National Monuments Comment Period

[WhereStream]

Originally Posted by Ted S.

Baxter State Park in Maine is an example of exceptional management on a state level. In fact I think Mount Kitahdin is better managed then what I have seen in several National Parks. States can do a good job. Let's hope for the best and be positive.

Baxter State Park has an unusual, perhaps unique, status as a park. The land, most of which was in the hands of Great Northern, the paper company, was purchased privately by a former governor, who set it aside as a park and donated it to the State of Maine ... with provisions for its use.

In those provisions, he made it clear he wanted the land to be left as close as possible to its natural state, while also allowing the people of Maine (and others, such as myself) to enjoy its beauty.

A good model, I think, for others of great privilege to follow. Certainly a good example of the value of protecting natural resources of exception beauty and merit. Let's hear it for Governor Percival Baxter.

Baxter, by the way, served as governor in the first half of the 1920s, a time when the Ku Klux Klan was in resurgence, with many thousands of members in many states across the country, including his own.

Baxter took a strident stand against the KKK, while other members of his political party in Maine embraced the racist, terrorist organization (he paid for this when he ran for Congress and was thwarted by KKK members and the Klan's political allies).

As I said, let's hear it for Governor Percival Baxter.

[Lumatic]

Originally Posted by avionstream

Millions of acres set aside, now reduced to only hundreds of thousands set aside. This affects such a small segment of the population that its hardly a national story. Another example of the media stirring things up.

I may never visit National Parks such as American Samoa, Denali, Dry Tortugas or Haleaka, but I am richer in knowing they are there.

[Moflash]

Its all about the Oil.

[Lumatic]

Grand Teton National Park comes to mind. I think most people see it as a gem in the NP System. even locals who benefit greatly from tourism, not always so. Initially it was vigorously opposed by locals including ranchers, after all Yellowstone is right up the road. John Rockefeller secretly bought up the majority of land to preserve it and then tried to donate it to the federal government (which initially would not take it) Even the locals now are glad it is a park.

There was a proposal to dam the Grand Canyon. Hech Hetchy, which many have said was comparable to Yosemite Valley was dammed and lost forever. There was a proposal to dam Yosemite. Glen Canyon's canyons and rock formations are also now below hundreds of feet of water. I am sure glad I had the chance to see Yosemite and Grand Canyon. It is my loss to never be able to see Hech Hetchy or Glen Canyon. It makes me sad they are lost forever and no one else will see them either.

I heard a statement on the news last night I hope is not true. The land in Grand Staircase and Bear's Ears will be sold to private interests, not managed by the state.

Attached are a couple of photos from Grand Staircase. By the way ranchers are allowed to graze their cattle within the monument.

[xrvr]

We are not talking about national parks, this is about monuments which dontneed hundreds of tnousands of acres.

[Lily&Me]

I suspect the Native American populations, whose ancestral grounds and ruins these monuments preserve from development, may differ with you on that, Jim.

Maggie

[PKI]

Vote!

[wkerfoot]

Many current national parks began as monuments, Death Valley and i believe all current Utah National Parks, the Grand Canyon 800,000 acres, Katmai originally over 1,000,000 acres now almost 2,800,000 acres.

Bill

Originally Posted by avionstream

We are not talking about national parks, this is about monuments which dontneed hundreds of tnousands of acres.

[Wconley]

Living in Washington state and remote from the lands and people affected, I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t know enough of the details regarding the designation, and now the rollback of these National Monument lands. So I appreciate the discussion regarding the merits both ways. I know where my inclination is (to protect the lands) so it’s all too easy to get tunnel vision. The more I learn, the better informed I am on these decisions. Thanks to those that have contributed their thoughts.

[youngpeck]

Yes, this is a complicated, important issue, and now, from this point on, far-reaching in all the various ways and means by which it will play out. None of us should rush to judge good or bad. There will be plenty of opportunity to do that in the coming months and years.

I would say that anyone who spends time in either of these special places will come away enriched and refreshed in many ways.

For starters:

https://www.nps.gov/history/archeolo...ties/about.htm

[Lily&Me]

No offense meant, but I can, and will, take a side on this and other emergent issues in this country.

We’re not being consulted, nor are our elected officials, but having things like this unilaterally reversed via Executive Order.

The process was flawed, in my opinion, and I believe a more democratic approach would have led to a different outcome.

Maggie

[WaLee]

What is done by executive order can be undone by executive order. The intial formation of the very large monument was done, according to statute, by executive order,

[Lily&Me]

I know that, but how much damage will first be done.

Maggie

[Lumatic]

Originally Posted by avionstream

We are not talking about national parks, this is about monuments which dontneed hundreds of tnousands of acres.

It is a fact that there has been a national review of National Monuments and their place and value in our society.

National Monuments can be but are not necessarily brick and mortar. The category was created by Teddy Roosevelt in 1906 under the Antiquities Act. The Antiquities Act defines a National Monument as having historic or scientific value. It places special emphasis on the preservation of Native American archaeological sites which were being destroyed by pot hunters.

