 sj |
||
|
||
BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold
|
|
|
|||||||
|
BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold |
Share Thread
|
||||||
|
Subject: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Donuel Date: 26 Apr 17 - 11:50 AM 265 Million acres of Federal land and water is dictated by Trump to be excluded from the antiquities act and given 'back' to the states to do with as they see fit. He says the control will be given back to the people. Corporations are now legally people. There are fossil fuels under some of these National Parks. Tillerson supports this move. Not every National Park is scheduled to be exploited for oil, lumber and minerals - yet. Trump just signed his executive order to take the Federal Park land from Utah. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Greg F. Date: 26 Apr 17 - 12:22 PM About time, too! You've seen one redwood, you've seen 'em all. Long as Twitler is going back to Reagan'trickle-down bullshit, might as well reprise James Watt as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Donuel Date: 26 Apr 17 - 12:39 PM My, you have a fantastic memory |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Greg F. Date: 26 Apr 17 - 05:05 PM Yeah, and one reason we're cursed with Twitler and his crew is that too many U.S. voters have no damn memory at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Donuel Date: 26 Apr 17 - 09:21 PM edit- Correction: the abandoned Trump hotel I mentioned is in Azerbaijan, not Turkey |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Stu Date: 27 Apr 17 - 02:52 AM An absolute disaster. US national parks are amazing places and the envy of the world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Apr 17 - 03:08 AM Well, to be credible, one has to be accurate. As far as I can see, no National Parks are threatened. National Parks are established by an act of Congress, and cannot be abolished by executive order. National Monuments are a different matter. They are established by executive order, and can generally be abandoned by executive order. The national monuments in question have, in general, not been developed. Not all are operated by the National Park Service - the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service operate some of the National Monuments. I don't know that there any plans to privatize or sell any National Monuments. If National Monument status is removed, the land is still federal land - but it becomes available for mining and petroleum and grazing leases. The Ken Burns series on the National Parks gives good coverage to the controversy that arose in the establishment of many of the National Parks. Many times, locals opposed the parks because they set aside land that had been important to the local economy. Sometimes, the parks displaced people who had lived on land that became parkland - for example, Shenandoah National Park and the Blue Ridge Parkway displaced a lot of people when they were built. I love the national parks and monuments, and I've visited many of them. I went to 31 national park facilities on my tour of the U.S. last fall. But there is another side of the story. Many rural states aren't so sure they want their wilderness areas to be crowded with tourists. While I would most probably oppose the removal of National Monument status from any federal land, I think it's important to discuss the matter from a factual basis and not from "fake news." -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: DMcG Date: 27 Apr 17 - 03:36 AM Thanks, Joe. As an outsider I was unaware of the distinction and had to some extent already started down the mistaken path. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: robomatic Date: 27 Apr 17 - 06:55 AM When I saw the thread title I did not have to click on it to know who initiated it. Or its accuracy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Apr 17 - 04:20 PM Although this thread begins with grossly inaccurate information, it's important to know that there is a serious threat from this executive order requiring review of national monuments established in the last twenty years. Most of the parks on the list are places most people have never heard of, but they are all truly remarkable places. The Los Angeles Times has an excellent article describing the lands that are threatened, and the San Francisco Chronicle has an article on the 8 monuments in California that are threatened. My nephew Joe Offer works for a nonprofit dedicated to protecting the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument in Montana. I haven't been to that area yet, but I hope to make it there this summmer. Sounds like it's absolutely beautiful. Carrizo Plain National Monument is reputed to have the most spectacular wildflower displays in all of California - but I haven't figure out how to get there yet. It's up on the top of the mountain range southeast of Bakersfield, and it really doesn't have roads. I got really close, but my little red Honda told me she didn't want to go any closer and get stuck in the mud. That's the case with a lot of these newer National Monuments - the government has just begun to build the infrastructure needed to give visitors access to these lands. Most of these areas had a fairly good level of protection even before they were declared National Monuments. If Trump were to negate monument status, his administration would still have to do a lot of work to cause significant destruction to the natural beauty of these places. Most likely, Trump's actions couldn't start damaging these areas until after the end of his administration. Leasing out government lands for exploitation is a lengthy process - and a new President could quickly negate Trump's executive order and restore monument status to these lands. And it is very unlikely that any of these government lands would be sold. That would require legislation. These lands are truly remarkable places that deserve to be protected and preserved. Trump's executive order is a real threat and must be taken seriously, but it will take more than one administration to do the ecological damage that Trump wants to accomplish. