Bush Gang Itching to Loot National Parks

[Tim Seaver]

The coalition cited these examples of what the rules would bring:

• The use of snowmobiles would be radically expanded at Yellowstone and other national parks, allowing them to travel over any paved road in winter.
• Grazing and mining would be elevated to "park purposes," thus ensuring their continuation.
• The use of jet skis, ORVs, dirt bikes and other mechanized vehicles would be permitted on a virtually unrestricted basis.
• Tourist flights would increase, impacting the natural peace and quiet at parks.
• Rangers would be forced to kill bears at parks like Yellowstone if they damaged private property.

Pretty mind boggling.
More information at www.npsretirees.org/

[Skeemer]

Rain Man replied to my earlier post:
What I see--> you've bought into the Republican, Chamber of Commerce, and insurance industry rhertoric and lies, lock, stock, and barrel.

No, it is more what I've personally observed...in many cases first hand. Ford (UAW) is closing its Lorain Assembly plant at the end of the year...where they once built the T-bird and vans and provided thousands of jobs and much of the area's economy.

My former employer, Delphi (UAW) in Sandusky OH is on the verge of bankruptcy.

Honda (non-union) is celebrating its 25th anniversary in Ohio where it has created over 16,000 jobs.

I can tell give you numerous examples of the union protecting the poor worker. BTW, they get a cost of living allowance quarterly so they're not too worried about rising gas prices.

On the lawyer side, I backed into a person in a parking lot doing no damage to my vehicle (no lie) and smashing his headlight. He immediately hires a lawyer who sends him to a doctor and starts a lawsuit..claiming serious injury.

A person in Sandusky drove around the down gates at a two track railroad crossing...another train (blocked by one sitting there) was coming and smashed into the car killing the occupant. They sued the RR and won a big lawsuit...even though the guy was breaking the law. I'm not making this up.

Lawyers here are on TV here everyday pleading with you to bring them your injuries...they make it sound like by doing so you've hit the lottery.

And who can forget the old lady who spilled hot coffee on herself and won the lawsuit.

I realize that there are many details involved in the above, but I haven't bought into anything "lock stock and barrel." I think it is you who have been bambuzzled, but like you said we can't all agree. I do believe Bush is a disgrace when it comes to the environment and our parks.

I just got through hiking the Colorado Trail which tries to be everything to everybody. The cattle ranchers have contaminated the trail and water sources most of the way. I am glad I hiked it...made me appreciate the AT being a "footpath only." If the changes implied in this thread take effect, I fear we will all be sorry.

[Sly]

I just got through hiking the Colorado Trail which tries to be everything to everybody. The cattle ranchers have contaminated the trail and water sources most of the way.

**** like this really pizzes me off too. You'd think that they'd at least be made to protect and fence off the source as they do in a few other areas.

Nothing worse than stepping over cow**** to get your water.

[Lone Wolf]

Seems wookie is gay. He's wantin me to bend over.

[Tha Wookie]

Seems wookie is gay. He's wantin me to bend over.

No, but Bush would be more than obliged.

You asked for it.

[Skyline]

I want to hear what the people on this site who voted for Bush think about this.

I warned this pre-election, and all I got was grief about what a "strong leader" he is.

So, are you accountable?

Lotsa luck getting anyone who voted for Shrub to SERIOUSLY defend this attempt to destroy our national parks. They will do what conservatives always do--change the subject, deflect criticism, demonize their opponents.

How many neo-cons raised their hands in the early '80s in support of the hideous policies of Reagan and James Watt re: the National Park Service? No--when questioned, they talked all around it, pointed fingers about totally unrelated topics, you get the picture.

"NASCAR Dads," a key Shrub constituency, gets its jollies playing with toys that make loud noises, waste energy, and spew pollution. The companies that make those toys are big GOP contributors. How could we expect any other position by this Administration?

[dougmeredith]

They will do what conservatives always do--change the subject, deflect criticism, demonize their opponents.

Don't you just hate that? Better to do what liberals do: steal money from people and give it to some lazy jerk who doesn't want to work.

Doug

[Sly]

Lotsa luck getting anyone who voted for Shrub to SERIOUSLY defend this attempt to destroy our national parks. They will do what conservatives always do--change the subject, deflect criticism, demonize their opponents.

Why shouldn't some fat slob, with more money than brains, get to tear up the trail with his ATV in order to get to the backcountry.

You wanna go fishing, or chill in the water? Not in our pristine lake, we got some jet-skiing to do.

Buffalo! We run over buffalo for breakfast, says the snowmobiler.

Just think of the resupply opportunities? Which Bushie on WB will be the 1st to thru-ride the AT?

[Skyline]

Don't you just hate that? Better to do what liberals do: steal money from people and give it to some lazy jerk who doesn't want to work.

Doug

Exactly. Subject changed. Criticism deflected. Didn't even take an hour.

Now, can you speak to the evidence that the Shrubbies have detailed plans on the front burner to destroy the places we all purportedly love? And if you happened to have voted for Bush/Cheney, how does it make you feel?

[Skyline]

Lest anyone try to claim this is a fabrication of the New York Times editorial board:

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/arti...90006&cid=1291

http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0826-08.htm

http://www.wilderness.org/NewsRoom/S...t/20050826.cfm

http://insidebayarea.com/news/ci_2975430

http://64.224.202.104/psapp/view_art.asp?PEB_ART_ID=410

[Tha Wookie]

Lotsa luck getting anyone who voted for Shrub to SERIOUSLY defend this attempt to destroy our national parks. They will do what conservatives always do--change the subject, deflect criticism, demonize their opponents.

