Daines- Bill to Reform Monument Designation Process

[Ben Lamb]

Valid point. Intent was "the limits of which in all cases shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected". Didn't need 1.3M acres for Bears Ears.

There are over 100,000 cultural sites contained within Bear's Ears. Which ones don't deserve protection?

 

[Nemont]

Couple of things: Does Daines bill have a prayer of passing the Senate? It would appear that there is no way it would get a cloture vote. What am I missing?

Also if congress gave this power to the Executive branch isn't it a proper debate to have in our Representative Republic as to whether congress should take some or all of the power back. Regardless of the merits of the Act itself, which IMO has been a good thing, isn't this debate the proper format for discussing how the power should be used? Playing games/Politics is often in the eye of the beholder.

Nemont

 

[Ben Lamb]

Nemont, it depends on rule changes that will be forthcoming from McConnell, et al. It also depends on what bill it gets slipped in to.

It is absolutely appropriate to have the discussion. That doesn't change the overwhelming opinion that gutting the act is a bad thing. The history of the Act shows it is a worthwhile piece of statute that has greatly benefited he United States & her citizens.

 

[James Riley]

Nemont: I want to hear more about filibusters. Didn't the Dems screw themselves on this when they were on the other side of the coin? Do they have enough to do it any more? Not sure. Just thought I heard something about how it's not going to save them any more (or the Rs when things change again). ????

 

[JoseCuervo]

Several weeks ago the Salt Lake Tribune posted a pro/con pair of editorials and one astounding number was the average size of monuments designated has grown exponentially over the years. (I will post if I can find them) Presidents are using the Antiquities Act as a path to creating National Parks and defacto Wilderness. Of course nobody worries about the new budget requirements when designated.

Be careful fire-bombing with "average size" of the monuments.

Obama did a big one that is out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, don't think you can average it into your land-based monuments and have an honest discussion.

 

[OriginalOscar]

There are over 100,000 cultural sites contained within Bear's Ears. Which ones don't deserve protection?

My buddy grew up east of Browning MT and his wife's family was 90 miles north of Billings. Both ranches had native American cultural sites including human on his dads place. Every corner of this country has native American sites. Do you have a plan to protect them all or just the ones on federal land? If you are concerned about the native American sites shouldn't that protection exist on private lands? Why not let the government use imminent domain to force protection on these sites and involve the native tribes in deciding what's best? Sorry if it affects your livelihood but you'll feel good knowing you're now doing good as a Do Gooder!

Where are you getting 100K sites on Bears Ears?

The reality is nobody has every conducted a complete inventory. Now that it's declared as a monument the government will conduct a complete inventory as part of developing the management plan. Doesn't that seem like cart before the horse. Create the monument and then figure out what we've protected?

 

[JoseCuervo]

My buddy grew up east of Browning MT and his wife's family was 90 miles north of Billings. Both ranches had native American cultural sites including human on his dads place. Every corner of this country has native American sites. Do you have a plan to protect them all or just the ones on federal land? If you are concerned about the native American sites shouldn't that protection exist on private lands? Why not let the government use imminent domain to force protection on these sites and involve the native tribes in deciding what's best? Sorry if it affects your livelihood but you'll feel good knowing you're now doing good as a Do Gooder!

Where are you getting 100K sites on Bears Ears?

The reality is nobody has every conducted a complete inventory. Now that it's declared as a monument the government will conduct a complete inventory as part of developing the management plan. Doesn't that seem like cart before the horse. Create the monument and then figure out what we've protected?

Just think of it this way...... If the inventory is done, and there is no need for protecting land, future generations can make that decision, with data.

If we drill the shit out of it now, we remove that option for future generations.


I think I will tend to err on the side of letting my kids, grandkids, etc... have something worth worrying about.

 

[OriginalOscar]

Be careful fire-bombing with "average size" of the monuments.

Obama did a big one that is out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, don't think you can average it into your land-based monuments and have an honest discussion.

View attachment 66440

Great argument. Nobody lives there. Love to see a dark side of the moon national monument.

Here's the size for review. Notice the growth in size - https://www.nps.gov/archeology/sites/antiquities/monumentslist.htm

Presidential overreach and time to involve legislative branch.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Great argument. Nobody lives there. Love to see a dark side of the moon national monument.

Here's the size for review. Notice the growth in size - https://www.nps.gov/archeology/sites/antiquities/monumentslist.htm

Presidential overreach and time to involve legislative branch.

When did I say anything about "nobody lives there"?

I was just providing you caution and facts for your consideration. The "fact" you choose to ignore facts, speaks solely about you.

 

[OriginalOscar]

When did I say anything about "nobody lives there"?

I was just providing you caution and facts for your consideration. The "fact" you choose to ignore facts, speaks solely about you.

Let the adults have a discussion. The juvenile deflection is old. Do you want to comment on the exponential growth of the monument designation or if native American sites on private land should have some form of protection? And make a case for your position!

