September 22, 2017

The Left, The Right, Reality and Zinke’s Proposed Forest Management Practices

From the Left all we ever hear is “We’re all gonna die!” From the Right all we ever hear is “It’s about time we’re gonna get it right!” The reality is nothing ever changes. But, don’t go look. The Left/Right paradigm is fake but exists only in echoed rhetoric and that is exactly what we are seeing when Trump’s new Secretary of the Interior announced changes in forest management practices.

The West is burning up, as one report this morning stated. Forest fires are popping up everywhere and as is usually the case, the Left blames is on Global Warming, and the Right blames it on poor forest management practices that result in the creation of tinder boxes.

Another example of the emotional reactions of brainwashed and blinded people is that immediately fear mongering began about the possibility that a tree might now be cut on Maine’s new and mostly unwanted national monument, Katahdin Woods and Waters.

The Right claims that their intent is “a healthy forest through active timber management,” with never a definition of the intent – and that is for a reason. The Left threatens a lawsuit if Zinke tries to cut down one tree in Katahdin Woods and Waters.

St. Clair, the original owner’s son, who is now the front man, without having a clue what Zinke meant by changing forest management practices, said, “We didn’t donate this land to be used as a commercial timbering operation.”

And this is business as usual here in the U.S. of A. While nothing changes in the Federal Government, except that which the ruling establishment wants to change and Congress just does as they are told, a part of what never changes, which is the reason the Federal Government gets away with what they do, is that the Left and Right continue their reactions and responses in the usual manner. In this case, the Left says we’re all gonna die and the Right says it’s about time to get it right. And then it’s on to the next round of fake announcements and none of these mouthy people ever go back to examine exactly what took place.

I think James Beers, former member of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, says it quite well as to why nothing will change – except the emotional rhetoric that always accompanies false political announcement. The Left controls every aspect of government, as well as every non-governmental agency. Because of the infiltration and successful years of brainwashing and mind control throughout our indoctrination factories, even those, like Sec. Zinke, who, to the Left, appears to be a Rightist intent on destroying the forests, cannot help but do anything except what the Left desires – protect the forests and create the tinder boxes. Only politics calls for the political rhetoric to satisfy the voters of each perspective party.

Beers points out much the same when he says that the only way anything could change is through serious changes and/or repeals of certain draconian federal laws that prohibit change of any kind. And we know that will NEVER happen because it is not intended to happen. And so we keep on keeping on.

Beers writes in a recent email:

All of these above mentioned reasons for fuel accumulation and many, many other dwindling public land benefits that are slated for elimination by fiats, regulations and unjust law authorities granted federal bureaucrats in the past 40 to 50 years have a common taproot..  Past Administrations, their appointees and the bureaucrat “scientists” they have hired, all have this land closure and sustainable natural resource management elimination  as their ultimate goal.  Unless and until that “legal” (?) authorization for federal bureaucrats in federal laws like the ESA and Wilderness Act is either repealed or severely and specifically controlled in the specific federal laws authorizing such tyranny I don’t believe these somewhat generic and feel-good directives amount to anything.  The next Administration (look to all the Obama directives and letters, etc. on a wide variety of subjects) will simply issue their own directives (and probably in less than 9 months) and just drop the government truck into high gear and truck on down the road from where they left off on 19 January, 2017.

Because we cannot see, with each announced or “leaked” (that’s funny) change to anything, we will always keep hearing, we’re all gonna die, and it’s about time to get it right, but the truth is nothing ever changes, because “We the People” call all the shots and “we the people” have nothing to say about it – but we are trained to think we do.

Yep, somethings never change. Just more talk.

Share

President Proposes $1.3 Billion FY 2018 Budget for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Press Release from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service:

Budget Makes Commitments to Public Lands, Energy and Public Access

May 23, 2017

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump today proposed a $1.3 billion Fiscal Year 2018 (FY18) budget for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Service’s budget also includes $1.5 billion in permanent funding, which is mostly administered to states through various grants and other initiatives for their wildlife and sportfish conservation programs. The bureau budget helps put the federal government on track to a balanced budget by 2027.

