Recommended shrinking or opening 10 national monuments to logging, mining, or fishing

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Trump is quietly dismantling Obama's biggest legacy
Recommended shrinking or opening 10 national monuments to logging, mining, or fishing
Most important environmental rules that Trump is reversing - Business Insider
What the rule does: Obama used the Roosevelt-era Antiquities Act — which allows presidents to preserve "objects of historic or scientific interest" as national monuments — to protect roughly 4 million acres of land and several million square miles of ocean.
Current status: In September, the White House recommended changes for 10 monuments including Bears Ears, Utah, Gold Butte, Nevada, and Cascade-Siskiyou, which straddles Oregon and California. Those changes include either shrinking their size or opening them up to "traditional uses" like mining, timber farming, drilling, and commercial fishing.
 

Upvote 0
OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Trump is quietly dismantling Obama's biggest legacy
Recommended shrinking or opening 10 national monuments to logging, mining, or fishing
Most important environmental rules that Trump is reversing - Business Insider
What the rule does: Obama used the Roosevelt-era Antiquities Act — which allows presidents to preserve "objects of historic or scientific interest" as national monuments — to protect roughly 4 million acres of land and several million square miles of ocean.
Current status: In September, the White House recommended changes for 10 monuments including Bears Ears, Utah, Gold Butte, Nevada, and Cascade-Siskiyou, which straddles Oregon and California. Those changes include either shrinking their size or opening them up to "traditional uses" like mining, timber farming, drilling, and commercial fishing.
Interesting don't here to much about this as well as the part about Antiquities Act — which allows presidents to preserve "objects of historic or scientific interest"
 

Golden_Crab

Sr. Member
Mar 28, 2016
253
183
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
If you can fish / camp / whatever... it should be open to economic development with due respect to other forest users.
 

OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
If you can fish / camp / whatever... it should be open to economic development with due respect to other forest users.
You would think so. Part of "traditional uses" one would think.
 

Duckshot

Silver Member
Sep 8, 2014
4,455
9,643
trapped on the earthly plane of causation
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
American Antiquities Act of 1906-

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any person who shall appropriate, excavate, injure, or destroy any historic or prehistoric ruin or monument, or any object of antiquity, situated on lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States, without the permission of the Secretary of the Department of the Government having jurisdiction over the lands on which said antiquities are situated, shall, upon conviction, be fined in a sum of not more than five hundred dollars or be imprisoned for a period of not more than ninety days, or shall suffer both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.

Sec. 2. That the President of the United States is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments, and may reserve as a part thereof parcels of land, 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: Provided, That when such objects are situated upon a tract covered by a bona fied unperfected claim or held in private ownership, the tract, or so much thereof as may be necessary for the proper care and management of the object, may be relinquished to the Government, and the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to accept the relinquishment of such tracts in behalf of the Government of the United States.

Sec. 3. That permits for the examination of ruins, the excavation of archaeological sites, and the gathering of objects of antiquity upon the lands under their respective jurisdictions may be granted by the Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture, and War to institutions which the may deem properly qualified to conduct such examination, excavation, or gathering, subject to such rules and regulation as they may prescribe: Provided, That the examinations, excavations, and gatherings are undertaken for the benefit of reputable museums, universities, colleges, or other recognized scientific or educational institutions, with a view to increasing the knowledge of such objects, and that the gatherings shall be made for permanent preservation in public museums.

Sec. 4. That the Secretaries of the Departments aforesaid shall make and publish from time to time uniform rules and regulations for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act.

Approved, June 8, 1906

Highlights by me. Unlike the previous administration this administration believes in following legislation created by congress.
 

Nitric

Silver Member
Mar 8, 2014
4,796
6,249
Dallas,GA
Detector(s) used
CZ6A
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
I'm on the fence on some of this stuff....I do think we need to encourage exploration on our own soil. But if they are going to open it up does this mean out of country business can work it? And is that a bad thing? There is so much I don't know the details of and the true impacts.