 

[JoseCuervo]

Let the adults have a discussion. The juvenile deflection is old. Do you want to comment on the exponential growth of the monument designation or if native American sites on private land should have some form of protection? And make a case for your position!

My position is you making all sorts of new straw man arguments isn't really an "adult discussion". Nothing about this discussion has to do with Native American sites on private land. If you want to go discuss private land topics, go start another thread, don't just try and deflect and then whine that people aren't playing by your rules.


Facts. They are messy to your fact-free lifestyle.

 

[RobG]

Great argument. Nobody lives there. Love to see a dark side of the moon national monument.

Should have spoke up when you had the chance. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr2617

 

[James Riley]

Why not let the government use imminent domain to force protection on these sites and involve the native tribes in deciding what's best?

I'll tell you why we don't do that: We'd rather compromise, work with locals, and go through a less intrusive process.

If we were to condemn and shove it down local throats then we'd be accused of over-playing our hand and, if we did that, someone might try to repeal or limit the AA or speed the PTL process.

Oh . . . wait.

 

[Ben Lamb]

My buddy grew up east of Browning MT and his wife's family was 90 miles north of Billings. Both ranches had native American cultural sites including human on his dads place. Every corner of this country has native American sites. Do you have a plan to protect them all or just the ones on federal land? If you are concerned about the native American sites shouldn't that protection exist on private lands? Why not let the government use imminent domain to force protection on these sites and involve the native tribes in deciding what's best? Sorry if it affects your livelihood but you'll feel good knowing you're now doing good as a Do Gooder!

Where are you getting 100K sites on Bears Ears?

The reality is nobody has every conducted a complete inventory. Now that it's declared as a monument the government will conduct a complete inventory as part of developing the management plan. Doesn't that seem like cart before the horse. Create the monument and then figure out what we've protected?

Private land is private land. Using eminent domain is irresponsible as it does not further the public good. It's why we have private property rights. This is a straw-man argument that ignores Bears Ears being entirely public land. Protecting public land is within the scope and preview of the President of the United States, as duly handed down from Congress in 1906.

The 100,000 number came from the Inter-Tribal Coalition.

 

[u1299]

Try it without the name calling.

I have no problem going through the legislative process. The Rocky Mountain Front Heritage Act was passed in 2012. I worked on that bill for 5 years. It was the first wilderness bill that passed in a generation due to the political gamesmanship the Republicans were playing. If we were to consider wilderness bills, etc, by their merit, we'd not need things like the Antiquities Act. But we do, because politicians play games with public lands and rather than work with conservationists, they try to eliminate them, remove protections for them, etc. Congress most assuredly is broken, and on public lands, has been for a long time. So when the legislative process is intentionally broken, and lands deserve protection from rapacious developers, I'm glad America had the foresight to give the President, via the legislative process, the ability to conserve America's cultural treasures.

Theodore Roosevelt had the exact same problems 110 years ago, which is why the Act passed narrowly. People wanted to turn the Grand Canyon into an amusement park and mine. He stopped that through executive action. The wisdom of the Antiquities Act has been born out over the course of history. People who think public land's only value is what you can strip from it think it's a bad idea. People who value our heritage and the cultures that used that land before value it.

I don't know you Ben, but I know from your posts; your knowledge about history, public lands, the legislative process past and current, and so many other issues discussed on this forum are way ahead of mine. Wish I had that same knowledge. I appreciate your efforts on behalf of conservation and public lands.

 

[noharleyyet]

Ben's nice....

 

[Ben Lamb]

 

[Ben Lamb]

I don't know you Ben, but I know from your posts; your knowledge about history, public lands, the legislative process past and current, and so many other issues discussed on this forum are way ahead of mine. Wish I had that same knowledge. I appreciate your efforts on behalf of conservation and public lands.

That is very kind. Thank you. I've been lucky to have a career that's put me in the arena for a while. Anyone can do this kind of stuff. There's a lot of opportunity especially now to get in the fight. Just takes a love of place, critters & a willingness to fight.

There are many who are much better at it than I am, and I'm glad that they're out there doing the heavy lifting.

 

[OriginalOscar]

Private land is private land. Using eminent domain is irresponsible as it does not further the public good. It's why we have private property rights. This is a straw-man argument that ignores Bears Ears being entirely public land. Protecting public land is within the scope and preview of the President of the United States, as duly handed down from Congress in 1906.

The 100,000 number came from the Inter-Tribal Coalition.

Isn't the argument for Bears Ears the greater good and support for the tribal heritage? If that's truly the case we should seek ways to protect these sites on private lands across this country.

The 100,000 number has no basis. Tribes have never completed an inventory.

The Do Gooders stopped the ND pipeline. Perhaps on the way home to CA the could find sites in MT to protect.

 

[OriginalOscar]

Should have spoke up when you had the chance. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr2617

Would have been a Great Gig in the Sky