“President Trump promised the American people he would cut wasteful spending and make the government work for the taxpayer again, and that’s exactly what this budget does,” said U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke. “Working carefully with the President, we identified areas where we could reduce spending and also areas for investment, such as addressing the maintenance backlog in our National Parks and increasing domestic energy production on federal lands. The budget also allows the Department to return to the traditional principles of multiple-use management to include both responsible natural resource development and conservation of special places. Being from the West, I’ve seen how years of bloated bureaucracy and D.C.-centric policies hurt our rural communities. The President’s budget saves taxpayers by focusing program spending, shrinking bureaucracy, and empowering the front lines.”

The President’s budget focuses funding on the nation’s highest priority conservation needs, access to public lands for all Americans, and the agency’s role in streamlining energy development, while containing costs through management efficiencies and other savings to address federal fiscal realities.

“Improving access to national wildlife refuges supports the great American traditions of hunting and fishing that together generate billions of dollars for conservation and billions more for our nation’s economy,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Virginia Johnson. “Accordingly, this budget request prioritizes deferred maintenance funding for national wildlife refuges and fish hatcheries, active habitat management across millions of acres of public lands, and core wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities.”

“Timely environmental review of energy development and other infrastructure needs will create jobs and help the U.S. achieve energy independence,” said Johnson. “This budget also supports our law enforcement officers who support cooperative efforts to secure our borders.”

The FY18 budget includes the President’s continued focus on the following priorities:

America’s Public Lands:

Through the National Wildlife Refuge System, the Service continues the American tradition, started by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1903, of protecting fish and wildlife and their habitats and providing opportunities for hunting, fishing and other outdoor recreation to all Americans. The proposed FY18 funding level for the Refuge System is $470.1 million. The proposed budget maintains a commitment to providing outdoor recreational opportunities in rural, urban or suburban landscapes, including through the Service’s Urban Wildlife Refuge Partnerships program, as well as supporting the vital role of volunteers on our refuges.

American Infrastructure:

Included in the request for National Wildlife Refuges is $136.2 million for improving the Service’s maintenance backlog and to take care of the American public’s investments in facilities and infrastructure managed by the Service. Of this, $41.0 million is to address the backlog in deferred maintenance. This would sustain the Service’s current commitment to eliminate its maintenance backlog in the National Wildlife Refuge System.

In addition, $19.4 million is requested for maintenance of national fish hatcheries, which stock sport and subsistence fish for states and tribes and also propagate and release endangered aquatic species to aid in their recovery. . A further $51.9 million in funding is proposed for national fish hatchery operations.

Invasive species cost our economy billions of dollars each year. To continue its commitment to address this important issue, the Administration proposes level funding for programs that focus on preventing the spread of Asian carp, quagga and zebra mussels, and sea lamprey.

A total of $225.2 million is proposed to implement the Endangered Species Act and related programs, of which $79.6 million is dedicated for species recovery efforts. Recovery funding includes an increase of $1.8 million for working on five-year species reviews and delistings and downlistings.

Birds are important to Americans in many ways. Birdwatching generates $43 billion in economic activity yearly; hunting of migratory waterfowl is a traditional recreational pastime that generates billions more. A total of $44.0 million is requested for the Service’s Migratory Bird program, which provides waterfowl hunting opportunities and encourages conservation of birds and their habitats.

The budget eliminates funding for Landscape Conservation Cooperatives and the Service’s science program, as well as funding for youth programs and the Cooperative Recovery Initiative.

American Safety and Security:

Refuge law enforcement efforts are funded at $37.9 million to enhance visitor and employee safety on our public lands and honor the President’s commitment to improving border security.

Additionally, the Office of Law Enforcement is funded at $73.0 million. The recent escalation in poaching of protected species and the illegal trade in wildlife poses an urgent threat to conservation and global security. Wildlife trafficking generates billions of dollars in illicit revenues each year, contributing to the illegal economy, fueling instability in range nations, and undermining regional security in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Poaching operations themselves have expanded beyond small-scale, opportunistic actions to become a coordinated, large-scale activity often commissioned by armed and organized criminal syndicates that also traffic drugs, arms and people, and that see wildlife trafficking as a low-risk, high-reward alternative. Our continued investment in combatting wildlife trafficking is important to addressing organized crime and saving hundreds of iconic species such as the African elephant and rhino from extinction.  The Service’s International Affairs program is funded at $14.2 million, nearly level with FY17 Continuing Resolution Baseline. The program provides grants and technical assistance for the international conservation of endangered and threatened species.