But sure! Sounds better than no mining! We have to bring something back to this country. The factories and industry won't ever be back to the level they once were. And...Dirt is dirt, I doubt there is much of this country that has never been touched by man. It will grow and settle back. What are we preserving? Natural erosion and forest fires that we could have had the wood from?

There is about 100 acres of National forest land off one point of my property. It's isolated. It's in a patch with no other National forest land for a long way...No real road in, and doubt anyone even knows it's there unless they are really looking for it, except the bordering land owners. It's useless!!! It's also protected. No motorized vehicles at all...No this no that.. no no no........But when a tornado came through? No one was allowed to take a fallen tree off of it.

Some of that kind of stuff needs sold off... It's good for me, because I can walk it along with my land. But really useless for gov. to own. Sell it! Along with all the other scattered bits and pieces.
 

Last edited:
OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Thanks for the inputs.
 

OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
American Antiquities Act of 1906
16 USC 431-433

________________________________________
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any person who shall appropriate, excavate, injure, or destroy any historic or prehistoric ruin or monument, or any object of antiquity, situated on lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States, without the permission of the Secretary of the Department of the Government having jurisdiction over the lands on which said antiquities are situated, shall, upon conviction, be fined in a sum of not more than five hundred dollars or be imprisoned for a period of not more than ninety days, or shall suffer both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.
Sec. 2. That the President of the United States is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments, and may reserve as a part thereof parcels of land, 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: Provided, That when such objects are situated upon a tract covered by a bona fied unperfected claim or held in private ownership, the tract, or so much thereof as may be necessary for the proper care and management of the object, may be relinquished to the Government, and the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to accept the relinquishment of such tracts in behalf of the Government of the United States.
Sec. 3. That permits for the examination of ruins, the excavation of archaeological sites, and the gathering of objects of antiquity upon the lands under their respective jurisdictions may be granted by the Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture, and War to institutions which the may deem properly qualified to conduct such examination, excavation, or gathering, subject to such rules and regulation as they may prescribe: Provided, That the examinations, excavations, and gatherings are undertaken for the benefit of reputable museums, universities, colleges, or other recognized scientific or educational institutions, with a view to increasing the knowledge of such objects, and that the gatherings shall be made for permanent preservation in public museums.
Sec. 4. That the Secretaries of the Departments aforesaid shall make and publish from time to time uniform rules and regulations for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act.
Approved, June 8, 1906
 

Rawhide

Silver Member
Nov 17, 2010
3,590
2,185
SouthWestern USA
Detector(s) used
Nox 800, Etrac, F75, AT Pro. Last two for sale.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Cant step out my door in 100 miles now and enjoy hunting rocks. Biggest land grab in history.
 

Goldfinger450

Sr. Member
Aug 28, 2017
418
426
Central Oregon.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
The Western US Land grabs were RIDICULOUS in the last 8 years especially, I do not want to get Political as I get Angry when I think of the travesties and TREASON committed.

ASSEMBLER are you close to Bend, Prineville? We maybe neighbors.
 

Last edited:

Nitric

Silver Member
Mar 8, 2014
4,796
6,249
Dallas,GA
Detector(s) used
CZ6A
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Ohhh! I see.....I read it wrong the first time. I misunderstood what it all meant. But the site won't allow me to edit my post.
 

OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
The Western US Land grabs were RIDICULOUS in the last 8 years especially, I do not want to get Political as I get Angry when I think of the travesties and TREASON committed.

ASSEMBLER are you close to Bend, Prineville? We maybe neighbors.
Yes the idea is to not get political here. Just making this more well known.