I would be careful about blanketing all Bush voters in the same conservative stupor. All kinds of folks were fooled into voting for the Bush Puppet -not just your average-six-tabloid-a-day conservative pawn.

Nor would I want anyone blanketing me under the liberal label, which fails pitifully to define me. Both of those labels are from the same master: divide and conquer!

Read Skeemers first post in this thread. He admits regret voting for Bush. Give everyone else a chance to revisit our pre-november disussions so they can reevalaute the "strong leadership" of Bush.

Then let them take actions to stop Bush's assault on our country.

[Jaybird]

Whack and stack the elk and buffalo. What a barbecue!

BUFFALO BURGERS, ELK STEAKS....m-m-m-m-m-m-m-GOOD!

BUSH taking our NATIONAL PARKS.....m-m-m-m-m-m-m-BADDDDDDDDDDD!

[dougmeredith]

On a more serious note (not really related to the question in the original post, but perhaps more hiking-related) I would hate to see National Parks shrink, either here in Canada or in the US. However I don't really like hiking in National Parks. Too many rules. Also, in Canada at least, it feels like Parks Canada views the parks as their possession that they are gifting me some use of. I take the view that these parks belong to the people, and they are simply those who we employ to manage them for us.

Doug

[MOWGLI]

Lest anyone try to claim this is a fabrication of the New York Times editorial board....

I still say the French are to blame. But perhaps the Germans had a hand in it too. Damn Europeans. Always speaking languages other than English. What's wrong with them?

[tlbj6142]

Exactly. Subject changed. Criticism deflected. Didn't even take an hour.

Everyone does that. Its the easiest way to "win" an agrument.

Now, can you speak to the evidence that the Shrubbies have detailed plans on the front burner to destroy the places we all purportedly love? And if you happened to have voted for Bush/Cheney, how does it make you feel?

It pisses me off, just like when Cliton (whom I didn't vote for) did stuff I didn't like. Some of you folks think that if you vote for a person you are endorsing all of their polices. That just isn't true. Each canidate has their Pros and Cons. I seriously doubt everyone is happy with every decission their candidates makes. Its just not possible.

[dougmeredith]

Some of you folks think that if you vote for a person you are endorsing all of their polices. That just isn't true. Each canidate has their Pros and Cons. I seriously doubt everyone is happy with every decission their candidates makes. Its just not possible.

You mean there is more than one issue? Don't let the secret out here. Most don't realize it.

Doug

[Tim Seaver]

Some of you folks think that if you vote for a person you are endorsing all of their polices. That just isn't true.

Exactly..which is why this is a perfect opportunity for people, regardless of your political leanings, to speak out against Bush's destructive plan for our National Parks. It's sad to think that party loyalty could trump the need to preserve our parks for future generations.

Please let our officials know how you feel, in no uncertain terms. Letters will probably carry more weight than email, but every little bit helps:

Gale Norton, Secretary of the Interior
[email protected]
U.S. Department of the Interior
1849 C Street, N.W
Washington, D.C. 20240 Fran P. Mainella, Director, National Park Service

[email protected]
U.S. Department of the Interior
National Park Service
1849 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20240
(202) 208-4621

[Tha Wookie]

Thanks, I just sent two letters. Anyone, feel free to copy and paste mine below, and make changes as you see fit.

Mrs. Norton,

Please stop the gutting of the national park ideals and scientific practices before it goes into effect in the proposed NPS restructuring. Wilderness Areas and National Parks should have NO oil drilling, cell towers, logging, mining, OHV riding, grazing, or any facility or technology that does not directly deal with recreation provision, research, or direct land management.

Although some impacts these activities might have on natural protected lands are technically reversible through long-term natural processes and costly rehabilitation, they do not come without a high ecological cost for our current and future generations.

Please keep the glutinous attitude of our country, and the private interests of the current Administration out of our National Parks and wilderness areas. Leave us some place that may exist in peace and natural harmony.

Sincerely,

Nate Olive
Nate Olive, M.A.
Recreation Ecologist/Trail Specialist
Registered Federal Research Contractor
Winterville, GA 30683
www.thawookie.com

[Jack Tarlin]

Gee, thanx for yet another "six tabloids a day" crack, Wook. You're turning into quite the little cheapshot artist, but your material is getting kinda lame. Cantcha think of ANYTHING original, ever?

For the record, as I've already stated, one of the papers I read every day is the New York Times, the same august and esteemed publication that was cited at the start of this thread. Sorry you have a problem with it.

Are you saying the Times is a tabloid, Wook?

Oh, and thanks for using the perjorative term "puppet" yet again; I understand that like a child who has learned a new nasty word, you feel the overwhelming need to bleat this insult every few hours in absence of anything new to say; thanks for not letting us down by missing a day. God forbid you should surprise us with something new and different. The wit and incisiveness displayed in your repeated and tired use of the same childish epithets really adds to your postings here, but you really might wanna get some new lines one of these days; your constant use of the same ones is really getting kind of boring.

[Tim Seaver]

Any thoughts on the Hoffman re-write, Jack?