Biden Admin and CBD recently jointly filed

[Rick M.]

Again the monuments still stood, and the withdrawn land was still Federal land, held in Trust for the Citizens of the US. That is the truth. Nothing was stolen as you alluded. In fact trump added a new area of 11k acres that wasn’t previously part of it.

With one Exec order all public land multi use leases are stopped. Nation wide

You are arguing semantics of multi use doctrine while trying to give the appearance that public land was sold or given away. It was not. It’s really that simple.

If you want multi-use doctrine stopped, and it truly protected then push for congress to relist it as wilderness, that way trees are protect, ground is roadless and etc. and NFS is management goal is different. National park service has a completely different use ideology then BLM/NFS. But that won’t happen even though I would now like to see it that way. Foot or horseback only

You... didn't read either of the articles, did you? They literally laid it out, bare as can be. There's no arguing semantics going on, there's a dishonesty in your take that you aren't willing to move beyond or acknowledge. That's unfortunate, but I did my part in being clear and providing sources. I'm gonna move on.

"Foot or horseback only" - I couldn't agree more with this.

As to the original topic of the post, I'll be keeping an eye on it for sure. Thanks for bringing it up. We should all take more time to write to our leaders regarding the disruption of both state and federal agencies from doing their jobs by non-profit, politically-motivated organizations. From wolf and grizzly hunting to fishing, access, etc., it needs to stop. The FWS shouldn't be tied up in court every time they want to execute decisions that we have entrusted them with.

 

[Rick M.]

Wrong every governing body has a use mandate. NPS is completely different then NFS or BLM. It’s not just minerals, it’s timber, water, access, hunting, maintenance, people etc.

If you think all public land is open to the people, have fun at a national park. Let me know how the access in its entirety works out….

Now that is arguing semantics.

Everything you stated above is determined by the NPS, BLM, etc., which is why designations are important. Yes, we pay to access National Parks, which is how they are maintained and protected. Yes, BLM land is multi-use, etc. etc. The designations have more to do with how the resources on the lands are managed, not whether or not individual Americans can pitch a tent.

 

[cuerro viejo]

You... didn't read either of the articles, did you? They literally laid it out, bare as can be. There's no arguing semantics going on, there's a dishonesty in your take that you aren't willing to move beyond or acknowledge. That's unfortunate, but I did my part in being clear and providing sources. I'm gonna move on.

As to the original topic of the post, I'll be keeping an eye on it for sure. Thanks for bringing it up. We should all take more time to write to our leaders regarding the disruption of both state and federal agencies from doing their jobs by non-profit, politically-motivated organizations. From wolf and grizzly hunting to fishing, access, etc., it needs to stop. The FWS shouldn't be tied up in court every time they want to execute decisions that we have entrusted them with.

Articles are irrelevant. I’ve already addressed that as a monument it still stood, and what land that was withdrawn fell back under same federal governance that it has had for 100 years.

You are just focused on minerals without seeing or understanding the difference in management ideology of NPS/BLM/NFS.

You don’t see the restrictions ideology potential. At this point doest matter, you are never going to differentiate the three’s management goals outside of minerals. It’s back to full tilt anyway, and will most likely change again in 2024.

Like I said you want it protect why not wilderness…..



As to the original topic is going to be interesting, CBD hasn’t been one to just take science and agree with it….

 

[cuerro viejo]

Now that is arguing semantics.

Everything you stated above is determined by the NPS, BLM, etc., which is why designations are important. Yes, we pay to access National Parks, which is how they are maintained and protected. Yes, BLM land is multi-use, etc. etc. The designations have more to do with how the resources on the lands are managed, not whether or not individual Americans can pitch a tent.

Which I’ve said from first rebuttal post… about different use doctrines per agency

It was in my initial argument that it wasn’t stolen and still federal land held in trust, just under different public use doctrine/goals

 

[Rick M.]

CBD hasn’t been one to just take science and agree with it….

Yeah their take on nuclear power was completely ridiculous.

 

[roadrunner]

I can understand Biden giving back the land in Utah to the tribal owners of it (Trump basically stole redesignated it for resource extraction companies to pillage) because that was a gross overstepping of the president.

None of this second part of your post is true.

It was never the "tribe's" to begin with and what minerals are you talking about?

 

[brocksw]

Environmental Group Sues to Block New Hunting and Fishing Opportunities on Public Wildlife Refuges

Hunters and anglers view the Center for Biological Diversity's suit as another attempt to prevent us from using a resource we helped conserve.

www.outdoorlife.com

 

[sneaky]

Honestly I don't get how this isn't regarded as frivolous. You have a non-profit that has zero domain knowledge and brings nothing to the board other than a bleeding heart, and yet they can drag the FWS into a "settlement". This shouldn't be happening. The FWS or any other federal entity shouldn't have to play ball with these outfits just because they have the money to make a fuss. Maybe someone can explain the process to me.

I can understand Biden giving back the land in Utah to the tribal owners of it (Trump basically stole redesignated it for resource extraction companies to pillage) because that was a gross overstepping of the president. However, this kind of stuff - intervening with the FWS and their resource management just seems like a pointless waste of time.

Edit - changed a word to be less offensive.

This is how CBD and these other groups make money. File frivolous suits using EAJA money, and get paid if they win. Taxpayer dollars funding this nonsense. It should be illegal for nonprofits to use public funds to file lawsuits, period.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk