water. If i were hunting that country, i also would be looking for water. Hate to say it but some "watchdogs" dropped the ball here, many said it wouldn't happen and not to worry. I fear this is just a start, a huge nail in the coffin to being fenced and posted out of our once Public Lands.

The sky is falling... why wasn't there a big rush to mine those areas prior to monument status? Wasn't that long ago it was open to development. 3 years for half of it and 20ish for the other. That part of the US is not a hot bed for any sort of mineral development, now or in the foreseeable future.

Be a shame to waste a perfectly good spin on it though.

Bambistew said:

The sky is falling... why wasn't there a big rush to mine those areas prior to monument status? Wasn't that long ago it was open to development. 3 years for half of it and 20ish for the other. That part of the US is not a hot bed for any sort of mineral development, now or in the foreseeable future.

Be a shame to waste a perfectly good spin on it though.

Click to expand...

I suppose one could look at it that way but i know of mining claims here in my local that are hardly ever actually mined but used as second homes, to get away from town and be on their own piece of ground at extremely low cost. You get a family together and each member posting adjoining 20 acre chunks on the best habitat in a area,..a great hunting/fishing camp at the cost of Public Access.

I tend to fall more towards the pro-monument side of the spectrum but I agree these articles are way over dramatizing the state of things. They make it sound like the area was never open to development before....not true. Also not true that there is some horde of individuals or corporations looking to rush in to stake claims. Not sure what point the authors are trying to convey....the land reverted to its previous management status when the monuments were rolled back. No big secret or surprise there, and certainly nothing additional enacted by the administration above and beyond the rollback.

Not sure where your local area is uncle sage, but staking a mining claim conveys no surface rights to the claimants. They certainly would not be following the law if they are building second homes on them. The situation you describe doesn’t make sense....have you asked about it at your local BLM office? I would be curious what they said?

Hunting Wife said:

I tend to fall more towards the pro-monument side of the spectrum but I agree these articles are way over dramatizing the state of things. They make it sound like the area was never open to development before....not true. Also not true that there is some horde of individuals or corporations looking to rush in to stake claims. Not sure what point the authors are trying to convey....the land reverted to its previous management status when the monuments were rolled back. No big secret or surprise there, and certainly nothing additional enacted by the administration above and beyond the rollback.

Not sure where your local area is uncle sage, but staking a mining claim conveys no surface rights to the claimants. They certainly would not be following the law if they are building second homes on them. The situation you describe doesn’t make sense....have you asked about it at your local BLM office? I would be curious what they said?

Click to expand...

Hello, one of the main reasons that i joined this site is because of all the efforts here being done to protect our access to Public owned property. I believe that current and future administrations will sell our land and eventually severely restrict the current access and privileges that we now enjoy. I'll throw in with the gang here if you guys feel this latest move is not a major threat but there is little i fear more than our loss of access which i have much enjoyed most of my life and would like to see passed down to future generations.

I'm very near Lake Almanor which is up on the Mountains of a very beautiful portion of far North Eastern Calif. Our little highway 36 separates the top of the Sierra Range from that of the Cascade mountain Range and existing not far downstream below the Lake itself, the North Fork of the Feather River near Seneca has Gold bearing land and is mostly Claimed. Several of my friends have Claims on the River, they don't mine them often if at all. Mostly used to get away and host friends on weekends around old rusty equipment and their temporary trailers or shelters. These claim are/were heavily Posted with skull and crossbones signs. There are some that live down there full time.

I get a knee jerk reaction anytime i see or hear of our Government further opening up our Public lands for others to control. If i'm over reacting to this latest bit, i'll consider that good news and take this opportunity to give my Thanks to those here better informed and that also feel our heritage is worth protecting instead of allowing mass exploitation by political cronies in position to stuff their own pockets from what is not theirs to do so.