This is just the beginning of the end for our national parks and monuments!

independentusa said:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...78ee4b03350e0b7fa85?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
This is just the beginning of the end for our National Parks and monuments. The GOP will "give" them to the highest bidder, depending on how much they donate to the GOP. I feel sorry for younger people as within a few years all of the wonderful places we could go will cost them mightily, if they are even there any more. More likely if they don't all become amusement parks they will have oil wells drilled on every square foot of park land. They will also allow grazing until the whole of the southwest is desert and have every tree chopped down. Once again we will become the USA of the 1900's where we can't drink the water or breathe the air. Ain't stupidity wonderful.

Click to expand...

Ahhh.... I love the scent of nonsensical hyperbole first thing in the morning.

ludin said:

The fact is the federal government shouldn't be seizing land unless there is a merit for it.
I am perfectly fine with national monuments and protecting land.

Does the federal government need to seize millions of acres to do it? No.

Click to expand...

Well, the fed didn't seize that land. Utah agreed to give it to the fed in order to be a state. With that being said I'm in favor of the land being in control of the state. I believe the only land that should be in control for the fed is actual monument/park type land such as the Grand Canyon, White Sands, etc. Also land used for military bases and government buildings. It's my understanding that a number of western states are currently trying to work with the fed to accomplish just that.

DamnYankee said:

ROTFLMAO

No they don't. The majority of Nevadans live either in Las Vegas metro area, Clark County, or Reno/Sparks, Washoe County. The US 395 corridor from Reno south through Carson City County to Douglas County.

Click to expand...

Compare Nevada's county map with the fed land map. Those counties and areas are on fed land.

independentusa said:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...78ee4b03350e0b7fa85?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
This is just the beginning of the end for our National Parks and monuments. The GOP will "give" them to the highest bidder, depending on how much they donate to the GOP. I feel sorry for younger people as within a few years all of the wonderful places we could go will cost them mightily, if they are even there any more. More likely if they don't all become amusement parks they will have oil wells drilled on every square foot of park land. They will also allow grazing until the whole of the southwest is desert and have every tree chopped down. Once again we will become the USA of the 1900's where we can't drink the water or breathe the air. Ain't stupidity wonderful.

Click to expand...

That's one of the biggest piles of hyperbole I've ever seen....

azgreg said:

Compare Nevada's county map with the fed land map. Those counties and areas are on fed land.

Click to expand...

Ya think? And within those counties are private property where people live. Nevada's population is what, 2.5 million? The majority living in Las Vegas metro area, on private property. Washoe County being the second largest county by population, where people live on private property. Your map isn't detailed enough, I might suggest buying a Delorme or possibly a Benchmark map of Nevada. Don't take my word for it, research it for yourself.

How do I know this? Nevada is my home away from home and I spend a great amount time there since buying property that is surrounded by federal land where no one can build on it.

A piece of advice for those people that want to visit the desert lands. Be very careful where you go and know for certain where you are. Not all of the vast desert in Nevada is federal land. You may wander upon private property that is not posted. Furthermore, as a rule of thumb, if you know for certain you are on public land and happen upon a fenced area with a gate, if the gate is open, leave it open, if it is closed and not locked, then you may pass but close the gate behind you. There is a reason for this.
Ranchers lease public lands for grazing of livestock. BLM grants permission to some ranchers to lock gates but mostly they are not locked. If it is locked, note the location and report it to the nearest BLM office. Some ranchers do violate the rules by locking gates to keep people out, this is not legal as people do have the right to go onto lands under lease by another and camp, for example. If a rancher has special permission to secure a gate, it will normally be posted by the BLM, but keep in mind IT IS YOUR responsibility to know the rules and know where you are.

azgreg said:

Well, the fed didn't seize that land. Utah agreed to give it to the fed in order to be a state. With that being said I'm in favor of the land being in control of the state. I believe the only land that should be in control for the fed is actual monument/park type land such as the Grand Canyon, White Sands, etc. Also land used for military bases and government buildings. It's my understanding that a number of western states are currently trying to work with the fed to accomplish just that.

Click to expand...

Good luck. Once you give up control to the federal government you don't get it back.
In this case that is what trump is doing.

However he is being sued not that it will go anywhere.

holbritter said:

Here is the other side of it:

The case to reduce the monuments
Utah's Republican congressional delegation, along with county commissions and conservative groups, pressed the administration to open up these federal lands once more for private use.

"President Trump's decision to reduce these monuments allows us to still protect those areas that need protection, while at the same time keeping the area open and accessible to locals who depend on this land for their daily lives," said Matt Anderson of the Utah-based Sutherland Institute.

Anderson says large, public land national monuments hurt rural counties. These areas already have large amounts of federal public land, he says, where cattle grazing, mining and other types of private enterprise are heavily regulated.

Rural Utah is still fuming from President Bill Clinton's designation of the Grand Staircase in 1996, which grandfathered in existing cattle-grazing leases and other uses, but also nixed a proposed coal mine. Clinton signed the proclamation at the Grand Canyon, in Arizona, and Utah officials at the time said they were blindsided.

"When you designate a large national monument, you restrict access to the land and you block traditional uses of the land," Anderson said.

The home of Bears Ears, rural San Juan County, is often cited as one of Utah's poorest, and more than 60 percent of all its land is owned and managed by the federal government.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...ramatically-shrinks-2-utah-national-monuments


It sounds like it never should have been taken over by the Federal Govt. to begin with.

Click to expand...

As another note, the area surrounding Joshua Tree National monument is booming.

Its iirc the second biggest tourist draw in the world.

You can't rent a house in the area if you work there. Its all Airbnb now.

So it can be just another way of using the land as opposed to just "taking it away" from the local economy.

They better leave my Smoky Mountains alone...