I know, I know, it's Fox "news"

[UnfrozenCaveman]

But reports seem to be indicating more Federal land wackyness

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/021810_monumentlist.pdf

Sure sounds like "our" government is looking at alternative to creating some new "monuments"

 

[teotwaki]

Can't blame Fox for keeping us informed, especially getting that internal draft.

Anyhow, if they can't use Wilderness Study areas to lock it up they can use the "Antiquities" Act to grab it.

 

[AveryS]

Veiled disparagement towards Fox News?

I am glad they brought to light this document. Thanks for posting.

 

[goodtimes]

I generally don't like the idea of one individual having the authority to permanently close off land (like Clinton did, and Obama is considering) without any sort of local input.

But -- I'd rather 'lose' the land to a national park/reserve/monument than to a developer who is going to blade the land and build more unconstrained urban sprawl (complete with the local wal-mart, mc donalds, etc).

And yes, I stand to 'lose' some riding area in this deal . . .

 

[FLYFISHEXPERT]

Here is the article
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/18/obama-eyeing-millions-wild-acres-national-monuments/

 

[UnfrozenCaveman]

Veiled disparagement towards Fox News?

Ya' think

Heck, I don't trust any of them...the talking heads...If they'd just admint that they're nothing more than "news readers", as BBC have done it might make more sense.

...back to your regularly scheduled programming...

 

[dms1]

I got an email today from the AMA (American Motorcyclist Association) about the same document.

 

[paulj]

There's comprehensive list of National Monuments in Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Monuments_of_the_United_States
and some discussion of the controversies at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Monument_(United_States)

I'm guessing from these that George W has the record for area designated - though most of that area is underwater.

Devil's Tower was the first NM. Grand Canyon was a NM for 11 years before becoming a NP. Capitol Reef NM had a longer, more convoluted history (1937-71).

 

[sjk99]

I generally don't like the idea of one individual having the authority to permanently close off land (like Clinton did, and Obama is considering) without any sort of local input.

But -- I'd rather 'lose' the land to a national park/reserve/monument than to a developer who is going to blade the land and build more unconstrained urban sprawl (complete with the local wal-mart, mc donalds, etc).

And yes, I stand to 'lose' some riding area in this deal . . .

In 35 years of taking pictures about half the stuff I have photos of is gone. When an area, artifact or something of historic or beatific nature is destroyed it's gone for good and plenty is gone in just that short time.

X2 on this thought.

When Clinton created the Agua Fria NM north of Phoenix there was lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth but really the only beef now is that the BLM doesn't have the funds to patrol it. You can still camp, hunt & explore they just can't sell or trade parts to mini-ranchers or golf-course developers.

 

[paulj]

The Hill has an article on this, with a link to a pdf of the relevant attachement (#4)
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/67...et-interior-plot-to-create-national-monuments

http://thehill.com/images/stories/blogs/antiquitiesdocument.pdf

The initial paragraph is

Many nationally significant landscapes are worthy of inclusion in the NLCS. The areas listed below may be good candidates for National Monument designation under the Antiquities Act; however, further evaluations should be completed prior to any final decision, including an assessment of public and Congressional support

Last on the list of 14 is San Juan Islands. All the larger islands are populated, with only a small amount of state (state parks) and federal land (1 NP?). The possible designation will have more to do with off shore development than anything else.

Possibly more relevant to expo use is Attachment 6 on BLM 'land-rationalization efforts', including consolidation of checkerboarded lands, and the purchase of old mine claims in Colorado alpine country.

 

[cnynrat]

I couldn't resist commenting on the write-ups about a couple of these areas that I am familiar with.

Bodie Hills, CA: "Bodie Hills provides an opportunity to link both ecotourism with cultural tourism providing benefits to the surrounding communities." There are already "several hundred thousand" visitors per year to Bodie. There are at least ten times that number that visit the area each year to ski at Mammoth, fish in nearby lakes and streams, camp and hike in the eastern Sierras, or play at the Mammoth mountain bike park. Whatever benefits making Bodie a NM may have, I doubt it will provide any incremental benefit to the surrounding communities.

San Rafael Swell, UT: "Visitors to the area can find ancient Indian rock art and explore a landscape with geographic features similar to those found on Mars." Really. On Mars. The Swell is a neat area, but probably a lot more like some other areas on the Colorado Plateau than it is like Mars. Have we discovered slot canyons on Mars that were formed by running water?

 

[paulj]

San Rafael Swell, UT: "Visitors to the area can find ancient Indian rock art and explore a landscape with geographic features similar to those found on Mars." Really. On Mars. The Swell is a neat area, but probably a lot more like some other areas on the Colorado Plateau than it is like Mars. Have we discovered slot canyons on Mars that were formed by running water?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Desert_Research_Station

Yes, there are canyons on Mars that look similar to ones carved on earth by flash floods. I don't think image resolutions are good enough to identify slot canyons.

 

[craig333]

The modoc plateau is hardly in any danger. You have a very low population because there aren't any jobs up there. A few farmers, some CDF and FS employees and a handful of loggers. Hardly in danger of over development.

 

[paulj]

The modoc plateau is hardly in any danger. You have a very low population because there aren't any jobs up there. A few farmers, some CDF and FS employees and a handful of loggers. Hardly in danger of over development.

The attachment (see link in my previous post) does not mention any specific threat to the Modoc Plateau. It just describes it as 'spectacular and remote lands', abundant wildlife, archeological treasures, Skedaddle Mountains, etc.

Who besides the loggers would object to monument status?

The rules for a National Monument are not the same as for National Parks or Wilderness. What is allowed, or not, may depend on who is administering them. For BLM land they are probably someplace between general BLM land and Wilderness Study Areas. Possibly closer to wildlife refuges.

 

[Wonderland]

The day is coming when we won't be allowed to get off the couch, yea!!!:victory:



All these closures are going to do is, turn good law abiding citizens into outlaws, who wants to go poach some trails with me?:roost: