Trump to order review of national monument designations

[accadacca]

President Trump this week is expected to take the first step toward potentially undoing national monuments created by his predecessors, and may set off an unprecedented legal battle in the process.

Mr. Trump’s looming executive order, first reported by The Salt Lake Tribune on Monday, will direct the Interior Department to review all monument designations for the past two decades, dating back to President Bill Clinton’s creation of the massive Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument in Utah in 1996.

The Interior Department is also expected to zero in on the 1.3 million-acre Bears Ears National Monument, also in Utah and established by former President Barack Obama in the final weeks of his term.

Mr. Obama set a record for the most land and sea set aside as national monuments, taking presidential authority under the century-old Antiquities Act to new levels. And by cordoning off those huge swaths, he shut them down to energy development and other activities.

Bears Ears was especially controversial. Not only did it come during the last month of Mr. Obama’s tenure, but the designation was made over the objections of many Utah lawmakers.

Other designations, including a massive marine monument off the coast of New England, an 87,000-acre tract of Maine wilderness and a host of others also generated controversy.

Critics of Mr. Obama’s use of the Antiquities Act welcomed news that the Trump administration plans to revisit the issue.

“We’re happy to see an administration finally taking action to resolve the many abuses of the Antiquities Act,” said Molly Block, spokeswoman for the House Natural Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over national monuments.

Other Republicans who have been critical of the Bears Ears designation said it’s past time to rein in a president’s authority in naming monuments.

“For years, I have fought every step of the way to ensure that our lands are managed by the Utahans [who] know them best and cherish them deeply,” Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican, told The Salt Lake Tribune. “That’s why I’m committed to rolling back the egregious abuse of the Antiquities Act to serve far-left special interests. As part of this commitment, I have leveraged all of my influence — from private meetings in the Oval Office in the president’s first week in office to my latest trip to Bears Ears this week — to ensure that this issue is a priority on the president’s agenda.”But should Mr. Trump seek to formally roll back Bears Ears or any other monument, he’ll be entering a legal gray area, and his actions surely will be challenged in court by environmentalists.

What’s unclear, however, is whether a president has the power to revoke a monument. Past presidents have decreased the size of monuments, but no president has tried to outright eliminate one.

“This is a frightening step toward dismantling the protection of some of America’s most important and iconic places: our national parks and monuments,” said Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity. “Trump’s tapping into the right-wing, anti-public lands zealotry will take us down a very dangerous path — a place where Americans no longer have control over public lands and corporations are left to mine, frack, clear-cut and bulldoze them into oblivion. It starts with Bears Ears and Grand Staircase and only gets worse from there.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...nument-design/

[Sandstone Addiction]

...

[kiwi_outdoors]

Might be a fair idea - I could never understand how one man could shut down vast swaths of land without the approval of their elected representatives (emphasis on the plural)

[accadacca]

National Monument executive order expected

“For years I’ve fought to check the abuse of power under the Antiquities Act. That’s why I’ve been working closely with the Trump administration from day one to right the wrongs of previous administrations,” said Senator Orrin Hatch.

The people of Utah appear to be split. A UtahPolicy.com poll released on Tuesday shows 52% of the people think Bear Ear’s should either ‘definitely’ or ‘probably’ be rescinded or shrunk, 41% believe it should ‘definitely not’ or ‘probably not’ be changed, 8% were undecided.

http://fox13now.com/2017/04/25/natio...rder-expected/

[Sandstone Addiction]

"It's time to end this abusive practice"

Spoken by President Trump in the press conference today at the DOI referring to the Antiquities Act.

More win!

[tallsteve]

I'm finding it quite ironic that folks I know who backed Obama's decision to executive order Bears Ear, instead of having it go through Congress, are now whining and demanding that it go through Congress for review before it can be rescinded.

[DiscGo]

I actually feel like this is kind of a perfect example of what an Executive Order should be. He isn't bypassing Congress or legislating as if he were a Monarch. President Trump is ordering the Department of Interior to review the monuments. With the review, they can put the time into determining which of these monuments should be expanded (if any), and which should be reduced in size or abolished altogether.

Whether you love these monuments and or hate them, I feel like we as Americans should be grateful that our President is trying to bring about change through the proper channels instead of over-extending the Executive Branch's power.

