New National Monument proposals

User avatar
yuccahead
Posts: 604
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:39 am
The middle number please (4): 7
Location: SE UT

New National Monument proposals

Post by yuccahead »

So, last week a White House memo was leaked that had a list of possible future National Monuments.
Here's a link with the list-

http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/ob ... s/C37/L37/

There are a few desert areas including two in Utah - the San Rafael Swell and Cedar Mesa.
It's been said before that if the San Rafael Swell was in any other western state it would be a National Park by now. If you've never been there you owe it to yourself to make it a destination next time you get to Utah.
Cedar Mesa is in SE Utah and includes numerous canyons and hidden ruins as well as Grand Gulch.
As you might imagine local Utahns, especially the OHV factions, are all a-twitter with the thought of a Democratic President protecting more of their land, even though it's not their land, it's mostly BLM with a widespread checkerboard of state lands intermingled. A state congressman has even gone so far as to introduce legislation in Congress to exempt Utah from federal land designations, we'll see how that goes.
Anyway, these two areas absolutely deserve protection from grazing, mining, drilling and OHV use, let's hope they get it.

MMM
Posts: 454
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 6:25 pm
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4

Re: New National Monument proposals

Post by MMM »

This is a blantant land grab. I hope (but am honestly not holding my breath) that this will not happen. Wilderness areas must be created by laws pased through Congress. Monuments on the other hand are created at the whim of the president. I am constantly amazed how OHV users are cast as a bad lot. In fact 90% plus are law abiding people who enjoy the public lands. Once a monument is created, the land is LOCKED UP. No collection of any rocks, plants or just about anything els, roads can be closed without public input. In fact NO PUBLIC INPUT OF ANY KIND is needed to creat or manage national monuments. This action is wrong, wrong wrong. And it goes way beyond OHV use. Allow public comment and pass wilderness if you want protection. Don't make this a country of the rule of one.

Mike

User avatar
Plays In The Dirt
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:51 pm

Re: New National Monument proposals

Post by Plays In The Dirt »

I'm not familiar with this area so can't really say whether it should be protected or not. I do agree with you Mike in that I don't like to see so much of our public land being closed down either because after all I like getting out there myself and do so on a regular basis. Granted I do a lot of hiking but do take my quad to some areas. I also agree with you that a large percentage of OHV users are good people and ride in a responsible manner. However, that 10% that's not can tear-up a whole lot of land in very quick order and therein lies the problem and why there's such an outcry about OHV use. It's a tough call for land managers that's for sure.

User avatar
javaone
Posts: 106
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:34 am
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4

Re: New National Monument proposals

Post by javaone »

Hey YH, I guess the “FREEDOM OF SPEECH Moderated?” area has been closed… Hmmm, go figure. So I will post this here - Please move this to where ever you want. - MODERATOR :|
yuccahead wrote:
Well, Jerry, that works both ways. Without the opposition of environmental groups OHV users would ride anywhere and everywhere they wanted to. A lot of them do anyway
Yh, It’s an honor you are directing comment my way. :mrgreen: You work is awesome and I respect most of what you say. :)

My thoughts are when urban sprawl and/or the Enviros push, for instance, the mountain bikers (yes, with pedals) out of an area, what do you expect them to do??? The love of their sport forces them to go somewhere else. It is their release…

I believe OHVers and the Enviros both abuse issues at times just to prove a point… :roll:

When your ready to ask horse owners to pick up there horse poop on the trail, I will be all ears… :lol:

Just kidding about that, but sometimes that’s how silly some of this bickering seems at times. ;)

I look forward to seeing your next ART.

Jerry

MMM
Posts: 454
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 6:25 pm
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4

Re: New National Monument proposals

Post by MMM »

I guess my point in posting here is to allow for normal law making. If you want wilderness, fine but go through the process. The creation of national monuments as espoused by clinton and now it appears by obama goes around these laws and is done strictly by the action of one person. This is NOT how, at least in my mind, the country is susposed to work.

Mike

spiny
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 3:16 pm

Re: New National Monument proposals

Post by spiny »

I always find it amusing (in a surreal way) to see national monument designations characterized as "land grabs." Overwhelmingly, the lands are already federal public lands, so it is no more of a land grab than it would be for me to go out in my back yard and commit a land grab on my own property. The exceptions would be any state or private lands that are checkboarded within the monument boundary, but these are usually small and are purchased or traded for other lands.