America First Energy:

The budget includes $98.8 million to facilitate planning and consultation that will support energy development, economic recovery and job creation in the United States. Timely evaluations of proposed infrastructure, energy and other development projects contribute to job creation and economic growth. Funding will allow the Service to expedite project reviews and work with developers on appropriate mitigation and avoidance measures.

The President’s budget also contains proposals to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling; to enable the National Wildlife Refuge System to recover damages from persons who injure or destroy federal resources; and to permanently authorize the Recreation Fee Program.

The President’s FY18 budget proposal for the Department of the Interior supports his commitment to create jobs, provide outdoor recreation through hunting and fishing, facilitate energy development, and support law enforcement needs. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Congressional Justification can be found online: www.fws.gov/budget/2018/FY2018-FWS-Greenbook.pdf.

The Department of the Interior oversees one-fifth of the nation’s land and the entire Outer-Continental Shelf. The Department is charged with overseeing energy development on federal lands and waters, grazing allotments and timber sales, water conservation and delivery, upholding tribal trust responsibilities, conservation of wildlife and habitat, and maintaining access for recreation throughout public lands, among other priorities.

~~~~~~~

Ranking member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, made the following comment about Trump’s budget proposal:

“Once again, the Trump Administration has turned its back on Teddy Roosevelt-style conservatism and is instead trying to allow special interests to pillage our natural resources so a wealthy few can make themselves even wealthier. We won’t let him.”

Share

Hearing Focuses on Bills to Protect Property Rights, Increase Federal Transparency

Press Release from the House Committee on Energy and Natural Resources: (I added a link and copy of H.R. 1830 the Water Rights Protection Act)

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 18, 2017

Today, the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans held a legislative hearing on two bills to increase federal transparency, safeguard private and state water rights, and provide certainty to water and power users.

The “Water Rights Protection Act” discussion draft (Rep. Scott Tipton, R-CO) protects state water law and private property rights from future federal takings.

Private water rights holders should not live in fear of the federal government coming after them. Mr. Tipton’s bill is necessary to ensure that privately held water rights cannot be extracted by the federal government in the future as a condition to secure a federal permit,Subcommittee Chairman Doug Lamborn (R-CO) said.

Over many decades, federal attempts to manipulate the federal permit, lease and land management process to circumvent long-established state water law and hijack privately-held water rights have sounded the alarm for all non-federal water users that rely on these water rights for their livelihood. The Water Rights Protection Act is commonsense legislation that provides certainty by upholding longstanding federal deference to state water law,Rep. Tipton stated.

Vice President of the Utah Farm Bureau Randy Parker discussed the water rights issues he sees on the ground everyday as the U.S. Forest Service (FS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) “systematically challeng[e] state sovereignty and historically held water rights on public lands.”

The ongoing protests, claims, coercion and even bullying by agents of the FS and the BLM has created and continues to cause considerable uncertainty for ranching families across the West,” Parker said.

Chris Treese, Manager for External Affairs at the Colorado River Water Conservation District, urged swift passage of the “Water Rights Protection Act” to avoid the inevitable downward spiral of litigation.

Unless the FS commits to respecting Western states’ individual water rights adjudication systems to accomplish its flow-related goals, the only sure outcome is contentious, lengthy and expensive litigation. This is a result in no one’s interest, including the environment,” Treese stated.

H.R. 2371 (Rep. Paul Gosar, R-AZ), the “Western Area Power Administration Transparency Act,” establishes a pilot project to increase the transparency of the Western Area Power Administration’s (WAPA) costs, rates, and other financial and operational dealings for utility ratepayers and taxpayers. Patrick Ledger, CEO of the Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, welcomed the transparency and accountability promoted by this bill in light of the recent trend of increased utility rates.

With better information broken down in key components – and with a historical perspective – customers can have a better dialogue with [WAPA],” Ledger said.This is perhaps the most fundamental benefit that the transparency legislation offers.”

Click here to view full witness testimony.

BILLS-114hr1830ih
Share

Are We Good Stewards of Our Environment?

During a radio interview with my friends at Shake, Rattle and Troll, I was asked a few questions, some of which I don’t think I answered succinctly or expressed myself to the specifics of what was on my mind at the time of the interview. It is one of the difficulties one might face when doing radio interviews, live and without foreknowledge of what questions would be asked. Any problems that might have happened were not the fault of anyone at Shake, Rattle and Troll.