"A real patriot is the fellow who gets a parking ticket and rejoices that the system works." - Bill Vaughan

[Scott P]

President Trump is ordering the Department of Interior to review the monuments. With the review, they can put the time into determining which of these monuments should be expanded (if any), and which should be reduced in size or abolished altogether.

Whether you love these monuments and or hate them, I feel like we as Americans should be grateful that our President is trying to bring about change through the proper channels instead of over-extending the Executive Branch's power.

Obviously others disagree, but Trump appointed an oil lobbyist and stockholder of oil companies to the Secretary of the Interior. That's a serious conflict of interest in my opinion; so it doesn't seem the "proper channels" to me when it comes to the National Parks and National Monuments.

As far as the monument goes, with the 12% cut in the Interior budget, I seriously doubt that the monument would be funded anyway. An unfunded monument won't do much good, protection wise. Personally I don't think that the new monument is a good idea for this reason.

[middlefork]

This article more or less refutes the allegation of "abusive action"

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/522233...undefined.uxfs

[Iceaxe]

This article more or less refutes the allegation of "abusive action"

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/522233...undefined.uxfs

You do realize the "news article" you linked is an opinion piece and is not an actual news article. An opinion piece may or may not be linked to facts or it could be pure male bovine excrement. Either way, using an opinion piece to support an argument is extremely poor practice as it's just that, one person's opinion.


But just to get to the meat of the subject, no one I know disputes there was open debate or public hearings. The problem many have is Bears Ears was done with no open debate, no public hearing and no vote in Congress with regards to the use of the Antiquities Act, it was basically done by one man with a signature, that is why many have their panties in a bunch. All the concerns expressed (from both sides) in the open debates and public hearings were simply washed aside.

[middlefork]

So until congress takes away the the Antiquities Act, he was acting with the authority granted him. Bummer.
I kind of like the early proposal but I don't see a lake in it.
https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/fi...ed-enm-map.pdf

[Iceaxe]

So until congress takes away the the Antiquities Act, he was acting with the authority granted him.

Exactly.... but that was not your original argument or the argument presented in the link you posted.

What Obama did was legal, however what he did was not done with public consensus or majority approval.

This is one of those things that is awesome if you're on the winning side and sucks if you're on the losing side.

[Brian in SLC]

Whether you love these monuments and or hate them, I feel like we as Americans should be grateful that our President is trying to bring about change through the proper channels instead of over-extending the Executive Branch's power.

30 executive orders in 100 days...

What was your point again?

[Brian in SLC]

This is one of those things that is awesome if you're on the winning side and sucks if you're on the losing side.

Have you seen your buddy Dan's map on the monument and surrounding area? Interesting, as it highlights the number and locations of current oil and gas leases and mining claims inside and outside the monument boundaries. Also highlights uranium and coal reserves and their locations.

In addition (and benefiting the state of Utah):

To further the protective purposes of the monument, the Secretary of theInterior shall explore entering into a memorandum of understanding withthe State that would set forth terms, pursuant to applicable laws and regulations,for an exchange of land currently owned by the State of Utah andadministered by the Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administrationwithin the boundary of the monument for land of approximately equalvalue managed by the BLM outside the boundary of the monument. TheSecretary of the Interior shall report to the President by January 19, 2017,regarding the potential for such an exchange.

So,here's opportunity to the state that wasn't available before. That's a win for the state and the local economy.

[rockgremlin]

Have you seen your buddy Dan's map on the monument and surrounding area? Interesting, as it highlights the number and locations of current oil and gas leases and mining claims inside and outside the monument boundaries. Also highlights uranium and coal reserves and their locations.

I'd really like to see that map.

In the last week I've been doing some intensive sleuthing in regards to the supposed vast "resources" that are located in the Bear's Ears. I personally am pretty familiar with all of the mineral resources within the state of Utah, so it came as a surprise to me when folks kept talking about all of the rich coal and oil reserves in the Bear's Ears. I had never heard of that...and apparently neither had any major mining company or else they'd already be mining there.


