2 National Monuments Gutted

[Milchshake]

You say "gutted" like a bad thing. Most of the Natives on the reservations in those areas disagreed with it becoming a monument in the first place. Like most Utahans, we feel like the state has a better handle on our issues than someone from the east coast.

That's pretty low using Natives as your shield, when they were among the strongest proponents of setting aside the land. They called Obama to act after extensive public consultation, and then only after failed efforts by the Utah congressional delegation to pass legislation protecting the area, which has seen ongoing looting and grave robbing.

There's also a history of Utahns with a settler mentality being on the wrong side of history concerning National Parks. Ironically, Utah also proudly promotes its lucrative “Mighty Five” national parks, four of which were originally national monuments that state and local officials strongly resisted when they were originally designated.

Then:

Many of the national parks that anchor the economy of southern Utah — including Zion, Bryce Canyon, Arches, and Capitol Reef — were first protected in the 1920s and 1930s as national monuments. In the 1960s, efforts to make those places national parks, and to establish a Canyonlands National park, met stiff resistance from the oil and gas industry, ranchers, and Utah Sen. Wallace F. Bennett, who in 1962 predicted, “All commercial use and business activity would be forever banned and nearly all of southern Utah's growth would be forever stunted.”

Now:

When congressional Republicans shut down the federal government in the fall of 2013, state officials in Utah rushed to keep the state's five national parks open. The move came with a hefty price tag — about $167,000 a day to run the parks. In 2014 speech on the Senate floor, Senator Hatch declared, “We owe a debt of gratitude to the people, both elected officials and citizens, who possessed the foresight to recognize the value of Canyonlands and created the park 50 years ago.”

The Utah State Tourism Board promoting the Mighty 5

[PACOX]

The restriction prevented hunting and grazing and restricted hiking areas to only a select paths instead of where ever you want.

So no reason?

[Symphonic]

That's pretty low using Natives as your shield, when they were among the strongest proponents of setting aside the land. They called Obama to act after extensive public consultation, and then only after failed efforts by the Utah congressional delegation to pass legislation protecting the area, which has seen ongoing looting and grave robbing.

https://governorblog.utah.gov/2016/05/bears-ears/

I think the loudest groups that supported the creation of the monuments in their original size were brought in from out of state. I'm not joking when I say that most Navajo were opposed to the creation of it.

[Adam Jensen]

The left cares about national monuments all the sudden? Are they not a symbol of the White Male patriarchy?

This is about nature reserves, not confederate soldiers in bronze.

[LaserSharkDFB]

https://governorblog.utah.gov/2016/05/bears-ears/

I think the loudest groups that supported the creation of the monuments in their original size were brought in from out of state. I'm not joking when I say that most Navajo were opposed to the creation of it.

That link does not show that any kind of majority of Native Americans opposed Bears Ears. Do you have a source showing this to be the case? Sorry to doubt you, but too often when someone claims that 'most of (minority) opposed this', they're just lying.

[JohnBrown1917]

The left cares about national monuments all the sudden? Are they not a symbol of the White Male patriarchy?

You come up with some strange strawmen.

[lockedout]

What a load of shit. All he did was give control of the land back to the State reversing what Obama did.

Good, it never should have been given away in the first place.

[Brubear]

https://governorblog.utah.gov/2016/05/bears-ears/

I think the loudest groups that supported the creation of the monuments in their original size were brought in from out of state. I'm not joking when I say that most Navajo were opposed to the creation of it.

That's funny because 5 of the local tribes to the region, including the Navajo and Utes, are gearing up to sue trump over this.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/...the-president/

Hours after President Donald Trump announced his scaled-back vision for Bears Ears National Monument on Monday, a coalition of five American Indian tribes filed the first lawsuit of many that were promised to challenge the executive action.

Their argument: Trump does not have the legal authority to shrink the designation.

“They declared war on us today,” said Shaun Chapoose, a member of the Ute Indian Tribe Business Committee. “If they think we’re not prepared to protect it, they’re kidding themselves.”

