Topgun 30-06
Active member
Then your opinion is invalid.
It's really no joking matter because if they pass that and put the Valles Caldera under Parks management there will be a huge loss to the public (us) and MT may be next!!!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Then your opinion is invalid.
It's really no joking matter because if they pass that and put the Valles Caldera under Parks management there will be a huge loss to the public (us) and MT may be next!!!
Originally Posted by Oak View Post
Then your opinion is invalid.
It's really no joking matter because if they pass that and put the Valles Caldera under Parks management there will be a huge loss to the public (us) and MT may be next!!!
I'm not a big fan of it going to NPS either, but I believe, at least under the proposal I read a while back, that the current hunt structure would be maintained under NPS management.
I did find this, interesting read: http://rmefblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/coalition-letter-to-senators-regarding.html
I'm not a big fan of it going to NPS either, but I believe, at least under the proposal I read a while back, that the current hunt structure would be maintained under NPS management.
I did find this, interesting read: http://rmefblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/coalition-letter-to-senators-regarding.html
Thanks for the different info on the VC. I'll have to dig into it a more. I just don't understand why they wouldn't transfer it to the FS. Parks system just makes me nervous
I think this is why: "The Sierra Club, Caldera Action, National Parks Conservation Association, New Mexico Wildlife Federation, Coalition of NPS Retirees, Audubon and others..."
I usually like to see at least one group I trust in the mix...
Apparently it would transfer to the USFS in 2020 if nothing is done.
http://riograndesierraclub.org/Valles-Caldera-bill
Ah, I see. NPS would protect it better from grazing, logging, etc. Hunting grandfathered in, but of course that could change.
The reason I made that statement is even though it says "SHALL", I'm skeptical that things will stay the same in the long run when they possibly decide there are conflicts of some sort and hunting has to be decreased, changed, or whatever that could be detrimental to us. Maybe it won't happen, but I"ve always believed in the "never say never" theory"!
The reason I made that statement is even though it says "SHALL", I'm skeptical that things will stay the same in the long run when they possibly decide there are conflicts of some sort and hunting has to be decreased, changed, or whatever that could be detrimental to us. Maybe it won't happen, but I"ve always believed in the "never say never" theory"!
“I’m happy to see public lands bills make progress,” Jewell said Saturday, according to the Washington Post. “The preference on public lands bills is that they go through a typical process of public lands bills and they get debate and discussion.”
“I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use the natural resources of our land but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob, by wasteful use, the generations that come after us....
“Of all the questions which can come before this nation, short of the actual preservation of its existence in a great war, there is none which compares in importance with the great central task of leaving this land even a better land for our descendants than it is for us, and training them into a better race to inhabit the land and pass it on. Conservation is a great moral issue, for it involves the patriotic duty of insuring the safety and continuance of the nation.”