Need Your Support

sagebrush · Mar 26, 2015

As many of you know, we are fighting a battle in AZ to keep control of the Kaibab Plateau, a big part of the Strip and our best elk hunt, Unit 9 with the AZGFD, US Forest Service and BLM. These agencies have done a great job protecting the land, wildlife and resources there for decades. There is a movement by anti-hunters to designate 1.7 million acres, a land mass equivalent to the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined, as the Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument and transfer control to the National Park Service. The NPS has a terrible record for wildlife management here in AZ as well as throughout the west. We have critical wildlife projects that have been on the books for two years while the NPS studies the project proposals. Meanwhile, nothing is getting done for our wildlife. The GCWNM has been pushed by the anti's for years and they have been turned away at every attempt. They are now asking President Obama to designate the national monument under the Antiquities Act of 1906, which was originally designed to protect small parcels of historic and cultural interest, bypassing congress and the will of the local people.

We can put these land grabs aside once and for all by asking our Senators to support S437 the Improved National Monument Designation Process Act. Here is a link to the text of the bill:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/437/text

This bill will require the approval by congress for any future national monument and marine preserve designations.

Thanks for your time and send an e-mail to your Senators today.

"You can fly a helicopter to the top of Everest and say you've been there. The problem with that is you were an a$$hole when you started and you're still an a$$hole when you get back.
Its the climb that makes you a different person". - Yvon Chouinard

Homer · Mar 26, 2015

....I see guys you wake up when your ox finally gets gored....

Zeke · Mar 26, 2015

My emails have been sent. Thank you!

You should have put "SFW" in the thread title so some of the whiners would have at least looked at your thread. God knows they're too busy whining about SFW to actually take any action on an important issue but at least they would have looked.

Zeke

Deerlove · Mar 26, 2015

Sorry where on that bill do we respond at?

Zeke · Mar 26, 2015

>Sorry where on that bill do
>we respond at?

I didn't look to see if you could respond on the provided link. I just emailed my senators directly since I have their contact info from previous contact.

Zeke

Deerlove · Mar 26, 2015

thanks

sagebrush · Mar 26, 2015

You can contact your Senators here:

https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

"You can fly a helicopter to the top of Everest and say you've been there. The problem with that is you were an a$$hole when you started and you're still an a$$hole when you get back.
Its the climb that makes you a different person". - Yvon Chouinard

Homer · Mar 26, 2015

....monument status is an executive decision....your senator has zero say in the matter.....unless he has pics of the president that the president cares about....

....monument status is used now because more wilderness designations are not popular and can't get through congress.

we are all *******....

2lumpy · Mar 26, 2015

LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-15 AT 10:25PM (MST)[p]Your right Homer, absolutely right. But sometimes a Senator does have something political to trade a President. It's important that we try. Maybe Lee or Hatch do have a pic the Pres. cares about. Stranger things have happened.

As our President has often said, "Votes matter". That is by far the most profound statement I've heard from the gentleman.

My letters have been sent to my Senators and Representatives as well. It only take a second, if you keep them in your e-mail address book.
DC

1911 · Mar 27, 2015

>....monument status is an executive decision....your
>senator has zero say in
>the matter.....unless he has pics
>of the president that the
>president cares about....
>
>....monument status is used now because
>more wilderness designations are not
>popular and can't get through
>congress.
>
>we are all *******....

What he said. ^^^

Cue eldorado. Nice executive action. Thanks for sharing.

BuzzH · Mar 27, 2015

Executive decisions are used because all the interested parties cant get their chit together and get things done.

Add in a bunch of Legislators, that haven't a clue about wilderness, WSA's, land management, etc. etc. and this is the result.

Its not all on them either, their constituents have an obligation to inform/educate their Legislative body of their desires regarding land management.

Further, when the Legislators fail to listen, they need to be held accountable and called out for their actions...and in some cases, sent packing come election time.

This constant finger pointing and crying is going to continue until Sportsmen become pro-active rather than re-active.

An unwillingness to get to the table and work out reasonable compromise has consequences...

Homer · Mar 27, 2015

LAST EDITED ON Mar-27-15 AT 08:50AM (MST)[p]uh....spoken like a true land grabber Buzz.....

....so any wilderness proposal needs to be approved or we'll just get our president to make it all a monument....lawmakers be damned...They're just not as smart as us bureaucrats....

BuzzH · Mar 27, 2015

Didn't say that at all.

Many of these areas in question have been in limbo for decades while the interested parties wage an uncompromising turf war.

Rather than get to the table and come up with a workable solution, battle lines were drawn. Shallow water and shallow minds freeze first.

Pretty quick, a few decades later, you wake up to an executive order and start stomping your feet and holding your breath.

Look to the Rocky Mountain Front in Montana for how you get things done via collaboration rather than executive order.

eelgrass · Mar 27, 2015

So BuzzH, do you support S.437 - Improved National Monument Designation Process Act?

Eel

It's written in the good Book that we'll never be asked to take more than we can. Sounds like a good plan, so bring it on!

sagebrush · Mar 27, 2015

>....monument status is an executive decision....your
>senator has zero say in
>the matter.....unless he has pics
>of the president that the
>president cares about....
>

S.437 would require congressional approval for national monument designations, so Senators and members of the House would have the final say.

"You can fly a helicopter to the top of Everest and say you've been there. The problem with that is you were an a$$hole when you started and you're still an a$$hole when you get back.
Its the climb that makes you a different person". - Yvon Chouinard

BuzzH · Mar 27, 2015

No, I don't, for more than the reasons of the National Monument issue.