One specific question I was asked, I would like to clear up any misconceptions and better explain my answer. I was asked if I thought that in this country man has been a good steward of our environment. I answered yes, which might have caught some off guard. Not to make excuses but my mind was focused on wolves…after all, my book about wolves was what I was asked to talk about and answer questions.

I did answer the question as it might pertain to whether or not man has been a good steward concerning our attempts to sustain populations of wildlife. Over all, I think we have. There are exceptions, as always, and what is never honestly considered in such discussions is how much natural occurrences contribute to loss of wildlife. The finger is always and quickly pointed to the evils of man.

We are only kidding ourselves to think it’s an easy task to find some kind of equilibrium of happiness and satisfaction between consumptive users of our natural resources and the environmentalists who want nothing touched.

I stated that I believe people want clean water and clean air but that I didn’t think they knew how to achieve that. I didn’t have time to further explain. It’s easy to talk about having clean water and clean air, but what are those? Who gets to define clean air and clean water and by what standards do they go by. Leaving it up to governments is a huge mistake, however, too many trust their government. Yikes!

We may all be convinced that we have clean water, land and air, but in many cases we have been lied to. We talk about “clean” drinking water only to find out it may be clean by someone’s standards while the water is laced with harmful chemicals. But, we don’t talk about that. We see pretty parks and pretty flowers and plants and to our uneducated eye, it must all be clean. We briefly look to the sky and if we see haze, we are conditioned to believe it is pollution and yet if we see chemical trails from aerosol spraying, we are told it is condensation even though the trail lingers for the duration of the day and into the night.

We want clean air and clean water but we are not getting it. We are told of the strides we have made to “scrub” our smoke stacks and clean up exhaust emissions, while at the same time corporate America is given a free pass and Americans foot the bill.

I could go on and on. If I were to answer the question posed in a more general fashion, then I would have to say that man has not been good stewards of our environment because those who take charge of that mission are lying, stealing, cheating thieves. If a problem surfaces it’s blamed on “man,” that is the common man, i.e. you and I. And we are forced to pay because we are citizen slaves to a corporate constitution that says we will pay all the debt….period.

A second question I was asked was about whether I thought wolf (re)introduction into the Northern Rocky Mountains, the Desert Southwest and the Southeast were good things. I answered no and further stated that it was a criminal enterprise. If we had had the entire day on the radio we could have discussed this issue and would still have only scratched the surface. That’s why you should by my book, “Wolf: What’s to Misunderstand?”

Beyond the criminal enterprise, what makes the (re)introduction bad can be assessed in two simple observations. 1.) The opportunity for citizens to hunt for game and food has been seriously reduced in many places, due to wolves tearing hell out of the elk, deer and moose herds. This should be unacceptable. 2.) The unnecessary loss of livestock (private property) and a person’s right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (Yehwah’s given right not man’s). It is a testimony to the direction this country has gone that shows that any animal should be given priority over the well-being of man.

Another point I wished I had the time to discuss was the section in my book all about how the process of devising the Environmental Impact Statement was rooted in fraud and ignorance. Every item listed for consideration in the drafting of the EIS that was of concern to the people and property was blatantly disregarded. As a matter of fact, officials who wrote the EIS came right out and said it was only considering those things that positively benefited the wolf or placed the wolf in a positive light. In other words, man did not matter.

One blatant example of this can be seen when it was asked of the Government’s wolf officials, if they intended to vaccinate the wolf to prevent the spread of disease (to humans), etc. the answer went directly to their point: They would do everything necessary to protect the wolf from any harm or illness.

Since the drafting of the EIS, every item disregarded because the Government said it was not worthy of consideration, are the only issues that remain unsolved and pose the biggest challenges to the public’s health and safety and the protection of game herds.

The last thing I wanted to better explain had to do with my comments about the perverse nature Americans have been manipulated into when it comes to animals. It was agreed upon by those conducting the interview, and myself, that it is a serious problem in this country when people place any animal, wild or domestic, on a plain of existence equal to or greater than man. I tried to explain that doing such was in contradiction to the Scriptures and our Creators intention for the role that animals would play in consideration of His creation of Man.

