National Monuments

As much as I appreciate public land and want to see these places preserved, I have to agree with Trump that taking large portions of land away from state control is an inappropriate use of federal power. I feel that the Utah people deserve the right to decide the fate of their land, but at the same time I don’t want to see these places destroyed. Very conflicted.

Kind of chaffy, but no matter what the governor claims a majority of us in Utah wanted to see Bears Ears protected. And this is not a land grab as most of the land involved is federal land and all citizens should have a say in its fate. If you have read the recent article in the Washington Post it is worth remembering that Orrin Hatch, along with a majority of Utah politicians, seeks to take control of all federal lands within our borders and at the state level there are yearly calls for legal action to do so.

From what I understand most of the land in the West ended up in Federal hands in the first place because the states were unable/unwilling to pay for the management of those lands and wanted the Feds to take the land off their hands.

This fact has largely been forgotten in the recent past (20-25 years) more than a hundred years after the states ceded the land to the Feds.

I’m happy to be corrected by those that may have a better knowledge/understanding of this history.

Malheur was declared by Teddy Roosevelt

It seems like they have a good compromise between different users – wildlife, recreation, hunters, ranchers, native Americans, timber,…  Is there any mining in the area?

Turning it over to locals and just using it for ranchers and mining doesn’t seem like a good solution

The decision does not solely belong to current Utah residents. Belongs to all of us.

The simplest concepts…

I could be incorrect but all of the Bears Ears land is and was federal, nothing taken from private or state lands.  As with almost all new monuments, the only thing “taken away” is mineral exploration (oil, gas, coal, uranium).  All other uses including grazing continues.  The sage brush rebellion/local/states rights folks just don’t want to be told what to do with something they have no ownership rights to other than being US citizens.

I have lived and worked in that area but yes Chaffy

these monuments are not taking anything away from the states that they didn’t already give away. the only way for a state like utah to afford administering all of their public land without federal help is to drill, mine, frack, and otherwise exploit it. which, of course, is why they want it. there is short term oil profit to be made. at which point no bpl lords and ladies will be visiting it with their low volume pack and torso length pad ever again…

There was a great article in a recent Field & Stream* about the movement to cede federal lands to the states… and how misguided it is.  Various powerful special interests try to present it as a grassroots movement, but you can always trace the money back to wealthy industrialists.  The Sagebrush Rebels are… dupes.  If they succeed they certainly will not be getting any of those lands.  Which is what they think.  They’re already misguided enough to be working against their own interests.  The grazing fees for BLM land are so incredibly far below market rate that western ranchers qualify as the biggest federal welfare recipients in the country!  What the hell are they complaining about?

*Frankly, the patchouli-smelling tree-huggers and the pro-guns hunters are natural allies on this issue, and they need to hold their metaphorical noses and start working together.  I mean Jesus Christ- Grand Staircase-Escalante?!?

These states land folks always conveniently forget that ALL of this land was originally federal land, purchased by the US Government in the Louisiana Purchase.

Good points here. Thank you all for posting them.

“Various powerful special interests try to present it as a grassroots movement, but you can always trace the money back to wealthy industrialists.  The Sagebrush Rebels are… dupes.”

Hmmm…  I wonder how applicable this is to other “movements”.

Usually the truth is some combination

These states land folks always conveniently forget that ALL of this land was originally federal land, purchased by the US Government in the Louisiana Purchase.

Haha.  no.  Go back and study your history.  Utah has nothing to do with the Louisiana Purchase.  Nor does CA, AZ, ID, NV, NM…..

I understand the states’ frustration.  The power in the federal government lies in the populous states.  Much of the west is public.  Less room to grow.  Less power in DC.  They can get money to buy influence by using the lands in their state, but everybody else tells them no.  Then again, I like public lands and free access.  It is complicated.

“Haha.  no.  Go back and study your history.  Utah has nothing to do with the Louisiana Purchase.  Nor does CA, AZ, ID, NV, NM…..”