The courts have not weighed in on the matter since the Antiquities Act’s passage 111 years ago. That law authorizes presidents to unilaterally set aside public lands to protect “objects of historic and scientific interest,” which President Barack Obama used to designate the 1.35 million acres in San Juan County last year.

The five tribes — Hopi, Navajo Nation, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Pueblo of Zuni and Ute Indian — pushed for the monument status and are suing Trump and members of his administration for splitting the designation into two areas that comprise less than 202,000 acres. In a brief visit to Utah, the president also trimmed Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument by nearly 900,000 acres.

In their lawsuit, posted late Monday, the tribes argue to the U.S. District Court in Washington that the Antiquities Act does not allow a president to revoke or modify a monument — only to designate one.

The legal challenge is also about “ensuring our tribal members have access to those lands” that hold spiritual significance, said Ethel Branch, attorney general for the Navajo Nation. Members of the intertribal coalition collect plants and water from the Bears Ears region for cultural and medicinal ceremonies. They regard any action against the monument as a rejection of their heritage and their “ties with Mother Earth.”

“Bears Ears is in every way a home to [these] tribes,” the filing reads.

At a news conference after Trump’s announcement, tribal leaders condemned the president and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke for allegedly snubbing their input, criticized the “tremendous affront to tribal sovereignty” and vowed to fight the revised designations.

When he looks out over Bears Ears, Chapoose sees a museum where the artifacts, dwellings and remnants of a culture are displayed in the desert landscape. Without protection, he fears looting, grave-robbing and vandalism will destroy the place he considers sacred.

[Gray_Matter]

Any good reason why anyone would want those positions reversed? I mean, I know Trump is doing it because his legislative agenda pretty much is a list of Obama's accomplishments with a big NOPE written through them.

But seriously - why?

There is several billion tons of coal under there.

[Independent voter]

Any good reason why anyone would want those positions reversed? I mean, I know Trump is doing it because his legislative agenda pretty much is a list of Obama's accomplishments with a big NOPE written through them.

But seriously - why?

Ranchers and miners were able to lease the land from the fed at pennies per acre so it was a real asset to these people. Once it was made a national monument mining and ranching was banned. Also any dirt roads into these areas will no longer be repaired so access will be limited.

Ranchers would often set fires to keep pastures for cattle open, they can't do that in a wilderness area.

I don't think there was any state of Utah land involved.

[Gray_Matter]

Yeah but who would want to mine it?

Whoever paid the lobbyists to push it with the politicians. This thread wouldn't exist if there wasn't minerals under those parks.

[Noradin]

You really think it's improbable that Trump would push this just to piss on Obama's bed?

I think it's probable that someone with an agenda told him about Obama's involvement, otherwise how would he know?

[Techno-Druid]

Nothing about those restrictions is sensible.

Hunting is needed to keep deer populations in check. Grazing cattle is no different than the Buffalo that once gazed the lands in much much larger numbers. Tourism helps to protect these lands restricting it is not a positive.

Gray wolves are superior at reducing and managing deer and elk populations. They not only kill the deer, but they alter their behavior, conditioning them to avoid certain areas of parks. This can allow for vegetation to radically regenerate and for an increase in biodiversity.

And why not have wild bison there instead of cattle? Plains bison are a symbol of America.

[Daelak]

You say "gutted" like a bad thing. Most of the Natives on the reservations in those areas disagreed with it becoming a monument in the first place. Like most Utahans, we feel like the state has a better handle on our issues than someone from the east coast.

I have zero trust in a Utah State level agency to do the right thing when it comes to these national monuments. Especially considering the whole "man's dominion over the Earth" shtick that worshipped over in Utah. How about we leave it to the NPS and BLM to ensure these public lands are preserved for generations, like that disgusting liberal progressive Teddy Roosevelt wanted.

[Symphonic]

I have zero trust in a Utah State level agency to do the right thing when it comes to these national monuments. Especially considering the whole "man's dominion over the Earth" shtick that worshipped over in Utah. How about we leave it to the NPS and BLM to ensure these public lands are preserved for generations, like that disgusting liberal progressive Teddy Roosevelt wanted.

