Public comment period on national monuments
A certain politician has launched an unprecedented attack on our national monuments, and the public comment period is open.
http://blog.gossamergear.com/public-...onument-review
"An executive order passed by the Trump Administration on April 26 ...."
I'm sorry, but executive orders are "issued" (by a single politician) not "passed" (as in, by multiple branches of government).
GG should do better.
[I]ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: ... Defile not therefore the land which ye shall inhabit....[/I]. Numbers 35
[url]www.MeetUp.com/NashvilleBackpacker[/url]
.
Please explain how "review" becomes "unprecedented attack".
Cite evidence, please, not personal opinions.
So, NO other president has "reviewed" the Antiquities Act before? Definition "unprecedented": "never done or known before ".
Old Hiker
AT Hike 2012 - 497 Miles of 2184
AT Thru Hiker - 29 FEB - 03 OCT 2016 2189.1 miles
Just because my teeth are showing, does NOT mean I'm smiling.
Hányszor lennél inkább máshol?
this has nothing to do with the AT
The OP posted a link that discusses the order to "review any national monument designated via the Antiquities Act since January 1, 1996, that spans at least 100,000 acres. 22 land-based monuments and five marine monuments are under review and now is the time to comment and make your voice heard" and essentially urged those on this forum to share their comments.
I respect very much the opinion of Rain Man, Old hiker and Lone Wolf and you guys have all helped me many times but I think your comments are not very helpful here.
1. Rain Man: It's true that executive orders are issued and not passed. What is this significance of this statement? Should we not comment on this executive order because Gossamer Gear said "passed" and not "issued"? If a person told you something insightful would you not listen to them because their shoe was untied? Seems weird to me.
2. Old Hiker, how about you cite some evidence of other presidents reviewing national monuments in this fashion before? Should we not be concerned yet since they haven't actually acted to rescind or partially rescind a National Monument designation yet? Do you not understand the plan of those that want the review? It's not like it's some secret. The review isn't to come up with a plan on how to protect more open space, is it? I think the point of the OP was there is a public comment period and now is the time to share your comments if you have any.
3. Lone Wolf. It's true that this has nothing to do with the AT but this website isn't just limited to the AT despite the name. There are subforms on all different trails and open spaces.
Always strikes me as a little odd that there is a subset of people on whiteblaze who can see the benefits of having open space and enjoy getting out into the wilderness but criticize someone for merely saying hey consider voicing your concerns to protect those open spaces.
I would actually be interested in hearing more from all 3 of you about this. As I said at the start of my post I respect your viewpoints and I enjoy hearing different points of view and I'm open to changing my mind if I'm all wrong about this. I bet we'll agree on more then you think.
Regardless, I suggest everyone on whiteblaze considers reading the OP's link and making your voices heard. Thank you OP for sharing.
AT Flip Flop (HF to ME, HF to GA) Thru Hike 2023; LT End-to-Ender 2017; NH 48/48 2015-2021; 21 of 159usForests.com
Somers515---Thanks for the link and the head's up. All Whiteblazers should be concerned with keeping as much land as possible protected and be concerned with keeping the "beautiful" in America the Beautiful, or what's left of it.
There are probably hundreds of websites and forums devoted to road building and logging and sprawl and off-road sport vehicles and oil/fracking resource development---but Whiteblaze is not one of them. I assume all WBers want to keep what's left of our outdoors intact and to see more wilderness and less roads. Stupid assumption probably on my part.
In other words, I see the importance of this thread and the importance of discussing any threats to our trails and to the great outdoors.
Remember, Whiteblaze is a Community of Appalachian Trail enthusiasts---and with the inclusion of dozens of other trails in this forum---it's really a community of Trail enthusiasts. And a community of Hikers and Backpackers.
"Review" in _this_ context is guv'mnt speech for - I'm PO'd and all you minions should do something about this! My personal opinion (maybe not worth much, but it's mine) is that Whiteblaze is a appropriate forum for this discussion. And we need more public lands not less.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
Miles to go before I sleep. R. Frost
I'm down with discussing it...might learn somthin' along the way.