IMO, Presidents should have executive order authority.

In what other cases are you willing to revoke the Presidents authority to issue executive orders?

If you look back at the use of EO's, its been utilized by R's, D's, and at pretty similar rates.

Reagan issued 381, Clinton 364, Bush Jr. 291, and it looks like Obama is in the ball park at 203ish.

Another reason I don't like this new proposal, is because if Congress actually gave a chit, they would have been more pro-active in designating or releasing many of these areas already. They've proven, for decades, that they aren't interested in working together. Even more so with the current Political Climate in D.C.

I don't see how Congress can blame anyone but themselves for decades of dead-lock in regard to many of these areas. Allowing them to continue pi$$ing up a rope via this new law, will not prove anything, other than, once again, how ineffective Congress has become. The current congress couldn't agree on what color the sky is on a clear day, let alone find compromise on land designation.

I'm saying that the best way to resolve these issues regarding WSA's, NM's, etc. is to use the system in place. Get the interested parties together, get collaboration, get local involvement, and there would be no need for an executive order. Congress already has the authority to designate (or not) wilderness, National Monuments, etc.

I challenge them to use their current authority, get over always having to be right, and be willing to look at an issue in a non-partisan way, that benefits the greatest number of Citizens for the longest time.

It can be done...but you cant do it by passing more laws, repealing Presidential Authority, and being a basic pain in the a$$ all the time.

Homer · Mar 27, 2015

Buzz,

I do like your response to mine......my issue unfortunately is that I like the status quo on Blm areas....multiple use. The left throws great restriction proposals out there.....and any compromise on my part is a win for them...

One less existing road = +1 for them.....-1 for me.

BuzzH · Mar 27, 2015

Exactly why compromise cant be reached.

For you its a hard line with one less existing road being a -1 for you.

No different than the opposing side seeing one more road being open a -1.

Collaboration isn't about us, or them, getting our way on every last acre of BLM, every last road, etc. Its about what each side is willing to give up, to get something in return.

You're going to tell me that you'll fall on a sword over one road being closed on BLM land? There's no existing roads on BLM that wouldn't make sense to close?

Same with those wanting to close roads...fall on their sword over one road being open? There are roads that shouldn't remain open for motorized use?

If you want gain, there is going to be some pain involved. For true collaboration to be reached, everyone should be compromising, not just one side. If both sides aren't cussing under their breath about what they lost, while smiling about the gains they made, then someone was steam-rolled.

Usually, there is much more agreement on these types of issues than there are differences...that's the middle ground where you start. Find where you differ, and compromise on that.

If we never reach agreement amongst ourselves, then there absolutely will be one winner and one loser.

Not where I want to be...on either side of the W-L column.

SMOKESTICK · Mar 27, 2015

So how often does this happen in the eastern states? It seems as though the western states are held to a different standard.

I just learned that the Senate last night passed a budget resolution calling for the sale of federal lands to make a dent in the budget deficit.

According to Wyoming's compact, any federal lands sold by the state, 95% of the money is returned to the federal government. Hardly an incentive for Wyoming to sale the lands; however, it appears that other (probably eastern states driving this) states want to sale off the federal lands to lower our debt. Who do you think is going to buy our federal lands?

The topic of Executive Orders may play to your interests this time BuzzH, but how would you feel if the Executive Order settled your issue buy handing you your head? If it can be abused, it appears as though Presidents will abuse it. There is a reason our Founding Fathers created a system with shared powers and specific powers. Our problem appears that the Executive and Judicial branches of government are not executing their powers properly and no one is holding them accountable. I have learned that many lawyers profess to know the law; yet, they are telling us that the US Constitution is a living document that can be interpreted according to current issues, etc.

People need to wake up and start learning our history because I am afraid that we are about to start seeing what happens when "We the People" pay more attention to making money than protecting our freedoms. History is about to be repeated again.

Homer · Mar 27, 2015

......I don't see it as equal......they give up something they want...we give up something we have....

....at status quo we are equal.

BuzzH · Mar 27, 2015

Smokestick,

In regard to EO's, show me where I said it played into "my interests".

My "interest" is to maintain the intent and use of EO's...where Reagan and Bush Jr. wrong to issue EO's?

In what other cases are YOU willing to strip the President of their right to issue EO's? Was Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Obama wrong about issuing EO's over 1000 times?

Just because YOU view a particular EO as an abuse, doesn't mean the rest of the world does. It also doesn't make it a fact, simply because your ox is gored.

I would rather that designations of lands be done via the control Congress already has. They can form committees, get local involvement, and start the collaborative process anytime they want.

Yet, even when asked to do so, countless times, they choose not to, then cry like you are here, that EO's are used (and supposedly abused).

That's their choice, they have the authority to designate wilderness, National Monuments, etc.

I would rather go that route, but if they aren't willing to collaborate and get together, then they/we will continue to see designations issued under EO's. The people they claim to represent are tired of their lack of action. Tired of the fighting, arguing and political battle lines while they get paid to do NOTHING.

If Congress cant get their act together, then what other route is to be taken by those that want resolution?

You're right, Congress needs to be held accountable. Accountable to their failure of the American Public to get off their duffs and get these public lands put into some sort of designation. Whether that be wilderness, Monuments, National Parks, status-quo or a combination of all.

BuzzH · Mar 27, 2015

Right on Homer, don't be willing to compromise with those that have an equal say in how our public lands are managed and what designation they should have.

That's working out real well...

While you're busy drawing that hard line in the sand, for "status-quo", they'll be getting another Monument designated without you.

Good thinking...