So, I started asking around. In the last week I've asked the following regulatory agencies about the mineral resources in Bear's Ears:

The USGS (United States Geological Survey)
The USFS (United States Forest Service)
DOGM (Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining)

The verdict? Nothing. There are no resources there --- outside of some historical uranium and vanadium mines that are old and mostly mined out.

I was also told that most of what you hear in the media regarding the Bears Ears is grandstanding, and hardly has basis in fact.

So.....there ya go. You can rest easy knowing nobody is gonna go raping and ravaging the Bears Ears for coal or gold or oil or whatever.

[Iceaxe]

Have you seen your buddy Dan's map on the monument and surrounding area?

Since I have no clue who Dan is or what map you are referring to we'll have to assume he is not my buddy.

[Iceaxe]

I'm not against Bears Ears as a general concept, but I'm against it for what it will be in reality.

Obama created Bears Ears National Monument on December 28th as he is heading out the door.

Republicans hate these types of designations and will not approve funding, Obama and the Democrats knew this in advance.

Despite a complete lack of funding to protect the resources the tourism and recreation industry will still mass market the new monument, because that’s what the Industrial Strength Recreation Industry does.

Proponents of the monument will not object to the mass marketing because they cling to the idea that tourism is clean and the future of the area's economy.

Herds of people will flock to Bears Ears to visit the new monument that is being mass marketed in spectacular ‘action ads’ on TV and your favorite social media network. This is already happening (see video clip below).

Impact from the increased visitation will skyrocket.

Monument supporters will eventually say the new monument needs more protection and more funding and more staff and more law enforcement and more paved roads and designated campgrounds and restricted access to backcountry areas seldom visited in the past.

And people like me who have enjoyed and visited this relatively obscure area for over 50 years will just cry and remember when it was a seldom visited and secluded place before the "National Monument" tag put a bullseye on Bears Ears.

[Brian in SLC]

Since I have no clue who Dan is or what map you are referring to we'll have to assume he is not my buddy.

Where's that photo I have of you two lovin' on each other...

http://www.danransom.com/2017/01/bears-ears-is-too-big/

[rockgremlin]

Where's that photo I have of you two lovin' on each other...

http://www.danransom.com/2017/01/bears-ears-is-too-big/

So....where's the map of all those fabulously rich coal and oil deposits in the Bears Ears?


One thing Mr. Ransom said that I wholeheartedly agree with:

"This is about theatrics. This is about politics."

Concur.

[Brian in SLC]

So....where's the map of all those fabulously rich coal and oil deposits in the Bears Ears?


One thing Mr. Ransom said that I wholeheartedly agree with:

"This is about theatrics. This is about politics."

Concur.

Wish I could figure out a way to link it. He posted it on FB. Not sure how much effort he put into it, but, its pretty damn amazing.

I sent Dan's good buddy a copy on FB so maybe he can figure out how to link it.

In the debate for or against the Bear's Ears, what's kinda missing is what is actually, with regard to resources, extraction, etc, at stake. What is being locked up? That map helps define it.

With oil/gas down (see Vernal's economy), one wonders how viable that industry would be to the Blanding area. I get that service industry jobs in tourism don't have those high salaries that extraction jobs provide. But...if the industry was healthy, and, it had been a few years back, how many folks in Blanding benefited from it?

Just like the timber industry in Maine and Montana, the copper industry in Butte Montana...the market can tap those out and when it dies...those jobs die too. My dad worked in a mill....and...one day, it closed and the company filed bankruptcy. Lost his job and 20 years plus pension (Missoula Montana). So, I have empathy for these communities whose employment is tied to extraction, especially when the market for those products change or the resource is tapped out. Boom and bust.

Rural Utah is tough sleddin' for employment. I'd think having an option like tourism would be a good thing. At least its an option.

Grazing cattle? In Southern Utah? And having them compete with feedlot or areas which grow a gob of grass? Not much there (although the Redds have hung in there with Dugout Ranch).



I think Dugout is in the Bear's Ears. With regard to grazing:

Laws, regulations, and policies followed by USFS or BLM in issuing and administering grazing permits or leases on lands under their jurisdiction shall continue to apply with regard to the lands in the monument to ensure the ongoing consistency with the care and management of the objects identified above.

Anyhow...current grazing not much effected.