New York state lands enjoy stronger protection than federal lands - we have it in the state constitution. I've heard the frackers fantasize in public about seizing state forest preserve land by federal eminent domain so that it can be repurposed without needing a constitutional amendment. Sick.
I always know where I am. I'm right here.
We're not pure up here north of the 49th parallel, but the egregiousness of Trump is breathtaking and short-sighted in an extreme.
… Damn — I'm going to have to get out and hike tomorrow …
"Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
'Til it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot"
Joni Mitchell (from Saskatchewan)
It's really nice to see polite input and civil discussion on an outdoors related issue that could have turned ugly if it was just arguing along partisan political lines. And, TU very much to the MODS who have allowed this discussion. I feel like I'm in a room with all of us behaving as adults willing to not just pontificate but consider points of view respectfully. WOW. TU to everyone for participating in such a way. Refreshing.
I didn't intend to opine on the "land grab" issue, but to correct the oft stated misinformation that all national monuments are born from federal lands. The Antiquities Act permits a landowner (private, NGO, local gov't) to voluntarily relinquish land for monument designation.
I am uncomfortable with the growing trend of the Executive branch acting as the sole authority of government. If land is so precious, fine, designate it as a national monument; and then immediately propose legislation to make it a national park, national historical park, or whatever. Congress has abdicated its responsibilities here, in war making, and elsewhere. This is not how our Gov't was intended to function.
Be Prepared
Fair enough... from my limited knowledge of the process... I've seen it as the political version of the nature conservancy. A way to move quickly to preserve something of merit while bureaucracy eventually catches up.
in that context...a review of those rapid fire executive choices in every arena used makes sense. So I'm not opposed to the concept itself in anyway.
Unfortunately I tend to agree that a common sense review is not the objective or that an altruistic motive exists in this case. So I get the logic, but do not trust the fella employing it.
Two points: First, it sounds like you really do want to opine on these monuments being a "land grab" which they clearly are not. None of the previously non-federal lands you previously listed were "state lands", nor were they "federal lands" until the private owners of those lands decided to give ("relinquish") them to the federal government presumably on the condition they be declared national monuments. There is no federal land grab involved, plain and simple. The only land grab being proposed is private interests now seeking to exploit our common patrimony for personal/corporate gain by revoking national monument status. Second, I too am uncomfortable with Executive Orders being the sole means of exercising government authority, but that is the result of the political parties being hijacked by extreme right and left interests so that no legislators are willing to meet in the middle for the good of the country. It is a sad state of affairs.
Handlebar
GA-ME 06; PCT 08; CDT 10,11,12; ALT 11; MSPA 12; CT 13; Sheltowee 14; AZT 14, 15; LT 15;FT 16;NCT-NY&PA 16; GET 17-18
Thank you handlebar for clarifying for me what is happening in my own head.
Be Prepared
Those 71 yrs and more than a few gray whiskers are showing - the Gray Fox.