I understand, the lands would actually not be as "free" as people are thinking, but they would be BLM/Forest Service lands. Just not national monuments, so those who live off the land are able to do so.

Here is a quote from one of my friends who has been working with locals down there through this process:

I've been down with the local Diné and the people of san juan, as have the people that I work with, who've been their more times than I have. I've been working on this for more than two years. The Aneth chapter, who lives in San Juan County, are one of the poorest of the navajo nation. many don't have running water or electricity. They live off the land and the supplies they get from the bears ears. This is where they gather wood to heat their homes, cook their food, make their fences.

It's also where they go hunting and gather pinions, herbs, etc. The group you're referring to are not from san juan county and their people have not been on the land for eons. The Aneth lived on the bears ears when kit carson raided - they actually fled their to avoid him and decided to stay. They were the people who never surrendered. I believe the only navajo nation that refused to surrender.

Then, however long later, the government made a deal with them and created an extension for them on the navajo nation land. They call it the Aneth Extension. The group that wanted a national monument spread lies to the natives in the area telling them that if they agreed to make it a monument that they'd be able to move back on the land, they ran radio adds (which were lies), they told them that they'd be able to co-manage (which was another blatant lie), along with that they said that they'd still be able to gather their supplies but who knows if that would really be allowed. We wouldn't know until we saw this particular monuments rules, or whatever it is. And then even if the rules were favorable to the natives and locals, they could be changed whenever a new president feels like changing it.

That's a huge gamble! Especially considering 6 of the 8 monuments in utah have become national parks and once that happened the locals would be screwed because they wouldn't be able to touch the resources that are so vital to their survival. They wouldn't be able to heat their homes during winter, they wouldn't be able to fix their fences, they wouldn't be able to graze their cattle, or hunt for food. What happens then? Then on top of that, many locals would have to leave san juan to look for work. Since it's one of the poorest counties in the country, spouses would likely look for work away from home which is a huge strain on families and marriages. Schools would close down when they couldn't tax the land anymore and I assume local taxes would sky rocket but I'm not sure about that... maybe just property taxes, I don't know.

Anyhow, an economy cannot thrive when it only has one industry. San Juan would follow Beaver County's path and declare a state of emergency because of what a national monument would do to their economy. It's really sad that so many outdoor sporting goods stores and other environmental groups have been funding these lies. Bussing people in from all over the western states to drown out local voices when Washington comes to town. Their goals are selfish. There are people in San Juan who support a monument but their numbers are few and far between. The people of San Juan County, native and non-native alike celebrated today and it was beautiful!

I just copied and pasted that from her facebook page. The 5 tribes that are threatening to sue, are some of the 20,000 natives that live about 45 minutes away. I don't even think they'd be in the same county anymore. And Half of the "20,000" are navajo... that live in arizona. I just think we often hear one side, the loudest, and not the people who actually are living there.

[cubby]

There is several billion tons of coal under there.

Jesus, please tell me you're kidding.

- - - Updated - - -

Ranchers and miners were able to lease the land from the fed at pennies per acre so it was a real asset to these people. Once it was made a national monument mining and ranching was banned. Also any dirt roads into these areas will no longer be repaired so access will be limited.

Ranchers would often set fires to keep pastures for cattle open, they can't do that in a wilderness area.

I don't think there was any state of Utah land involved.

God dammit - is there anything Donnie Dum Dum won't fuck up at this point. Every. Single. Day. he just gets worse and worse.

[Daelak]

I understand, the lands would actually not be as "free" as people are thinking, but they would be BLM/Forest Service lands. Just not national monuments, so those who live off the land are able to do so.

Here is a quote from one of my friends who has been working with locals down there through this process:



I just copied and pasted that from her facebook page. The 5 tribes that are threatening to sue, are some of the 20,000 natives that live about 45 minutes away. I don't even think they'd be in the same county anymore. And Half of the "20,000" are navajo... that live in arizona. I just think we often hear one side, the loudest, and not the people who actually are living there.

