Trump to Order Review of National Monuments

[fwagner]

Yes for a arm chair quarterback with zero expertise and scientific background on energy production or environmental studies, MTGomer "nailed it". Stating that fracking is cleaner then wind and solar is beyond dumb!

 

[MTGomer]

Yes for a arm chair quarterback with zero expertise and scientific background on energy production or environmental studies,

Do we know each other?

 

[MTGomer]

If you're willing to ask yourself if all of your predetermined bias has any merit, begin here.
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/rare-earth-mining-china-social-environmental-costs

Again, just because it doesn't impact YOU doesn't mean there isn't an impact to real people.

 

[elkduds]

Yet every last citizen of the United States has access to clean, cheap drinking water if they want it. Everyone. Nobody says fracking isn't capable of contaminating something at some point.Many Americans - like you and Bwana just have a NIMBY attitude.

Something shitty is done halfway across the world, to non-white peasants that don't speak your language, whom you will never meet, never have to see the damage OUR lifestyle has made on their life. You and I as the end user of the product of their suffering don't have to think about it, look at it, and can remain willfully ignorant about it if we want.

You have no idea what my attitude is, why I choose my actions, how I live my values. Presume or accuse when you have no clue, you will always be wrong as you are in accusing me of "a NIMBY attitude."

Fracking does contaminate well water, and injecting waste fracking fluids into deep wells is the primary cause of the huge increase in OK earthquakes. I know what goes unaddressed in other parts of the world: Disregard for human rights and environmental safeguards, often to the point of atrocity. I study what my candidates support and my legislators see and hear my name often.

Are you defending fracking's pollution by suggesting people can go buy water when an underregulated, unenforced industry that owns our government pollutes the well water those people own? If we in this free country, cradle of property rights, cannot protect our own water, air and land from industrial corruption and subterfuge, we are in no position to decry what you criticize in other parts of the world. We absolutely can have industrial development, energy independence and environmental safeguards. This country is unwilling to reduce profits in order to cover the real cost of doing so.

I speak and act up when "something shitty happens," halfway around the world or in fracking Mecca Garfield County CO, where tapwater burns from time to time. I vote w my wallet, so I boycott everything UT based on their PLT politics. I volunteer for causes I support, whether BHA or to defeat Trump's sellout of America to his corporate supporters.

You don't know me.

 

[Irrelevant]

Gomer, while I might critique your opinion of what "cheap" is, you have a relatively good point. Even bad ideas in this Country cause less overall environmental damage than many good ideas elsewhere. The only hitch I see is that the technology involved in fracking also uses a helluva lot of rare earth minerals. And the main use of them is not in the wind generators nor in the fracking biz, but in the daily consumer electronics and the existing power grid infrastructure.

 

[Gr8bawana]

Ah ok, this is much better. It's a pic from a modern fracking field in WY. What is it that makes it "green"? It's sure not the millions of gallons of water it takes for each well taken from areas that are already arid to begin with. The million of gallons of toxic waste water they produce that contain who know what because the oil companies will not disclose them? Even the fumes they release from the vents are toxic to people and animals around them.

 

[Sytes]

What is the justification for adding more monuments? Seems is more of an ego-driven thing for the President to add to their legacy by saying "I did this" rather than a coordinated effort where we say, hey, let's make more restrictions on public land in a straight-forward manner as in how we close military bases. Lot's of discussion and reviews on the impact. Nope, the President sticks in his thumb and pulls out a plum and says what a good boy am I (actually had to do with the King stealing estates).

Jackson Hole... what a joke. 1.7 million acres - Bears Ear, another joke. There are abuses throughout Presidential history with respect to disrespecting the intent by Congress and TR. Amazing how partisan the angries come out over a President directing a "review" of potential abuse laden "monuments".

