Caribou Gear Tarp

No one at the helm of America's national parks

Well, news flash, it costs money to manage public land, and I don't expect people to work for free, not have a pension, or a competitive salary/benefit package.

I would venture a guess, that the park employees making 60K a year or less, outnumber those making anything close to 150K.

When you look at the number of citizens who enjoy our National Parks, I'd say the cost is worth it.

With just a guess...I was pretty close:



Total payroll expenses for NPS is about 1.1 billion...DOD spending on payroll and benefits in 2013 was 150 Billion.

Let's face it the NPS and public lands in general are not something most people remotely care about. Given this and the fact we are 23 trillion in debt makes the funding issue unlikely to change in the near future, if ever. We can argue why this is in a partisan manner, but that doesn't change the situation.
 
There could be fifty different reasons that the NPS salaries jumped between 2016 and 2017. The one I most suspect was that retirement openings were just left being vacant. Generally speaking, new hires are going to bring down the average salary.

Those salaries are not excessive in my mind. To me they are in the wheelhouse of the middle class, certainly not higher. It is proper in my opinion that an employee of the Federal government make a salary that allows for a middle class lifestyle.
 
Who on here has been directly affected good or bad by a public land policy by policy I'm talking as far reaching as policies that allowed or implemented oil and gas, solar and wind, logging etc... in the last 5 years?

Me, with two that come to mind without giving it hardly any thought. At least if these examples qualify for what you mean as "directly affected." And none of those would be considered good, from the standpoint of a hunter.

The area I used to hunt in Wyoming for pronghorn with 2 points is a complete industrial complex of gas wells, pump stations, and huge structures that I have no clue what they are for. I hunted it in 2014 and 2018. The level of disturbance was far higher and given the amount of dirt turned up for new projects, it looks like if I draw in the coming years I will see even more disturbance.

My Uncle Larry's elk hunt this year has a huge high voltage power line being built that will go through the middle of the BLM in that unit. New roads, big parking lots, etc. It looks like the staging area for building the football stadium in Las Vegas. The elk we found in last year in these now disrupted areas were not there this year, rather having moved a few miles away.

I suspect if I looked at the hunts I did in the last five years, a little more thought could get me to remember a couple more.
 
suspect if I looked at the hunts I did in the last five years, a little more thought could get me to remember a couple more.
This is the type of answer I was looking for. Now let's get to the nuts and bolts of these projects on these parcels of public land. Now I cant answer these questions so I dont expect my fellow HTers to know the answers either. But what policy or policies made these projects possible at the federal level and state levels? When were these policies born into existence? What's the long term effect these projects will have on these areas? Why were these projects needed to be done? Will these projects hurt anyone or benefit anyone in the long term? See if we can narrow this down and find out which people are directly responsible for the actions taken on these public lands.
If we can do this I'm all for playing the blame game but this country has been in existence a long time. We have had multiple Democrat and Republican presidents during that time. The east has been industrialized basically since day one and over all these years steps taken by multiple people have managed to keep the west pretty open and accessible for us public land users. So I feel like we as a whole with government have done a decent job at balancing public lands and industry over the last almost 250 years. But according to mark and some others one administration is gonna ruin it all in 8 short years. I highly doubt it.
 
Our voices need to be heard on these issues that's one of the main reasons we still have the lands we do. But if your gonna be a voice make it matter, make sense, and know the real facts of what your talking about. Otherwise your not helping anything.

Broad statements like Trump hates public lands or obama hates america makes you sound ignorant. These statements arent true they just have different views than you or I and different visions of what will work or not work for the country. I'm glad I'm not president of this great country and making these decisions we'd be doomed. 🤣
 
Let's face it the NPS and public lands in general are not something most people remotely care about. Given this and the fact we are 23 trillion in debt makes the funding issue unlikely to change in the near future, if ever. We can argue why this is in a partisan manner, but that doesn't change the situation.

I tend to disagree...cutting the NPS budget to shore up a 23 trillion dollar debt, is akin to asking someone swimming in debt from buying boats, motorcycles, ATV', cars, trucks, etc. etc. that the $3 Starbucks is going to shore up their personal finances....aint happening.