Try this Salt Lake Tribune Article, might have more perspective than a Facebook post.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/environme...ut-cedar-mesa/

[Redwyrm]

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/1460...rilling-rights

The president is visiting Utah this morning to formally announce that he’s shrinking two national monuments previously designated by two former Democratic presidents: Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante. Trump’s decision, revealed last month by the Salt Lake Tribune, has outraged environmentalists and tribal groups who contend that the sites—particularly the 1.35 million acre Bears Ears—contain ancient and sacred artifacts and should be federally protected from recreational and other activities. But Trump has sided with Republican lawmakers and local leaders who believe the state should be able to decide what happens on its own land. “We’re going to be doing something that the state of Utah and others have wanted to be done for many, many years,” Trump told reporters on Monday before boarding Air Force One. “It will be one of the great ... really events in this country in a long time—so important for states’ rights, and so important for the people of Utah.”

Trump didn’t directly say who the “others” are that have wanted the federal government to shrink or eliminate these monuments. But one is certainly the fossil fuel interests. As Reuters reported, the executive order Trump signed in April to allow national monument designations to be rescinded or reduced came “as the administration pushes to open up more federal land to drilling, mining and other development.”

Bears Ears is in the industry’s sights. This summer, a Tribune investigation found that oil and gas interests “hope to tap hydrocarbon deposits under parts of the Bears Ears region that Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke may soon recommend removing from the monument.” Specifically, the Tribune found that industry has been eyeing a 2.7-million-acre area called the San Juan County Energy Zone, which the Utah legislature had previously been considering to open up to the industry. Much of that area became off limits when former President Barack Obama proclaimed Bears Ears a monument in December 2016.

Public land advocate Randi Spivak told the Tribune that drilling in Bears Ears was “a clear and present danger,” and that “the only thing staying in the way is monument status.” Today, Trump will begin the process of removing that obstacle—surely the start of a long legal fight. “What’s next, President Trump—the Grand Canyon?” Rhea Suh, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement. “See you in court.”

[Brubear]

I understand, the lands would actually not be as "free" as people are thinking, but they would be BLM/Forest Service lands. Just not national monuments, so those who live off the land are able to do so.

Here is a quote from one of my friends who has been working with locals down there through this process:



I just copied and pasted that from her facebook page. The 5 tribes that are threatening to sue, are some of the 20,000 natives that live about 45 minutes away. I don't even think they'd be in the same county anymore. And Half of the "20,000" are navajo... that live in arizona. I just think we often hear one side, the loudest, and not the people who actually are living there.

The Ute Mountain, Navajo Nation, and Hopi tribes are literally right by these monuments.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Be...4d-109.8652554

[Milchshake]

Ranchers and miners were able to lease the land from the fed at pennies per acre so it was a real asset to these people. Once it was made a national monument mining and ranching was banned. Also any dirt roads into these areas will no longer be repaired so access will be limited.

Ranchers would often set fires to keep pastures for cattle open, they can't do that in a wilderness area.

I don't think there was any state of Utah land involved.

That's mostly wrong. Cattle grazing leases get grandfathered in, hunting is still allowed, excepting special habitats and archaeological areas. Only mining was outright banned, and ATV use was limited to designated OHV trails. Recreational ATV riders are some of the biggest howler monkeys out west fighting conservation efforts. Stewards of the Land^TM feel the need to tear it up wherever they please.

If a person lives out West take a look at the maps of your local National Parks or Monuments. You'll see an incessant checkerboard pattern along the edges, and if you're brave you might ask why this happens. It's because the old leases and property owners get grandfathered in. Land is swapped with private or state owners. In short, a lot of work in put in to account for existing users of said areas.

Also you're confusing Wilderness Areas(Forest Service) with National Monuments(BLM). Each agency has different mandates for what type of land-uses they can restrict or manage. These rules were set forth by Congress in the acts concerning Monuments and Wilderness Areas.