National monuments are not the same as wilderness declarations. All of the existing national monuments have some roads within them. For example, at Grand Staircase-Escalante in Utah,
"Street-legal motorized vehicles - four-wheel-drive and mechanized vehicles (including bicycles) - are allowed on approximately 908 miles of routes in the Monument. Non-street-legal all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and dirt bikes are allowed on approximately 553 miles of the designated routes." (http://www.blm.gov/ut/st/en/fo/grand_st ... hicle.html) I don't quite see the public being locked out.

The Antiquities Act authorizes the President to establish national monuments on federal lands. Years ago, Teddy Roosevelt tried to get Congress to make the Grand Canyon a national park, but local opposition stalled that effort, so he used his power to declare it a national monument. It wasn't until years later that Congress gave this treasure the recognition it deserves and converted it to a national park. How many people today would say that Teddy made a mistake? By the way, he used the same strategy at Devil's Tower, the Petrified Forest, Lassen Peak, etc.
(http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/life/c ... nument.htm

I haven't yet had the pleasure to see the San Rafael Swell, but I've heard it's spectacular. I do know from personal experience that Cedar Mesa is chock full of petroglyphs and valuable archaeological sites, not to mention a lot of beautiful scenery. I'd rather not see these special places sprout oil derricks or solar power arrays.

User avatar
yuccahead
Posts: 604
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:39 am
The middle number please (4): 7
Location: SE UT

Re: New National Monument proposals

Post by yuccahead »

spiny covered things pretty well. It's mostly BLM land, they'll swap for the rest and a presidential NM designation is perfectly legal and has been for more than 100 yrs. The land is not "locked up", just protected. If you stay on designated roads, like OHV riders here say they do, you shouldn't have a problem with a new designation. MMM, you shouldn't be taking/collecting things from the desert anyway, it's bad juju.
PITD, I don't know if you looked at the link above, but there is also a Nevada site on the list -

"Heart of the Great Basin, Nevada: This monument would include the Toiyabe, Monitor, and Toquima Ranges. All three ranges have some protected status granted by wilderness designation. This was one of my favorite parts of Nevada which I explored in preparing my Nevada Mountain Ranges book. It contains substantial archeological sites, huge aspen groves, and 12,000 foot peaks. "

Sounds like a spectacular place.

User avatar
yuccahead
Posts: 604
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:39 am
The middle number please (4): 7
Location: SE UT

Re: New National Monument proposals

Post by yuccahead »

javaone wrote:
Yh, It’s an honor you are directing comment my way. :mrgreen: You work is awesome and I respect most of what you say. :)

My thoughts are when urban sprawl and/or the Enviros push, for instance, the mountain bikers (yes, with pedals) out of an area, what do you expect them to do??? The love of their sport forces them to go somewhere else. It is their release…

I believe OHVers and the Enviros both abuse issues at times just to prove a point… :roll:

When your ready to ask horse owners to pick up there horse poop on the trail, I will be all ears… :lol:

Just kidding about that, but sometimes that’s how silly some of this bickering seems at times. ;)

I look forward to seeing your next ART.

Jerry
Jerry, Thanks for the compliments, glad you like my photos. I didn't mean to imply that there is only one way, but Newton's Laws of Physics hold true throughout the universe. An action on one side will cause a reaction on the other. If the pendulum ever stops swinging things might get resolved.
I couldn't agree more that there are extremists on both sides.

As for mtn. bikers, I live in mtn. bike central. I don't know where you're talking about but residents here deal with them all year long. Even a percentage of bike riders have no desire or intention of following a trail. I see bike tracks in the National Parks offtrail and everywhere else. So, it's not just an OHV problem.

Brew
Posts: 344
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 10:43 am

Re: New National Monument proposals

Post by Brew »

It's not just the OHVer's in Utah that are in opposition to more monument land, it's the Governor of Utah and at least one of its representatives. OHV use isn't the only restriction that would put in place when an area is made into a national monument.

The land isn't OWNED by the BLM. They only manage it.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_14450119

Brew

User avatar
Plays In The Dirt
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:51 pm

Re: New National Monument proposals

Post by Plays In The Dirt »

yuccahead wrote: PITD, I don't know if you looked at the link above, but there is also a Nevada site on the list

Yes I did

"Heart of the Great Basin, Nevada: This monument would include the Toiyabe, Monitor, and Toquima Ranges.

Sounds like a spectacular place.
Yes it is. I work and live in this area most of every month. I'm also a member of the Austin Historical Society which is in or adjacent to the Toyiabe National Forest. I go there all the time.

Post Reply