Update information links:
AFP Issues Letter of Support for National Monument Creation and Protection Act
Oct 19, 2017
https://americansforprosperity.org/...rt-national-monument-creation-protection-act/
Arlington, Va. – Americans for Prosperity expressed its support today for H.R. 3990, the National Monument Creation and Protection Act, which would reform the Antiquities Act to protect both public lands and the public interest. In a letter of support to Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT), AFP detailed how the proposed legislation would allow for the protection both of land and the rights of Americans in communities surrounding historic sites.
In Congress, an effort to curtail national monuments
Any monument larger than a square mile would require additional review.
http://www.hcn.org/articles/monumen...eatens-national-monuments-face-another-attack

On Oct. 11, the House Natural Resources Committee approved a proposal from its chairman, Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, to overhaul the Antiquities Act. Bishop’s “National Monument Creation and Protection Act” would severely constrain the power of the president to designate national monuments. It would limit the size of monuments a president could designate as well as the kinds of places protected.
The 1906 Antiquities Act allows a president to act swiftly to protect federal lands facing imminent threats without legislation getting bogged down in Congress. Many popular areas, including Zion, Bryce and Arches national parks in Bishop’s home state, were first protected this way.
Under Bishop’s legislation, any proposal for a monument larger than 640 acres — one square mile — would be subject to a review process: Areas up to 10,000 acres would be subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act, while those between 10,000 and 85,000 acres would require approval from state and local government. The bill would allow emergency declarations, but they would expire after a year without congressional approval. It would also codify the president’s power to modify monuments — a power that has been contested in light of the Interior Department’s recent recommendations that President Donald Trump reduce the size of several monuments, including Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante in Utah.
Originally established to protect archaeological sites from vandalism and looting, the Antiquities Act has since been used to protect a broad range of areas for a broad range of purposes. For example, President Bill Clinton designated Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument in Oregon to preserve biodiversity. By contrast, Hanford Reach, the first national monument managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, not only preserves a sweeping desert landscape, but also holds remnants of atomic history, including plutonium reactors in the process of being dismantled.
Bishop’s bill, however, would prohibit new landscape-scale monuments by replacing the phrase “historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest” with the more restrictive “object or objects of antiquity.” That term, the bill further specifies, does not include “natural geographic features.” Bishop maintains that these changes would restore the act to its original intent. “Any honest reading reveals that it was created to protect ‘landmarks,’ ‘structures,’ and ‘objects,’” he wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, “not vast swaths of land.”
President Theodore Roosevelt, who signed the act into law and designated the Grand Canyon a national monument in 1908, did not feel that way. Though the Grand Canyon was of course later turned into a treasured park, its designation spurred the first of many battles in Congress over the size of monuments designated under the act, which stipulates that they should be the “smallest area compatible” with protection.
Two of those tussles limited the power of the president under the Antiquities Act. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt declared Jackson Hole a monument in 1943; a 1950 law made the monument part of Grand Teton National Park — and added an amendment to the Antiquities Act stating that all future monument designations in Wyoming must go through Congress. President Jimmy Carter’s creation of 56 million acres of monuments in Alaska led to an act that requires congressional approval for monuments larger than 5,000 acres in that state.
In recent years, controversy over the Antiquities Act has been centered in Utah. The state’s legislators balked at Clinton’s 1996 designation of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument — a vast swath of land. In the years that followed, Utah Republican Senators Orrin Hatch and Bob Bennett and Utah Rep. Jim Hansen introduced bills that would limit the Antiquities Act. None of them made it through Congress.
Bishop has introduced legislation to overhaul the Antiquities Act multiple times before, including the “Ensuring Public Involvement in the Creation of National Monuments Act” in 2013. But he is just one part of a larger Republican push to lessen federal control of public lands. As High Country News reported earlier this year, many of the Utah legislators now going after monuments had long been focused on transferring federal lands to state control. Attacking the Antiquities Act is another way of undermining federal land management.
Groups such as the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the Public Lands Council, an advocacy group for ranchers who rely on public lands, applauded Bishop’s bill. It “would ensure local ranchers and communities are not subject to the whims of an unchecked federal government,” Craig Uden, president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, said in a press release. Meanwhile, many environmental and recreation groups, including the League of Conservation Voters, the Sierra Club and the Outdoor Industry Association, have voiced opposition. Sharon Buccino, director of the Land and Wildlife program for the Natural Resources Defense Council, called the bill “the most aggressive attack ever waged on America’s national parks and monuments.”
Many Democrats and conservationists hope the legislation will stall in the House, where a vote has not yet been scheduled. But as long as Republicans opposed to federal control of public lands hold sway, the Antiquities Act and the millions of acres it protects will remain in the crosshairs.
Rebecca Worby is an editorial fellow at High Country News.
 