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Thompson Date: 27 Apr 17 - 04:36 PM Enclosure of the commonages all over again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Donuel Date: 28 Apr 17 - 09:23 AM Joe you could be the straight man for the set up and criticize thread titles but you don't have to be cruel or vindictive about it. A light touch would not include accusing me of fake news, Russian or not. Innate intelligence is free so it is cheap, but knowledge has to be individually sought and paid for. Et tu DMcG? Robo, bless your heart :) At any rate thanks for holding me to the Pulitzer standard. http://www.theverge.com/2017/4/26/15423960/donald-trump-executive-order-national-monuments-bears-ears-utah |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Rapparee Date: 28 Apr 17 - 10:11 AM Here's a link to the full text of the order. Read it yourself. Executive Order. Nothing says anything about privatizing or selling these Monuments. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: DMcG Date: 28 Apr 17 - 10:24 AM Et tu, DMcG? I come not to disprove what Donuel spoke... But it is important we fire at the right targets. If the monuments are at risk but - currently - the parks are not, it weakens the stance of those seeking to protect the monuments if they lay themselves open to misrepresentation. So however free and easy Trump and co may be with the truth, do not assume they will grant their opponents any leeway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Greg F. Date: 28 Apr 17 - 10:42 AM Rap, please. Taken in the context of Twitler's stated views and those of the anti-government/anti-environment/Bundyite crowd of advisors that he's surrounded himself with- plus the orientation of the population he's playing to, what do you think the report is going to say and Twitler will do with it? Are you really that naive? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Donuel Date: 28 Apr 17 - 10:46 AM It is true I believe selling federal land to corporations is a forgone conclusion. It is not a States Rights issue as Trump claims. Are National Parks threatened? They have been used as political pawns before and will again. Look at their budget cuts. There already exists corporate encroachment near the Grand Canyon. The smog in the Grand Canyon is the result and did not exist in Clinton's administration. Some of you sound like this newest executive order is a good thing. If you do, it doesn't make you stupid, weak or malevolent. We can not and will not drill for oil in Yosemite but we definitely are going to drill the Utah Monuments land. Of this I am positive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Donuel Date: 28 Apr 17 - 10:59 AM Slippery slopes are often slippery because of oil, power and greed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Apr 17 - 03:14 PM It's a difficult question, Donuel, and I don't have a good answer yet: How should I respond when somebody on "my side" broadcasts untruthful information? I work as an advocate for our local homeless shelter, and I frequently get up to speak at public meetings. There's a woman in our group who gets up to speak as often as I do - but what she says is most often inaccurate, misleading, or downright untrue; and it often serves to weaken the cause we're fighting for. I try to be polite, but oftentimes I feel I need to refute what she says and offer the correct information. I try to speak after her, so that the last word is correct. I've had people complain that I think I'm always right, and I guess their allegation is true. Most often, I AM right - because I don't take a position until I take the time to have well-researched facts to back it up. If I'm not sure of something, I couch my words in ways that make it clear that this is more of an educated guess than pure fact. Donuel, you are one of the most prolific posters at Mudcat, and you start more threads in the BS section than just about anybody else. And very often, you start threads with misinformation and then dig yourself deeper. How would you suggest that people who are on "your side" should respond? By supporting the untruths you propose? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Apr 17 - 03:32 PM This article says that the haze is a serious problem at the Grand Canyon. It's caused by smog that blows in from the cities and from power plants. However, visibility at the Grand Canyon has improved over the last twenty years because of the Clean Air Act and the closure of a nearby power plant. Another on the list of National Monuments threatened by Trump's Executive Order, is Mojave Trails National Monument. I was there last November, and didn't even know I was in a National Monument. It's most of the hundred miles of Route 66 that runs from Needles to Barstow, California, along the route of the Santa Fe Railroad tracks. It's a beautiful, desolate area - and it's a pretty easy drive. If you take your time, you'll find all sorts of interesting things along the way. Most notable to me were the Amboy Crater and the lava flow that runs for miles and miles to the west of the crater. Roy's Motel & Cafe is another landmark within the National Monument - a huge, abandoned motel in the middle of nowhere. Mojave Trails National Monument covers most of the area between Joshua Tree National Park and Mojave National Preserve. We need to find ways to preserve these fascinating places without transplanting and impoverishing the people who once lived there and made their living there. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Greg F. Date: 28 Apr 17 - 04:47 PM visibility at the Grand Canyon has improved over the last twenty years because of the Clean Air Act Don't forget that Twitler & Co. want to repeal/weaken the Clean Air Act as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Donuel Date: 28 Apr 17 - 06:23 PM That's a lighter touch by far Joe. I would respond 'since familiarity breeds contempt and I am as you say the most prolific poster, the solution would be for me to post rarely with 4 times the accuracy and detail backed by several sources'. Since you are so much better at that than I,it would be even better if you post for me. Your written accounts flow with a realism of being there. I have a ukulele summer to enjoy. Thanks :) Do good donuel posts and keep in touch. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: US National Parks to be privatized-sold From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Apr 17 - 10:54 PM Yes, Donuel, I think you would be far better to think more and post less. Posting misinformation isn't helpful to anybody - not to you, either. We all would be better off if we could take the time to research matters before we post. You have much to say that is good, so do the research and don't go off sulking with your ukulele. But I'm sure your ukulele playing is better than mine. I know three chords pretty well, though. But since I'm not very good, I don't play in public. Donuel, if you have nothing to say, perhaps you shouldn't say it. Do your homework before you post. -Joe- |
