tomman58 wrote:agesilaus wrote:
I already posted the link, and without stupid political commentary about 20 messages ago. I really doubt that anyone is looking to create new coal mines since the existing ones are on life support. As for other mines unless you live in a cave and wear animal skins and eat what you catch or grow, you have no right to criticize what provides you with food, shelter, clothing and transportation. You are a hypocrite in other words
Hardly, As I said \"the coal industry to pollute rivers and streams again You choose the words you wanted to read.. The coal industry is dead but as the tRump put forth his \"executive\" mandate to allow polluting the rivers and streams for the dying coal industry show little care for us or the USA.
This not a political message but fact, period.
As for someones comment as to where the lands are kept for us, it is in places of lesser public disadvantage where possible.
I have never been to the north shore of Alaska but still think it shouldn't be lessened from oil drilling.
I am hardly a hypocrite but am an American interested in saving as much as possible for other future RVers and their kids.
tomman58 wrote:agesilaus wrote:
I already posted the link, and without stupid political commentary about 20 messages ago. I really doubt that anyone is looking to create new coal mines since the existing ones are on life support. As for other mines unless you live in a cave and wear animal skins and eat what you catch or grow, you have no right to criticize what provides you with food, shelter, clothing and transportation. You are a hypocrite in other words
Hardly, As I said \"the coal industry to pollute rivers and streams again You choose the words you wanted to read.. The coal industry is dead but as the tRump put forth his \"executive\" mandate to allow polluting the rivers and streams for the dying coal industry show little care for us or the USA.
This not a political message but fact, period.
As for someones comment as to where the lands are kept for us, it is in places of lesser public disadvantage where possible.
I have never been to the north shore of Alaska but still think it shouldn't be lessened from oil drilling.
I am hardly a hypocrite but am an American interested in saving as much as possible for other future RVers and their kids.
agesilaus wrote:
I already posted the link, and without stupid political commentary about 20 messages ago. I really doubt that anyone is looking to create new coal mines since the existing ones are on life support. As for other mines unless you live in a cave and wear animal skins and eat what you catch or grow, you have no right to criticize what provides you with food, shelter, clothing and transportation. You are a hypocrite in other words
agesilaus wrote:
I already posted the link, and without stupid political commentary about 20 messages ago. I really doubt that anyone is looking to create new coal mines since the existing ones are on life support. As for other mines unless you live in a cave and wear animal skins and eat what you catch or grow, you have no right to criticize what provides you with food, shelter, clothing and transportation. You are a hypocrite in other words
agesilaus wrote:
Yes the coasts are theoretically public but these big new parks grab a lot more land than a narrow coastal strip occupies. Is there a 10,000 acre Big Sur National Monument for example, one that would suck in lots of Monterrey real estate? (If I have my geography right, it's been years since I was there.) I'd say that area certain deserves more than the tiny state park.
Florida coastal lands to the high tide mark are public too, but developers just build above that point and eliminate all parking spaces, effectively blocking access. Try to get to the beach in Sarasota for example. There is actually a narrow public access corridor with the nearest public parking miles away.
agesilaus wrote:
Yes the coasts are theoretically public but these big new parks grab a lot more land than a narrow coastal strip occupies. Is there a 10,000 acre Big Sur National Monument for example, one that would suck in lots of Monterrey real estate? (If I have my geography right, it's been years since I was there.) I'd say that area certain deserves more than the tiny state park.
Florida coastal lands to the high tide mark are public too, but developers just build above that point and eliminate all parking spaces, effectively blocking access. Try to get to the beach in Sarasota for example. There is actually a narrow public access corridor with the nearest public parking miles away.
agesilaus wrote:
I'm all for preserving appropriate land for public use. Strange that no appropriate land is found in New York, New Jersey or other states in that area. It almost all comes from west of the Mississippi. And still the people from NY, NJ, Md, De, Ct and so on are the ones demanding more land should be taken from Ut, Co, Mt, Id, Az and NM. I will concede that Cali at least does give up lots of land, tho almost all in non-coastal non-liberal parts of the state.
agesilaus wrote:
I'm all for preserving appropriate land for public use. Strange that no appropriate land is found in New York, New Jersey or other states in that area. It almost all comes from west of the Mississippi. And still the people from NY, NJ, Md, De, Ct and so on are the ones demanding more land should be taken from Ut, Co, Mt, Id, Az and NM. I will concede that Cali at least does give up lots of land, tho almost all in non-coastal non-liberal parts of the state.
agesilaus wrote:
I already posted the link, and without stupid political commentary about 20 messages ago. I really doubt that anyone is looking to create new coal mines since the existing ones are on life support. As for other mines unless you live in a cave and wear animal skins and eat what you catch or grow, you have no right to criticize what provides you with food, shelter, clothing and transportation. You are a hypocrite in other words
agesilaus wrote:
I already posted the link, and without stupid political commentary about 20 messages ago. I really doubt that anyone is looking to create new coal mines since the existing ones are on life support. As for other mines unless you live in a cave and wear animal skins and eat what you catch or grow, you have no right to criticize what provides you with food, shelter, clothing and transportation. You are a hypocrite in other words
tomman58 wrote:
\"Years in the crafting, the measure will designate 367 miles of new scenic rivers and 2,600 miles of new national trails. It protects nearly 500,000 acres in California alone, and enlarges both Death Valley and Joshua Tree national parks. And it reauthorizes a crucial funding mechanism for land and water conservation that had lapsed.\"
So this was actually created and drawn up by other not tRump. I don't think it offsets all the public and protected lands from his pen as many now can have their resources harvested by big oil and mining. Also allows the coal industry to pollute rivers and streams again.
While a good thing we still need to overcome the stealing of our precious park and lands by private group for profit.
Article
tomman58 wrote:
\"Years in the crafting, the measure will designate 367 miles of new scenic rivers and 2,600 miles of new national trails. It protects nearly 500,000 acres in California alone, and enlarges both Death Valley and Joshua Tree national parks. And it reauthorizes a crucial funding mechanism for land and water conservation that had lapsed.\"
So this was actually created and drawn up by other not tRump. I don't think it offsets all the public and protected lands from his pen as many now can have their resources harvested by big oil and mining. Also allows the coal industry to pollute rivers and streams again.
While a good thing we still need to overcome the stealing of our precious park and lands by private group for profit.
Article
