Shrinking Utah's Bears Ears National Monument would be one more broken promise to Native Americans

[Rustic]

The federal government fucks up everything it touches… fact

 

[bendog]

Mesa Verde's pretty cool. I used to enjoy the Rocky Mtn Nalt Forest (before the califonians overran the place) and the Royal Gorge. If I ever get the kid off the paycheck, I might go back for some fishing.

 

[healthmyths]

There are not many things Obama did that I approved of, but this was one of them. I don't think we need to have that much drilling and mining operations going on public land, and preserving areas such as Bear Paws is IMHO a good thing. I would also say that any private industry taking place on public land ought to have a certain amount of money set aside up front to pay for restoring the land when the operations cease. Which is not to say leases cannot be granted for private use, but we should be pretty sure the economic benefits are worth it.

Are you aware of this act..?
Typically mining companies are required to do reclamation mandated by state and federal laws, including the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, returning the land to some approximation of its original state or preparing it for an alternative “beneficial use.”
This use to be a strip mine that has been recovered.

In Appalachia, former sites of mountaintop removal coal mining – where mountain tops are literally blasted off and transformed to gently rolling hills and flat plains after the coal is extracted – often become home to golf courses, subdivisions, industrial parks or even prisons. Coal companies tout such uses as ongoing engines of economic development in impoverished areas, though studies by environmental groups and media outlets indicate that only a small percentage of former mining lands become economically profitable.
Recovered coal mine land creates bargain rural retreats – but at what cost?

 

[task0778]

There are not many things Obama did that I approved of, but this was one of them. I don't think we need to have that much drilling and mining operations going on public land, and preserving areas such as Bear Paws is IMHO a good thing. I would also say that any private industry taking place on public land ought to have a certain amount of money set aside up front to pay for restoring the land when the operations cease. Which is not to say leases cannot be granted for private use, but we should be pretty sure the economic benefits are worth it.

Are you aware of this act..?
Typically mining companies are required to do reclamation mandated by state and federal laws, including the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, returning the land to some approximation of its original state or preparing it for an alternative “beneficial use.”
This use to be a strip mine that has been recovered.
View attachment 134250


In Appalachia, former sites of mountaintop removal coal mining – where mountain tops are literally blasted off and transformed to gently rolling hills and flat plains after the coal is extracted – often become home to golf courses, subdivisions, industrial parks or even prisons. Coal companies tout such uses as ongoing engines of economic development in impoverished areas, though studies by environmental groups and media outlets indicate that only a small percentage of former mining lands become economically profitable.
Recovered coal mine land creates bargain rural retreats – but at what cost?

I wasn't aware, thanks for posting this.

 

[healthmyths]

There are not many things Obama did that I approved of, but this was one of them. I don't think we need to have that much drilling and mining operations going on public land, and preserving areas such as Bear Paws is IMHO a good thing. I would also say that any private industry taking place on public land ought to have a certain amount of money set aside up front to pay for restoring the land when the operations cease. Which is not to say leases cannot be granted for private use, but we should be pretty sure the economic benefits are worth it.

Are you aware of this act..?
Typically mining companies are required to do reclamation mandated by state and federal laws, including the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, returning the land to some approximation of its original state or preparing it for an alternative “beneficial use.”
This use to be a strip mine that has been recovered.
View attachment 134250


In Appalachia, former sites of mountaintop removal coal mining – where mountain tops are literally blasted off and transformed to gently rolling hills and flat plains after the coal is extracted – often become home to golf courses, subdivisions, industrial parks or even prisons. Coal companies tout such uses as ongoing engines of economic development in impoverished areas, though studies by environmental groups and media outlets indicate that only a small percentage of former mining lands become economically profitable.
Recovered coal mine land creates bargain rural retreats – but at what cost?

I wasn't aware, thanks for posting this.

The major problem with anything to do with the Federal government is duplicity of efforts.
This is a major example.
So we have a former President Obama who thinks he is protecting the environment while taking land away from productive activities.
So he passes more rules and regulations including taking off the revenue generating land and making the land dependent.
It doesn't have to work that way.
My brother-in-law had over 4,000 acres of land that was once a surface mining site that WAS reclaimed and now this area is a top flight bass fishing spot
with 15 varieties of game fish stocked again under that 1977 Surface Mining Act. Much of it like the image I submitted above.
But we don't hear about that because it is "good news" regarding the responsible actions of ordinary Americans!

 

[imawhosure]

There are not many things Obama did that I approved of, but this was one of them. I don't think we need to have that much drilling and mining operations going on public land, and preserving areas such as Bear Paws is IMHO a good thing. I would also say that any private industry taking place on public land ought to have a certain amount of money set aside up front to pay for restoring the land when the operations cease. Which is not to say leases cannot be granted for private use, but we should be pretty sure the economic benefits are worth it.

Are you aware of this act..?
Typically mining companies are required to do reclamation mandated by state and federal laws, including the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, returning the land to some approximation of its original state or preparing it for an alternative “beneficial use.”
This use to be a strip mine that has been recovered.
View attachment 134250


In Appalachia, former sites of mountaintop removal coal mining – where mountain tops are literally blasted off and transformed to gently rolling hills and flat plains after the coal is extracted – often become home to golf courses, subdivisions, industrial parks or even prisons. Coal companies tout such uses as ongoing engines of economic development in impoverished areas, though studies by environmental groups and media outlets indicate that only a small percentage of former mining lands become economically profitable.
Recovered coal mine land creates bargain rural retreats – but at what cost?

I wasn't aware, thanks for posting this.