True, THOSE particular lands came to the Federal Government by way of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.  Same principle applies though, and also to lands acquired by the Gadsden Purchase.

In fact, when Brigham Young and the Mormon pioneers came down Emigration canyon and he uttered his famous phrase “this is the place” while looking out over Salt Lake valley, it was still technically part of Mexico.

I hope the Federal courts disallow ANY change in the boundaries of our existing National Monuments. We  in southern Nevada are concerned about the newest NM, Gold Butte. Trump is on a slippery slope toward yet another Federal court reversal of his edicts.

For more disappointing news on the environmental front look what his pick for EPA administrator did. Today they took down the EPA’s info on Climate Change and will put up new information (read “Alternative Facts”) “…to better reflect the current administrations views.”

man, the ink had barely dried on Obama’s expansion of our monument in S Oregon in January…& the cheetos-dust man has earmarked it for review. I didnt think public lands mismanagement could get any worse than bush-cheney.

i guess the nannies working for Plutocrats don’t read The Lorax to the little ones at bedtime?

Yeah, once the name calling starts its time for chaff  : (

I am not sure but this may have been part of it but it adds to the discussion and has been part of a pattern by other administrations in other western states…

http://www.wnd.com/1998/09/3343/

If anyone has a legitimate beef it would be the native Americans.  BTW, they won’t even be able to use the land as they think they will – no matter which outcome.

It wasn’t a land grab then and it isn’t a land grab now. The only land grab going on around these parts is the one that the Utah legislature is constantly planning to do to all federal lands within our borders, with the likely exception of the National Parks. The enhanced protection that the existing federal lands comprising Bears Ears receive from the National Monument designation puts 1,351,849 acres further out of their grasp. The locals that bemoan its loss never owned it and the local Native Americans were instrumental in seeing it protected.

I hope the Federal courts disallow ANY change in the boundaries of our existing National Monuments.

THAT will be a good test of how pure a “textualist” is Justice Gorsuch.  The Antiquities contains no language providing for revoking National Monument status.

Dave Chenault’s blog post Preserving the preserver .

The State of California will fight to keep our National Monuments intact, with our Attorneys General confident we can win in court, if Trump thinks he can shrink or dissolve them.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-california-monuments-20170608-story.html

For what it’s worth it looks like Katahdin Woods and Waters will remain.

http://www.pressherald.com/2017/06/14/zinke-impressed-by-katahdin-woods-and-waters-national-monument/

This was private land that was gifted to the federal government with the requirement that it’s managed by the Feds so I am not sure why it was even in question. I wouldn’t expect the Feds to reprivitize it and give it back to the estate.

It’s already having an impact on the local economy. I grew up near Caratunk and Pleasant Pond, which hopefully some of you AT alum will remember fondly.

This park however is on the eastern side of the 100 mile wilderness and includes the headwaters of the Penobscot. But still the attention it has gotten has been good for the economy. Mark Zuckerberg just vistedin kind of a high profile tour.

And in one of the weirder transactions, a non profit just bought the entire town of Monson. http://bangordailynews.com/2017/05/25/business/a-wealthy-group-bought-the-heart-of-a-poor-maine-town-to-build-an-artist-colony/

Which I guess isn’t all that different than the AMC buying up Little Lyford and Gorman Chairback.

The North Woods of Maine is a special place. It’s starting to get a good thing going now. Obviously with people come other problems…but there is plenty of room for every one. I would hate to see these economic gains (however modest) based not in the old industries of clear cutting but in the new industries of sharing our magnificent natural beauty, rolled back.

We had something like this here in Oz recently. A Council wanted to sell off a Public Hall to developers because it was in need of expensive repairs. They were doing fine until someone pointed out that the Council did not have the title to the hall. It had started as private property that had been gifted to the public with the Council as Trustees for the management. The Council had accepted the Trust (many years ago), and the Trust Deed did NOT permit sale. There was a bit of harrumphing from the Council over this, but the local residents held firm. They won.

Cheers