Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 05:16am PT
|
Wow. That's a chunk of land! And a pretty good article.
I have wondered about that stretch between Barstow and Needles. Some amazing stuff out there.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 05:25am PT
|
Way to go President Obama.
What's your reference to the Supreme Court about?
|
|
10b4me
Mountain climber
Retired
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 08:31am PT
|
Good news.
|
|
justthemaid
climber
Jim Henson's Basement
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 09:01am PT
|
nice!
|
|
dugillian
Trad climber
Vancouver
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 12, 2016 - 09:25am PT
|
Comment about the Supremes is in regard to them slowing or stopping his climate cha ge agenda. They can not reverse or stay creating national monuments as he has the authority under the antiquities act.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 11:43am PT
|
In what way does more rules on the desert help stop climate change? I might guess one impact will be to prevent solar power plants nearby.
|
|
Cragar
climber
MSLA - MT
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 11:46am PT
|
I love the TeddyBear cholla out there.
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 11:56am PT
|
Another example of over-regulation put upon us by (literally) antiquated laws.
More fences, gates, rules, fees, and restrictions.
I personally don't need these regulations to use our public lands in a responsible manner.
This designation is simply more bureaucratic bullshite stuffed down our throats by an ignorant administration.
|
|
PSP also PP
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 11:59am PT
|
It is not about you PUD
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 12:02pm PT
|
Question: How does this affect usage by, you know, locals and other citizens? What regulations will be involved? Doesn't the State (Ca.) still control it even though it's a National (Federal) monument?
It's nice and all, but Feds tend to make things worse in many ways.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 12:34pm PT
|
It's about the people that actually spend time in our deserts.
The masses need regulation.
Yep. We need to keep the commoners out of the King's Forest (or in this case, Desert). There's currently a renewed push for a Southern Sierra Monument that is totally unnecessary, selfish, stupid, and therefore likely to succeed.
John
|
|
Roots
Mountain climber
Tustin, CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 12:56pm PT
|
Are dogs still allowed?
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 12:59pm PT
|
Yayyy... one more step toward the feds owning everything. Yippee-skip!
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 01:02pm PT
|
The lands were purchased by private funds, then donated to the blm before becoming a monument.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 01:05pm PT
|
The lands were purchased by private funds, then donated to the blm before becoming a monument.
Thanks, dirtbag. That changes my perspective completely.
John
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 01:07pm PT
|
Sorry I was responding to mb's post. But nice snark there John. Your post changed my mind too.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 01:11pm PT
|
Private citizens have a lot more latitude for usage on BLM land than within monuments. Next it will be full-blown "park" with access fees, etc. Exact same chain of events happened at JT.
I still remember being able to drive up there on a whim, hike back out into the Wonderland, pitch a tent for two weeks, filter water out of small solution-pockets, have tiny fires a few nights, climb, and then leave (packing everything out, of course), all for free, of course. I didn't need "amenities" or "management" or any of the other "great things" that the federal "land managers" brought to the table by making it a national park. Now what we used to do (managing ourselves responsibly) is illegal there.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2016 - 01:14pm PT
|
It wasn't intended as snark. It appears the monument designation in the desert simply followed the wishes of the landowners. I thought it was a ploy to keep out users of public lands that could use them under the prior designation. Since it was not that, I have no problem.
The southern Sierra monument doesn't share that issue (since the feds already own the land), but would kick out a bunch of users that the proponents don't like from the non-wilderness-designated areas, and impose NPS restrictions. The current restrictions, with dispersed camping, etc., are very user friendly, so most of the locals strongly oppose the change from National Forest to National Monument designation.
John
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!