 

[The Hedgehog]

Ah ok, this is much better. It's a pic from a modern fracking field in WY. What is it that makes it "green"? It's sure not the millions of gallons of water it takes for each well taken from areas that are already arid to begin with. The million of gallons of toxic waste water they produce that contain who know what because the oil companies will not disclose them? Even the fumes they release from the vents are toxic to people and animals around them.
View attachment 70487

Where do you get your data? That picture is a "fracking field in WY?"

 

[u1299]

Jackson Hole... what a joke. 1.7 million acres - Bears Ear, another joke. There are abuses throughout Presidential history with respect to disrespecting the intent by Congress and TR. Amazing how partisan the angries come out over a President directing a "review" of potential abuse laden "monuments".

Am I missing something here, I don't think so, when he sidgned the EO he specifically said this was a massive federal land grab and he was going to see that it ended and that it never should have happened. He's already made up his mind so your statement about a review for "potential" abuse laden Monuments is BS, he's already said it's an abuse..

 

[Straight Arrow]

Jackson Hole... what a joke.

The Jackson Hole National Monument which began as a wildlife reserve and then evolved into a valuable part of the Grand Teton National Park is certainly no joke to the Wyoming tourism industry ... and as a gem of a truly grand national park, we as a nation should feel blessed that Presidents and others had the brilliant foresight to preserve and protect those special places in America, places which certainly set this nation apart from the rest of the world. I am offended as an American that you characterize such protections and sage foresight as "a joke".
I suppose instead of enjoying a tram ride to the top of the mountain range and being able to recreate at a premier ski resort, while viewing the magnificent peaks that offer world class climbing, you would rather see those Grand Tetons blown up from the top down and ground into ore to extract what must be an abundant wealth of mineral content.
"To hell with my grandkids, this world owes me wealth in my pockets today, the most important era of time, since I'm here now. Mine, mine, mine ... it's all mine! Drill, Baby, drill!"

 

[grizzly_]

View attachment 70487

That's what Farmington, NM looks like. There are 40,000 wells in that area, just southeast of Bears Ears across the Four Corners.

I'll be bear hunting right at the base of the actual Bears Ears a week from now. It's one of the coolest places you'll ever see and should beer protected.

 

[Sytes]

50 million acres... Alaska - Carter. There are many nauseous "monuments", depending on what side of the partisan bickering one sits. I simply believe we should not promote a singular authority to make decisions our Republic is designed to debate.

 

[Sytes]

Am I missing something here, I don't think so, when he sidgned the EO he specifically said this was a massive federal land grab and he was going to see that it ended and that it never should have happened. He's already made up his mind so your statement about a review for "potential" abuse laden Monuments is BS, he's already said it's an abuse..

His EO is set to review. Zinke's step is to dig into them. Find out which are "abuses" of our famous Theodore Roosevelt and Congress designed "monuments". Keep it American - our Republic as much as possible. On rare occasions, utilize the Antiquities Act to protect exceptional historical and (or) scientific interests our Representatives will not be able to get to in time to preserve the necessities offered. We are not an Autocracy nor should we abuse the Antiquities Act as a political manipulation of our Republic..

 

[Straight Arrow]

The Antiquities Act was authorized by one branch of federal government (legislative) to another branch (executive) to preserve and protect wildlands and places of historical value. It has proven key in preserving 150 or so special places in our nation. As a historian, outdoors person, conservationist, or wildlife advocate, one can only be relieved and thankful for the history of monument designations, and particularly those that have been the basis for national parks. Typically the decision is long in coming, after debate and input from stakeholders, not merely contemplated in an oval office vacuum. Of late, ultra conservatives and big business, especially resource extraction industries, have criticized the monument designations which have protected large tracts of virgin land ... for obvious reasons. It's all about power and money; it's not about place or future. They would like to see the Antiquities Act repealed by Congress. But in retrospect and viewed from a practical. realistic perspective ... what monument designations have harmed the respective area(s)? What monument designations have resulted in protections ultimately widely approved and valued?

We are not an Autocracy nor should we abuse the Antiquities Act as a political manipulation of our Republic..