As mentioned above many National Monuments went on to become National Parks. Ken Burns justly calls The National Park System "America's best idea" But, without Teddy Roosevelt and the Antiquities Act. the National Park System would never have become a world wide model for National Parks across the world.

National Parks are visited by tens of millions of American citizens every year, Along with millions of foreign tourists all of which ad to local jobs and economy,

As Teddy said about the Grand Canyon National Monument "Leave it as it is".

[Steamy1]

We have fallen heirs to the most glorious heritage a people ever received, and each one must do his part if we wish to show that the nation is worthy of its good fortune.

— Teddy Roosevelt

[Lumatic]

Originally Posted by PKI

Vote!

Too late. unfortunately we already did. Be careful what you ask for.

For now we don't have much left other than our opinions. So speak out!

[Steamy1]

Sourced from Patagonia's website:

There is Broad Public Support for Protecting Federal Public Lands


Over 2.7 million public comments poured in during the Department of the Interior’s 60-day comment period—a record-breaking response. More than 98 percent of those comments expressed support for maintaining or expanding national monuments.[1]

[1] Center for Western Priorities, July 2017

The Outdoor Industry Relies on Public Lands

Shutting down a national monument, or any major portion of a national monument, could have a devastating impact on local economies and the multibillion-dollar outdoor recreation economy that America’s public lands and waterways support.[2]

Public lands host 71 percent of climbers, 70 percent of hunters and 43 percent of paddlers in America, and they also contain nearly 200,000 miles of hiking trails and 13,000 miles of mountain biking trails.[3]

Outdoor recreation is among America’s largest industries, contributing 7.6 million jobs and $887 billion in annual consumer spending— far outpacing the jobs and spending generated by the oil and gas industry.[4]

[2] Headwaters Economics, August 2017

[3] ProtectOurPublicLand.org

[4] Outdoor Industry Association Economic Report, 2017

States Have Historically Sold Off Federal Lands


History shows that when the federal government grants, sells or otherwise gifts federal land to states, 70 percent of the land is sold to private interests, jeopardizing public access.[5]

States have different rules for land management, and private lands are often not accessible to the general public, meaning the transfer of federal lands to private hands could impact outdoor activity and access.[6

[5] Field and Stream, April 2017

[6] Backcountry Hunters and Anglers 2016 Report

[Len n Jeanne]

Most of the lands made into the Escalante and Bears Ears National Monuments were previously public lands-- managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and US Forest Service (Abajo Mtns.) Originally part of the federal government's public domain. With a sprinkling of state trust lands (the so-called school sections) and private lands. So far as I know, no private lands were taken for either National Monument. So it not quite accurate to describe the monument designation as a federal land grab.

What does change are special protections on those lands. A monument is focused on preservation. The BLM and USFS are mandated to manage minerals leasing, grazing permits, logging, recreation, as well as fish and wildlife. Generally arrangements can be made with local ranchers to grandfather in certain permits when a monument is established.

There is pressure within Utah for the state to sell its inholdings for private real estate development. Which is happening near Moab.

We've camped extensively in this area and in neighboring BLM lands. Ideally if the monuments are shrunk, the current land management agencies will push for more, rather than less stewardship on their land holdings.

I would encourage anyone intrigued by these monuments to visit. The BLM and USFS manage primitive campgrounds and trails in the area. Plus you can pretty well boondock anywhere you want not posted to the contrary. There is also a fun Airstream campground/"motel in the town of Escalante. http://www.shootingstar-rvresort.com/ Just "know before you go" the sensible precautions for desert boondocking and travel in remote areas.

Personally we would like to see less OHV (4-wheeler, quad bike) use of this area, because they do tend to chew up the back roads. But we feel there is room for them on designated trails.

We would also like to see the maximum areas sustained. With all due respect to the small populations of local people who think differently, the American public's tax dollars are currently supporting the BLM and USFS. Many of the recreationists in the Escalante/Bears Ears backcountry now are not the dreaded "coastal" people but are fellow Utahns from the Wasatch Front. Public lands were never intended as the private preserve of a few.

Protection of Native American antiquities is especially important. Once they're destroyed by vandals and pot-hunters, they're gone for good. Which is, sadly, happening now.

[Lumatic]

Originally Posted by Steamy1

Over 2.7 million public comments poured in during the Department of the Interior’s 60-day comment period—a record-breaking response. More than 98 percent of those comments expressed support for maintaining or expanding national monuments.

I assume the Department of the Interior was required to hold the comment period. So the Department of Interior ignored the public comments? Could the Interior Department have had made up their minds beforehand and the public comments were just a formality? Sounds more like a banana republic than a democracy.

[Mollysdad]

Originally Posted by Lumatic

Sounds more like a banana republic than a democracy.

We never had a democracy, we had a republic. We elect officials to do what's in the public interest, not what's in MY interest, necessarily. So you elected one administration who declared huge areas national monuments, and another who un-declared them.
I will say anyone who votes based on any one issue does a disservice to all. Unfortunately, it's getting harder and harder to find a candidate who thinks like I do on most things.
(and the ones who do get trampled by the wayside.)