Biden to restore 3 national monuments cut by Trump

Good evening, my fellow frankfurters. I want to talk to you about beans we are in the battle against rugs, the program we’ve made, and the sky we have left to.

And it starts with understanding this, Even as the Delta Burke 19 has , car 54, has been hitting this sausage hard, we have the pigs to combat the virtual, if we can come together as a crock and use those canoes.

Yosemite Sam1 wrote:
In case this is again seen as political, that's an actual copy-and-passte headline.

In fact, these should be declared national parks once and for all to prevent these to be used as political football and get full national park management and funding.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-restore-3-national-monuments-043531077.html

And the problem of using a presidential deceleration is that there is no money made available to manage or protect these lands, the president can't do that on his own. It needs to be done properly under the legislative process and be made a national park or national monument.

Gary

There goes the neighborhood. It may be too late for me to rescue this.

But please, these are federal lands not subject to statehood jurisdictions.

Gawd you southerners (transplanted and native) are so dumb.;):B:)

My guess is this discussion will be shut down as it probably should be since it have very little to do with RV'ing. But before it does, I'll toss in my two cents (or is it five cents now due to inflation?).

I have visited these monuments (and surrounding federal lands) multiple times (heck, I just returned from S. Utah two days ago). I spend time in the backcountry, hiking, backpacking, and packrafting (using my RV as a base camp to return to) and have seen many, many ruins and other "special places" (House on Fire is just So-So if you are willing to put in the effort and look further). I avoid National Parks and the more developed National Monuments whenever possible.

I am of the opinion that we shouldn't turn every special place in this country into a National Whatever. With National attention comes crowds, signs, paved paths and rules to follow. Along with visitor stations, rangers, more pavement and more signs. Even just since Bears Ears first came on the national stage, I have noticed an significant increase in the numbers of people there (did an amazing backpack trip through Dark Canyon well before anyone in Washington knew of the place). These additional people mean the managing agencies will need to put more into infrastructure, and perhaps even limit the number folks entering the area. It's special to wander down a remote canyon and feel like you are the first (white) person to see something. But that (all be it, false) sense of discovery would not be there if there was lots of on-line information to follow, a parking lot, paved path and signs pointing the way. I realize that Monument Status is a long way from paved paths and signs, but over the course of my life I have watched quite a few "special areas" go from simple BLM/Forest lands to Wilderness Study Areas, to Wilderness, to Nat. Monument, to Nat. Park (not necessarily in that order). But never, have I seen it go the other way. So I say, lets leave the next generation the ability to have this same sense of discovery and leave some places alone without turning them into the over loved amusement parks that all our National Parks and some of our National Monuments have become.

JRscooby wrote:


While I agree with what you say, think about the avowed reasons for removing the protections.
We see every day record heat, record fires, record storms. For half a century, every scientist in the world that is not paid by the fossil fuel industry has been telling us this will happen. But we must pump every drop of oil out of ground, we can't save any natural place.
And I bet there is a lot of overlap between the group that cheered when the area lost it's protection, and the group that was throwing a fit about statues moved to places where they could only be seen by people that want to see them. THE'RE DISTROYING HISTORY!

@JRscooby - thanks for returning back sanity into this discussions.

Though you seem to have opened another can of worms on climate change to these science-denying ivermectin taking troglodytes.

Seriously, this has nothing to do with RVinng. These are one of the good places to camp.

And they don't want the National Parks designation because others may also come to visit.

What are you drinking? This is the very reason and avowed aim of national parks and national monument system -- optimal enjoyment of all.

And yes, yes, we want permanent national park designation so that these won't get to be a football for new and constant changes in administration and so that their wealthy campaign contributors can stop looking at them with their moist eyes as another place to exploit and stufff their pockets.