True ... and it seems your personal interest determines whether or not you view protection as political manipulation. The political bent cannot be ascribed to any one political party as Presidents of both parties have employed the Antiquities Act. Autocracy? ... that's a big stretch from the Congressional Antiquities Act authority to labeling our government as an autocracy. Again it depends on whether or not you have a problem with protecting certain wild and/or historical places ... yeah, and some of them are huge. It boils down to an attitude of maintaining the potential to develop most areas of the planet versus the attitude of protecting large areas to maintain valued natural qualities. In my opinion, the former is self-centered and short-sighted.

 

[Northwoods Labs]

Sytes I posted this on another thread....maybe you didn't see it: http://www.hcn.org/articles/fact-checking-hatch-trump-on-bears-ears-national-monument

Besides the anti-National Monument rhetoric, why specifically are you so against Bear's Ears? Can you list any specific reasons or details of federal government abuse?

 

[Straight Arrow]

There you go ... trying to thwart ideological opinions with real facts and actual history of the issue.
Thanks for clearing it up and adding specific facts to what I was attempting to express.

 

[Sytes]

Sytes I posted this on another thread....maybe you didn't see it: http://www.hcn.org/articles/fact-checking-hatch-trump-on-bears-ears-national-monument

Besides the anti-National Monument rhetoric, why specifically are you so against Bear's Ears? Can you list any specific reasons or details of federal government abuse?

Why, specifically... for Bears Ears:

SIZE. 1.7 MILLION Acres.

List specific reasons re: federal government abuse:

It is a singular Presidential abuse. A copy of a copy... incrementally small steps one after the other and step by step, a further grasp of political grandstanding that has reached a point of disconnect from the intentions behind the Act.

From my perspective... My humble perspective as an American... A respectable and valued approach towards appreciating Congress and Theodore Roosevelt's intentions would be to evaluate the extent of historical/scientific value , the threat towards such - and time frame of such potential "imminent" threat, and the LEAST AMOUNT OF LAND NECESSARY to utilize the Act.

"...the limits of which in all cases shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected." - Antiquities Act, 1906.

THIS... is FAR from the essential protections sought for select locations to preserve Native American history. These areas do not entail 1.7 MILLION Acres.

edit added: Re: The link shared, Northwoods Labs... You, Ben and others have shared this link along with others. If you have specifics to share from links offered, feel free to quote specifics. I, personally, am pretty select of clicking links offered from forums...

 

[Straight Arrow]

THIS... is FAR from the essential protections sought for select locations to preserve Native American history. These areas do not entail 1.7 MILLION Acres.

Read more carefully.

Fact check: False. The monument does cover a huge swath, but it also encompasses a landscape that is home to the physical remnants of over 12,000 years of human occupation — from a Clovis camp, to tens of thousands of Puebloan sites, to the Hole in the Rock Trail — as well as vast paleontological resources. Many of the landforms, including the Bears Ears and Comb Ridge, are spiritually significant to the Navajo, Ute and Pueblo people.

This cultural landscape stretches across the new monument and far beyond its borders. In fact, the smaller monument Obama ultimately proposed already excluded some significant sites. Further diminishment would result in more important antiquities being left out. If anything, the new monument is too small to include all of the relevant cultural landscape — it should stretch eastward to connect with Canyons of the Ancients National Monument in southwestern Colorado.

 

[grizzly_]

Looks familiar... https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/documents/files/1936-proposed-enm-map.pdf

 

[Sytes]

Thanks for quoting a portion of the link, Straight Arrow. Again, from my perspective, I believe there is not a stitch of land that is not in some way linked, connected, hold interest to some plant, animal, human historic or scientific interest within the entire United States. I have personally seen abuses by "environmental" groups who have harmed American families by their belligerent abuse of our legal system over some animal, plant or what have you... So, I believe it is prudent to review and assess the depth of interest and whether something of this sort would better suit our Representatives review vs a single polarized partisan biased action.