The issue of national monuments designation is far from simple. It was intended to designate specific features for protection, not vast swaths of wilderness. If you ask most of the people in Northwest Maine, putting 87,000 acres of private land (now the Katahdin Woods & Waters national Monument) under the Federal umbrella was not a good thing.
I am not sure this is true. If a vast swath of wilderness contains scatter sites of archeologically significant artifacts; would that vast swath not merit protection? My understanding is the value of Bear's Ears National Monument includes historic cultural sites scatter throughout the monument.Originally Posted by Bansko
Why is the Maine Woods & Water "not a good thing"?
It was private land prior. It is now being opened for use by all citizens.
The he more land sequestered and spared exploitation the better.
Couldn't agree more rocketsocks! Most of my knowledge is from Ken Burns American Parks documentary and so I'm sure there is more to learn.
AT Flip Flop (HF to ME, HF to GA) Thru Hike 2023; LT End-to-Ender 2017; NH 48/48 2015-2021; 21 of 159usForests.com
www.dictionary.com
Teej
"[ATers] represent three percent of our use and about twenty percent of our effort," retired Baxter Park Director Jensen Bissell.
yeah I'm afraid I don't know much about the legislative body, or the judicial branch for that matter.
I resemble that remark. Or at least, that definition.
Old Hiker
AT Hike 2012 - 497 Miles of 2184
AT Thru Hiker - 29 FEB - 03 OCT 2016 2189.1 miles
Just because my teeth are showing, does NOT mean I'm smiling.
Hányszor lennél inkább máshol?
Several Presidents have reduced the size of previously-designated national monuments.
The National Park Service can not afford to be used to hand over private lands to the government. The budget is finite. For every tree you save in Maine, the fewer dollars there are for Yellowstone NP, Shenandoah NP, and yes, the Appalachian National Scenic Trail.
Be Prepared
Name the ones that were "reduced" for purely partisan political reasons.
Teej
"[ATers] represent three percent of our use and about twenty percent of our effort," retired Baxter Park Director Jensen Bissell.
I actually have no idea which monuments were reduced (vs. abolished), but I'd be interested to find out. Taft & Eisenhower shrunk several units as did some others, who I can't recall. Congress has delisted a litany of NPS units over the years. It's not that uncommon at all:
https://www.nationalparkstraveler.or...onal-parks9202
https://www.nps.gov/archeology/sites.../abolished.htm
Just b/c your fav politician said something; doesn't necessarily make it so......
Be Prepared
I actually found the answer on the NPS website:
Taft reduced Petrified Forest
FDR reduced Grand Canyon
JFK reduced Nat'l Bridges
Taft, Wilson & Coolidge reduced Mt. Olympus
Taft reduced Navajo
Eisenhower reduced Colorado
JFK reduced Bandelier
Eisenhower reduced Hovenweep
FDR reduced Craters of the Moon
FDR reduced Wupatki
Eisenhower reduced Glacier Bay
Eisenhower reduced Arches
Eisenhower reduced Great Sand Dunes
Not so unprecedented after all me thinks! I would now like to hear how evil and/or purely partisan FDR & JFK were!
Be Prepared
FDR modified monuments https://monumentsmatter.org/the-monu...april-12-1945/
Craters of the moon was diminished for a road right of way. Wupatki was reduced by 52 acres in 1941. On the other hand, FDR added 33,631 acres there in 1937. The Grand Canyon reduction was almost 72,000 acres and I have not found the reasoning for it yet. Considering FDR added what looks like 2-plus millions of acres through modifications and new additions I don't see anything particularly evil in his actions. JFK did not have nearly the same level of activity. He did reduce Natural Bridges 320 acres and at the same time he added 5,236 acres. Chandelier was also added to and reduced, but was net negative around 1,100 acres. Overall, JFK was net positive in modifications and additions.
https://www.nps.gov/archeology/sites...umentsList.htm
"Sleepy alligator in the noonday sun
Sleepin by the river just like he usually done
Call for his whisky
He can call for his tea
Call all he wanta but he can't call me..."
Robert Hunter & Ron McKernan
Whiteblaze.net User Agreement.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