I went so far as to state that these actions were an abomination to the Creator. And it is. It is because playing gOD and attempting to change His order of Existence is making a mockery of Yehwah and His work. That is an abomination. Abominations directed at Yehwah will never go unpunished.

If your basic belief system is not focused on the Scriptures and the Creation of the Almighty, I would not expect you to agree with or even understand this position.

But now you better understand mine.

Share

Cantwell, Western Democratic Senators Urge Feds to Lift Sudden Suspension of Public Land Advisory Groups

Press Release from the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources:

WASHINGTON, D.C — Today, Ranking Member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and a coalition of western Democratic senators today urged the Interior Department to lift its sudden suspension of long-standing local committees and advisory boards that provide essential community input on public land management.

Their letter to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke follows reports that the Department of the Interior (DOI) postponed all meetings for public resource advisory councils and committees (RACs) until September. The letter was led by Sen. Cantwell and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and signed by Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.).

“We are very concerned about this news and would like an answer as to why the RAC meetings were postponed during the BLM’s review of all advisory boards and committees,” the senators wrote. “It is critical that local voices, including RACs, have the opportunity to provide input and take part in the process at all times, not just when those local voices align with the Administration or a large special interest.”

The advisory groups are designed to get diverse community input on often-contentious public land management issues. These advisory groups were included both in Wyden’s original legislation creating Secure Rural Schools support for counties in Oregon and nationwide; and the Interior Department’s own rules dating back to 1995.

Those advisory groups have long helped to balance questions of environmental and economic impacts by informing decisions on issues such as recreation, land use planning, grazing, oil and gas exploration, and wildfire management.

“Balancing these interests is challenging, which is why RACs were created,” the lawmakers wrote. “By working through difficult land management issues and getting local input from the beginning, projects are more likely to succeed. Without this tool, many good land management projects would never be completed.”

A copy of the entire letter is here.

Share

I Want to be Clear, Renewable Energy Puts Money in My Buddy’s Pocket

Share

Big ‘Green’ and Mean: A Wind-Energy Giant Attacks Small-Town America

NextEra Energy, which bills itself on its website as “the world’s largest generator of renewable energy,” is suing a tiny municipality in one of Oklahoma’s poorest counties.

In mid February, NextEra, which operates 110 wind projects in 20 states, filed lawsuits in both state and federal court against the town of Hinton, population: 3,200. Why is the wind giant suing the Caddo County town? Simple: Hinton stands between NextEra and nearly $18 million per year in federal tax subsidies.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Totalitarian Control of All Land Disguised As Land Conservation

*Editor’s Note* – If I understand the information presented in the below linked-to article these people don’t want any big corporations to own, use or develop any land in Maine. These people don’t want any small, private development of land…or even the allotment of private housing scattered throughout the state. In short, they don’t want anybody to take advantage of any land or natural resources except them. It’s been that way for quite a while now and getting much worse. They keep forcing the hands of landowners and it appears the only way they can get what they want is to hand it all over to the State and Federal Governments, who can and will take what they believe is theirs to begin with.

And so where does that leave you and me?

“At some point, many Mainers have had the unsettling experience of discovering that a parcel of land on which they liked to hike, fish, hunt, or ski has been posted or developed. The Bangor Daily News once summarized the problem thusly: “Because land prices are being bid up by developers and by big outside money, Maine people are being pushed out of the market . . . [and] squeezed off the land that they or their neighbors once owned and to which they had traditional access.””<<<Read More>>>

Share

Presidential Executive Order on the Review of Designations Under the Antiquities Act

*Editor’s Note* – Below is President Trumps Executive Order (EO) designed to REVIEW, and nothing more, the hows and whys of land designations as National Monuments in the U.S. since 1996. In the following statements made by various political criminals (because they all are), the emotional clap-trap, designed specifically to continue the anger, hatred and fury of brainwashed members of the fake political left and the fake political right. 