Last edited:
OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Executive Order 13783 of March 28, 2017

Executive Order 13783 of March 28, 2017, “Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth,” requires agencies to review all existing regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies, and any other similar agency actions (collectively, “agency actions”) that potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources, with particular attention to oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy resources. Section 2(a) of the Executive Order also provides that this review shall not include agency actions that are mandated by law, necessary for the public interest, and consistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of the Executive Order. In response to Executive Order 13783
of March 28, 2017, “Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth, ” the Forest Service reviewed more than 70 agency actions, including regulations, policies, guidance, orders, and agreements with partner agencies, and programmatic analyses at the Washington and field office levels of the agency to asses if they unduly burden clean and safe domestic energy development. Agency actions subject to review under the Executive Order which the Forest Service has concluded may unduly burden domestic energy development are listed in Appendix A, Table A.1. Table A.2 lists agency actionsthe Forest Service believes the Executive Order exempts from review.

https://www.fs.fed.us/sites/default/files/eo-13783-usda-final-report-10.11.17.pdf
 

russau

Gold Member
May 29, 2005
7,250
6,700
St. Louis, missouri
discipline.gif
Shame on you! I removed your comments. Just a reminder - politics can only be discussed on the Charter Members > Political Discussion Forum.
 

Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
EPA's Scott Pruitt: Family getting death threats, too

EPA's Scott Pruitt: Family getting death threats, too
by John Siciliano | Oct 26, 2017
EPA's Scott Pruitt: Family getting death threats, too
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt says the death threats against him have extended to his family.
“The level of protection is dictated by the level of threat,” Pruitt told Bloomberg in an expansive interview released Wednesday night, answering questions about his recent request for almost a dozen more 24-hour security agents.
“The quantity and the volume – as well as the type – of threats are different. What’s really disappointing to me as it’s not just me – it’s family.”
Pruitt has an 18-member security team that is charged to guard him around the clock. It was reported earlier this week that EPA is looking to add as many as 12 new guards to the 18-member squad.
None of Pruitt’s predecessors have required such a large security force or around-the-clock protection. The estimated cost of the beefed-up squad would be about $2 million per year.
An administration official told Bloomberg that Pruitt has received threats in nearly every form of media, from Twitter posts to letters in the mail.
“Serious things take place that dictates a response,” Pruitt added
 

Golden_Crab

Sr. Member
Mar 28, 2016
253
183
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
I'm on the fence on some of this stuff....I do think we need to encourage exploration on our own soil. But if they are going to open it up does this mean out of country business can work it? And is that a bad thing? There is so much I don't know the details of and the true impacts.

But sure! Sounds better than no mining! We have to bring something back to this country. The factories and industry won't ever be back to the level they once were. And...Dirt is dirt, I doubt there is much of this country that has never been touched by man. It will grow and settle back. What are we preserving? Natural erosion and forest fires that we could have had the wood from?

There is about 100 acres of National forest land off one point of my property. It's isolated. It's in a patch with no other National forest land for a long way...No real road in, and doubt anyone even knows it's there unless they are really looking for it, except the bordering land owners. It's useless!!! It's also protected. No motorized vehicles at all...No this no that.. no no no........But when a tornado came through? No one was allowed to take a fallen tree off of it.