I also disagree that NP's are not something that people remotely care about...

National parks attract millions of visitors each year owing to their vast capacity for outdoor recreation - an estimated 331 million people visited national parks in the U.S. in 2017.

That's a pretty fair turnout for people not remotely caring about national parks...don't you think?
 
Our voices need to be heard on these issues that's one of the main reasons we still have the lands we do. But if your gonna be a voice make it matter, make sense, and know the real facts of what your talking about. Otherwise your not helping anything.

Broad statements like Trump hates public lands or obama hates america makes you sound ignorant. These statements arent true they just have different views than you or I and different visions of what will work or not work for the country. I'm glad I'm not president of this great country and making these decisions we'd be doomed. 🤣

Yeah, maybe take your own advice...and make it a double scoop.
 
Who on here has been directly affected good or bad by a public land policy by policy I'm talking as far reaching as policies that allowed or implemented oil and gas, solar and wind, logging etc... in the last 5 years?

I have in lots of ways and places...way more bad than good.
 
I'm not going to take the time to type it all out, but the shit show of farm bill funding (thing CRP payments and enrollment) has had a huge negative impact on the deer and bird hunting for me personally.

If you're looking for explanations, Whit Fosburgh does a pretty succint job of encapsulating this administration's work on public lands and waters. There has been some good, but a lot of bad as well. Can I say that without referencing something Obama did?
 
I tend to disagree...cutting the NPS budget to shore up a 23 trillion dollar debt, is akin to asking someone swimming in debt from buying boats, motorcycles, ATV', cars, trucks, etc. etc. that the $3 Starbucks is going to shore up their personal finances....aint happening.

I also disagree that NP's are not something that people remotely care about...

National parks attract millions of visitors each year owing to their vast capacity for outdoor recreation - an estimated 331 million people visited national parks in the U.S. in 2017.

That's a pretty fair turnout for people not remotely caring about national parks...don't you think?
It's not a matter of using the NPS budget to deal with the national debt. It's a matter of squeaky wheels getting the grease in times of tight budgets.
I am not sure how those visitor numbers are figured, but I would bet many are repeats and foreign tourists. Other wise just about every person in the country would visit a NPS property every year and we both know that's not true.
 
Sometimes by the time your effected the damage is already done. Just the fact that the Pebble mine and Mining in boundary waters were put back on the table by this administration should point to unhealthy bent in favour of business over our environmental.
Funny how conservatives arent conservative with our environment and public lands.
 
Another disastrous policy for hunters (not directly tied to public land) was ethanol subsidies. It goes back over a decade.

 
Disasters come in various shapes and sizes from loss of family jobs mining / timber industry to canopy overgrowth that could use a good thinning that supports flora and fauna.

Also not a fan of wind turbines placed on our public land supported by those who profess to be conservation minded orgs.

Shit can be slapped for and against. The pendulum effect, in full swing.
 
It's not a matter of using the NPS budget to deal with the national debt. It's a matter of squeaky wheels getting the grease in times of tight budgets.
I am not sure how those visitor numbers are figured, but I would bet many are repeats and foreign tourists. Other wise just about every person in the country would visit a NPS property every year and we both know that's not true.

Tight budgets?

Yeah, OK.


Perhaps the biggest question is why there should be a "tight budget" what, with how well this roaring economy is doing and all.

Its almost like someone cut revenue and increased spending or something of the sort?
 
But the management of public lands is only one of many complex political issues a Administration has to deal with. I feel like if I step left or right I'll end up with crap on my boot so the best bet is to pick the smallest pile. For me that was the current Administration and it's looking like it will be again.
I wish we'd just STFU about public lands sometimes, it is rather trivial compared to the big picture. How about clean air and clean water?

 
Last edited:
I wish we'd just STFU about public lands sometimes, it is rather trivial compared to the big picture. How about clean air and clean water?

How about focusing on fixing a broken two party political system that continues to divide our country so our politicians can focus on long term problems like clean air, water, and energy. While we're at it maybe review congressional and senatorial terms and salary.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,057
Messages
1,945,293
Members
34,995
Latest member
Infraredice
Back
Top