On the one side, the lying right is trying to make people think all those monument designations are going to be lifted and the BS slogan of “Make America Great Again” will be in full force while nothing happens except the strategically used rhetoric to fan flames and garner support while ensuring the left continues to hate the right, bringing things ever closer to violent protest or all out civil war. The fake left is of no exception in this incitement of anger and hatred. As is typical, the fake left convinces its blind followers that the world is going to come to an end because some people want to question the need for more and more parks and national monuments.

It will never be learned that the fake left and the fake right, along with their fake president and fake cabinet, have no interest in looking out for what is best for you and I. They never have and never will. The will make you think they are because they are the masters of deceit. Trump and Congress do not decide what will be and what will not be. They are but puppets, controlled by the real powers of the world. Trust me, any and all national monuments are not created with you and I and our future interests in mind.

In short, everything that I have posted here is a bunch of horseshit and should be seen as such. The president and his staff of clever liars are hard at work pretending they are caring for the people and fulfilling campaign promises. They choose their words carefully and then present an EO that does nothing except create bureaucratic garbage. To date, all of Trump’s EOs are nothing but false rhetoric to drive hate.

EO follows:

 

Presidential Executive Order:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in recognition of the importance of the Nation’s wealth of natural resources to American workers and the American economy, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Policy.  Designations of national monuments under the Antiquities Act of 1906, recently recodified at sections 320301 to 320303 of title 54, United States Code (the “Antiquities Act” or “Act”), have a substantial impact on the management of Federal lands and the use and enjoyment of neighboring lands.  Such designations are a means of stewarding America’s natural resources, protecting America’s natural beauty, and preserving America’s historic places.  Monument designations that result from a lack of public outreach and proper coordination with State, tribal, and local officials and other relevant stakeholders may also create barriers to achieving energy independence, restrict public access to and use of Federal lands, burden State, tribal, and local governments, and otherwise curtail economic growth.  Designations should be made in accordance with the requirements and original objectives of the Act and appropriately balance the protection of landmarks, structures, and objects against the appropriate use of Federal lands and the effects on surrounding lands and communities.

Sec. 2.  Review of National Monument Designations.  (a)  The Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) shall conduct a review of all Presidential designations or expansions of designations under the Antiquities Act made since January 1, 1996, where the designation covers more than 100,000 acres, where the designation after expansion covers more than 100,000 acres, or where the Secretary determines that the designation or expansion was made without adequate public outreach and coordination with relevant stakeholders, to determine whether each designation or expansion conforms to the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.  In making those determinations, the Secretary shall consider:

(i)    the requirements and original objectives of the Act, including the Act’s requirement that reservations of land not exceed “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected”;

(ii)   whether designated lands are appropriately classified under the Act as “historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, [or] other objects of historic or scientific interest”;

(iii)  the effects of a designation on the available uses of designated Federal lands, including consideration of the multiple-use policy of section 102(a)(7) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1701(a)(7)), as well as the effects on the available uses of Federal lands beyond the monument boundaries;

(iv)   the effects of a designation on the use and enjoyment of non-Federal lands within or beyond monument boundaries;

(v)    concerns of State, tribal, and local governments affected by a designation, including the economic development and fiscal condition of affected States, tribes, and localities;

(vi)   the availability of Federal resources to properly manage designated areas; and

(vii)  such other factors as the Secretary deems appropriate.

(b)  In conducting the review described in subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary shall consult and coordinate with, as appropriate, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the heads of any other executive departments or agencies concerned with areas designated under the Act.

(c)  In conducting the review described in subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary shall, as appropriate, consult and coordinate with the Governors of States affected by monument designations or other relevant officials of affected State, tribal, and local governments.