Some of that kind of stuff needs sold off... It's good for me, because I can walk it along with my land. But really useless for gov. to own. Sell it! Along with all the other scattered bits and pieces.

Hard to make a profit when you import everything from half way around the world... hard to pay a decent wage too.
 

OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
If there is going to be any "Mining" on these lands it sure would be nice to find out all the details. Hope some of the details are not held 'Secret'.
 

OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
lawsuit that wants “person” status for Colorado River

Colorado AG asks court to dismiss lawsuit that wants “person” status for Colorado River
Deep Green Resistance wants to protect the river’s rights in federal court
Colorado Attorney General asks judge to dismiss river lawsuit
The Colorado Attorney General’s Office wants a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by an environmental group and five of its members who want to declare the Colorado River ecosystem a “person” and represent its interest in court.
The attorney general’s office wrote to the U.S. District Court in Denver that Deep Green Resistance and its members do not have jurisdiction to sue the state in federal court under the 11th Amendment, do not have standing in the case due to lack of a specific injury and do not state a claim “upon which relief can be granted.”
The attorney general’s office said the questions of “whether the ecosystem should have the same rights as people, and who should be allowed to assert those rights in federal courts, are matters reserved to Congress by the Constitution.”
The case – Colorado River Ecosystem/Deep Green Resistance v. the State of Colorado – is being heard by U.S. District Court Judge Nina Wang. A status conference is set for Nov. 14.
The Sept. 25 civil action from Deep Green Resistance asked the court to declare that “the Colorado River ecosystem is a ‘person’ capable of possessing rights,” including “the rights to exist, flourish, regenerate and naturally evolve.”
 

OP
OP
Assembler

Assembler

Silver Member
May 10, 2017
3,072
1,155
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
reconsider Grand Canyon uranium mining ban

Trump to reconsider Grand Canyon uranium mining ban
By Timothy Cama - 11/01/17 05:15 PM EDT
Trump to reconsider Grand Canyon uranium mining ban | TheHill
“Uranium mining would have brought in nearly $29 billion to our local economy over a 42-year period,” the board of supervisors of Arizona’s Mohave County wrote in June to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, whose Bureau of Land Management owns some of the land. “This ban took away much needed growth and jobs from our area.”
Obama was pressured to turn the protected land into a national monument, which would have indefinitely blocked mining and other development, but he did not act on the proposal while in office.
Wednesday's news comes as the Trump administration is reviewing multiple national monuments designated since 1996, with an eye on possibly reducing the size of some of them.

Shrink at least 4 national monuments and modify a half-dozen others, Zinke tells Trump
By Juliet Eilperin September 17
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...1076f6d6152_story.html?utm_term=.b6cd16670400
 

Last edited:

schnackj

Tenderfoot
Feb 14, 2014
8
9
central valley CA
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
I feel on the fence on this, I fully believe in exploration and recreational opportunities on federal land and keeping federal lands open. But with that, I don't like the attitude that just because a forest or a piece of land isn't somehow generating revenue for someone its useless. My kids don't generate any revenue but I don't think their useless. My favorite part of prospecting has been doing research on potential prospecting grounds, going out with a shovel and pan and having a look. If land that you view as useless is sold off or transferred to the states and inevitably sold off, its going to be purchased by a logging company, rancher, or just some rich dude and what the FS or BLM gets for the land will do absolutely nothing toward fixing the debt. No prospecting, no hunting, no camping, no fishing, no trespassing. If you want to one day be able to take your kids or grandkids out and teach them what you enjoy you should think long and hard about land management issues and how they affect citizens.

While I don't like the executive overreach Obama did in this "land grab" it can be a slippery slope trying to reverse it. There should be open debate between developers, conversationalists, recreational users, and citizens in how we manage public lands.
Ryan Zinke once seemed to strongly support this, he resigned as an RNC delegate to draw attention to the GOPs support of transferring federals lands. He partially got the jobs as interior sec because of advice from DT jr who is an avid hunter.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Top