(d)  Within 45 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall provide an interim report to the President, through the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, and the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality, summarizing the findings of the review described in subsection (a) of this section with respect to Proclamation 9558 of December 28, 2016 (Establishment of the Bears Ears National Monument), and such other designations as the Secretary determines to be appropriate for inclusion in the interim report.  For those designations, the interim report shall include recommendations for such Presidential actions, legislative proposals, or other actions consistent with law as the Secretary may consider appropriate to carry out the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(e)  Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall provide a final report to the President, through the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, and the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality, summarizing the findings of the review described in subsection (a) of this section.  The final report shall include recommendations for such Presidential actions, legislative proposals, or other actions consistent with law as the Secretary may consider appropriate to carry out the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

Sec. 3.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

 

DONALD J. TRUMP

 

THE WHITE HOUSE,
April 26, 2017.

Bishop Statement on Antiquities Act Executive Order

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 27, 2017

House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT) issued the following statement in reaction to President Trump’s announcement on national monument designations.

“Today’s action sends the powerful message that communities will no longer take a back seat to out-of-state special interest groups. I’m pleased to see President Trump recognize long-standing abuses of the Antiquities Act. It was created with noble intent and for limited purposes, but has been hijacked to set aside increasingly large and restricted areas of land without public input.

“I applaud the Trump administration’s clear commitment to do what past administrations refused to do, actually talk to real people who live in the area. This EO is not the end of the story, we will work the Trump administration and our communities to get this right.”

Murkowski Commends Executive Order on National Monuments

U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, today joined President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke for the signing ceremony of an executive order directing the Department of the Interior to conduct a review of national monuments designated under the Antiquities Act since 1996.

Secretary Zinke will review onshore and marine monument designations over 100,000 acres in size, and provide recommendations to the president for changes to the scope and size of those monuments within the next 120 days.

“I strongly support President Trump’s order to review the largest national monuments designated over the past two decades,” Murkowski said. “During the past administration, we saw the Antiquities Act result in sweeping designations that frequently ignored local opposition. This review is a good step forward in our efforts to reform the monument designation process to ensure the concerns of those who stand to be impacted are heard and respected.”

The Obama administration designated a total of 554 million acres—an area five times the size of California, and more than the previous 18 presidents combined—as national and marine monuments. The scale and extent of those designations sharply contrast with the explicit wording of the Antiquities Act, which requires the reservation of “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”

Murkowski is a leading congressional advocate for Antiquities Act reform. Earlier this year, she and 27 Republican colleagues introduced S. 33, the Improved National Monument Designation Process Act. The bill would facilitate greater local input and require state approval before national monuments can be designated on federal lands and waters.

Murkowski is chairman of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

WATCH: Cantwell Defends The Protected Status Of National Monuments

President’s Executive Order Threatens San Juan Island and Hanford Reach

Download broadcast-quality video of Sen. Cantwell’s floor statement here.
Watch Sen. Cantwell’s floor statement on YouTube here.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Ranking Member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) today defended the Antiquities Act and the protected status of National Monuments across the country.

Senator Cantwell took to the Senate floor to oppose the President’s short-sighted attempt to illegally roll back the National Monument status for some our country’s most treasured public lands and national monuments, protected to preserve them for public recreation and enjoyment.

“The shortsighted move is a pretext to attack the designation of the Bears Ears National Monument in Utah,” Senator Cantwell said. “Sacred to five tribes, Bears Ears is a breath-taking sight for all Americans who come to experience what is the unbelievable unique beauty of the West.”

In Utah alone, outdoor recreation is responsible for $12 billion in consumer spending each year: more than twice the value of oil and gas produced in the state ($5 billion).

Just today, the Outdoor Industry Association released a new report on the economic contributions of the recreation economy. Nationally, the recreation industry currently creates $887 billion in consumer spending every year. That’s up more than $200 billion (from $646 billion) the last time this study was conducted, a few years ago.

In addition, outdoor recreation industry is responsible for 7.6 million jobs in this country today. That’s growth of 1.5 million jobs since the last time this study was conducted.

Sen. Cantwell explained that President Trump’s Executive Order calls into question more than just Bears Ears National Monument. “Reviewing any designation in the last 20 years, threatening the question of the San Juan Island or the Hanford Reach National Monument and the creation of other sites around the United States and threatening our economies. Time and time again, the Trump administration is pushing for policies that are harmful to our recreation economy, a disaster for our pristine places, and setting a terrible precedent for future conservation efforts.”

In Washington, the outdoor recreation economy generated $22.5 billion in consumer spending and $1.6 billion in state and local tax revenue.

Watch the video of Sen. Cantwell’s floor statement here.

Share

Stay Off My Land You SOB Part III

Part I and Part II

Silly debate continues in Maine over a proposed bill, LD 128, that would implement fascist/totalitarian tactics on anyone picking a wild berry, or such, on private land without permission from the landowner. The link to Part II above, will give readers a chance to read the proposed bill as it is currently written.

Okay! I get it! I’m a Maine landowner. I cherish my rights, what few I have left, as a landowner, but do I want to cut off my big nose despite my ugly face?

George Smith, a Maine outdoor writer and activist, continues to whine about the crap he’s taking from people because it is his own creation, i.e. LD 128. He writes in his column: “It is very irritating to find that someone has grabbed the fiddleheads or mushrooms off my woodlot before I got to them. And clearly, anyone who is on my land to commercially harvest something ought to be required to have my permission.

“Some critics have suggested any landowner who feels this way should post their land No Trespassing. But that is exactly what I don’t want to encourage, because it would hurt those of us who hunt, fish, and otherwise enjoy privately owned property.”

Obviously he and I look at a half-filled glass differently. I have two basic issues with his approach. The first issue is that there are already laws that exist about stealing private property. Would crafting another useless bill prohibiting anyone from foraging for wild edibles, actually stop anyone? Americans are notorious idiots, incapable of thinking rationally, as this has been programmed out of them. They therefore keep piling on laws, and more laws and even more laws, exemplifying the perfect conditions of insanity, thinking just one more law surely will stop the criminal. I might even argue that this same activist would argue that making laws prohibiting the ownership, by lawful citizens, of guns, will do nothing to stop a criminal. How is this different?

The second issue is one about landowner responsibility. Smith says he doesn’t want to post his land to keep trespassers off, because he wants to continue to have the privilege of accessing private land to hunt and fish. What does he expect? This might be a bit of having your cake and eating it too.

When any person owns something, if they intend to responsibly care for it, requires doing all things necessary to protect it according to your value system and hopefully not the values dictated by other people. If I should decide to buy a perfectly restored antique auto, and one of my top priorities is to make sure the body and paint remain unblemished, it would be irresponsible of me to drive it after a snow storm in the salt and sand. It might even require me to build a garage to store it in. Will these efforts stop somebody from stealing my car? Yes, there exists strict laws against auto theft. Do making more laws help?

If Mr. Smith values his wild edibles on his own land that much, it is then his responsibility to protect them. It is fools folly to think pushing another bill through the Legislature would actually protect his wild edibles, no more than posting his land would. Sometimes, with land ownership, depending on one’s values and priorities, that ownership demands the owner do things he might not like. In addition, many landowners are not concerned if someone is picking wild edibles. As a matter of fact some of the landowners are quite pleased that the tradition continues. Totalitarian tactics of forcing lifestyles and/or political ideals onto other people doesn’t seem a neighborly thing to do to those who don’t care and would just as soon not be bothered with every Tom, Dick or Harry knocking on their door seeking written permission to pick wild food.

I recall teaching my children when they were very young that they were the ones responsible for themselves and not to depend on others. I also taught them that sometimes life seems unfair but we have to learn to deal with it in the best and most reasonable manner. We cannot always have everything just the way we want it – and that door swings both ways.

If it is so upsetting that even after a bill and another bill, and yet another bill is crafted to bar private land access for any reason, as well, you’ve gone to the trouble of posting your land, and still people enter your land and take things, perhaps land ownership is too large a responsibility.

I think this is more of a case of a landowner taking responsibility for what they have and how they value that ownership, than wasting the Legislature’s time pushing for yet another law that will do absolutely nothing to protect a patch of berries, mushrooms or fiddleheads.

 

Share