The major problem with anything to do with the Federal government is duplicity of efforts.
This is a major example.
So we have a former President Obama who thinks he is protecting the environment while taking land away from productive activities.
So he passes more rules and regulations including taking off the revenue generating land and making the land dependent.
It doesn't have to work that way.
My brother-in-law had over 4,000 acres of land that was once a surface mining site that WAS reclaimed and now this area is a top flight bass fishing spot
with 15 varieties of game fish stocked again under that 1977 Surface Mining Act. Much of it like the image I submitted above.
But we don't hear about that because it is "good news" regarding the responsible actions of ordinary Americans!

How much land does the federal government control in the United States? Anybody interested?

Well, what if I said to Fakey and friends, we were willing to allow the feds to control 25% of the land. Would that be fair?

If you agree it is FAIR, (using lefty phrases) then watch how MUCH land comes back to citizens control. You would be amazed.

See, the left doesn't want to tell you how much they already have or you would tell these clowns to go pound sand. They are PHONY-BALONEYS, and when you just research it for about 30 seconds, you will laugh this thread right off the board-)

 

[boedicca]

There are not many things Obama did that I approved of, but this was one of them. I don't think we need to have that much drilling and mining operations going on public land, and preserving areas such as Bear Paws is IMHO a good thing. I would also say that any private industry taking place on public land ought to have a certain amount of money set aside up front to pay for restoring the land when the operations cease. Which is not to say leases cannot be granted for private use, but we should be pretty sure the economic benefits are worth it.

Are you aware of this act..?
Typically mining companies are required to do reclamation mandated by state and federal laws, including the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, returning the land to some approximation of its original state or preparing it for an alternative “beneficial use.”
This use to be a strip mine that has been recovered.
View attachment 134250


In Appalachia, former sites of mountaintop removal coal mining – where mountain tops are literally blasted off and transformed to gently rolling hills and flat plains after the coal is extracted – often become home to golf courses, subdivisions, industrial parks or even prisons. Coal companies tout such uses as ongoing engines of economic development in impoverished areas, though studies by environmental groups and media outlets indicate that only a small percentage of former mining lands become economically profitable.
Recovered coal mine land creates bargain rural retreats – but at what cost?

I wasn't aware, thanks for posting this.

The major problem with anything to do with the Federal government is duplicity of efforts.
This is a major example.
So we have a former President Obama who thinks he is protecting the environment while taking land away from productive activities.
So he passes more rules and regulations including taking off the revenue generating land and making the land dependent.
It doesn't have to work that way.
My brother-in-law had over 4,000 acres of land that was once a surface mining site that WAS reclaimed and now this area is a top flight bass fishing spot
with 15 varieties of game fish stocked again under that 1977 Surface Mining Act. Much of it like the image I submitted above.
But we don't hear about that because it is "good news" regarding the responsible actions of ordinary Americans!

How much land does the federal government control in the United States? Anybody interested?

Well, what if I said to Fakey and friends, we were willing to allow the feds to control 25% of the land. Would that be fair?

If you agree it is FAIR, (using lefty phrases) then watch how MUCH land comes back to citizens control. You would be amazed.

See, the left doesn't want to tell you how much they already have or you would tell these clowns to go pound sand. They are PHONY-BALONEYS, and when you just research it for about 30 seconds, you will laugh this thread right off the board-)

The Feds own 28% of the land in the U.S. - with most of it in the western half.

And they manage it Very Poorly Indeed.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42346.pdf

 

[healthmyths]

There are not many things Obama did that I approved of, but this was one of them. I don't think we need to have that much drilling and mining operations going on public land, and preserving areas such as Bear Paws is IMHO a good thing. I would also say that any private industry taking place on public land ought to have a certain amount of money set aside up front to pay for restoring the land when the operations cease. Which is not to say leases cannot be granted for private use, but we should be pretty sure the economic benefits are worth it.

Are you aware of this act..?
Typically mining companies are required to do reclamation mandated by state and federal laws, including the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, returning the land to some approximation of its original state or preparing it for an alternative “beneficial use.”
This use to be a strip mine that has been recovered.
View attachment 134250


In Appalachia, former sites of mountaintop removal coal mining – where mountain tops are literally blasted off and transformed to gently rolling hills and flat plains after the coal is extracted – often become home to golf courses, subdivisions, industrial parks or even prisons. Coal companies tout such uses as ongoing engines of economic development in impoverished areas, though studies by environmental groups and media outlets indicate that only a small percentage of former mining lands become economically profitable.
Recovered coal mine land creates bargain rural retreats – but at what cost?

I wasn't aware, thanks for posting this.

The major problem with anything to do with the Federal government is duplicity of efforts.
This is a major example.
So we have a former President Obama who thinks he is protecting the environment while taking land away from productive activities.
So he passes more rules and regulations including taking off the revenue generating land and making the land dependent.
It doesn't have to work that way.
My brother-in-law had over 4,000 acres of land that was once a surface mining site that WAS reclaimed and now this area is a top flight bass fishing spot
with 15 varieties of game fish stocked again under that 1977 Surface Mining Act. Much of it like the image I submitted above.
But we don't hear about that because it is "good news" regarding the responsible actions of ordinary Americans!

How much land does the federal government control in the United States? Anybody interested?

Well, what if I said to Fakey and friends, we were willing to allow the feds to control 25% of the land. Would that be fair?

If you agree it is FAIR, (using lefty phrases) then watch how MUCH land comes back to citizens control. You would be amazed.

See, the left doesn't want to tell you how much they already have or you would tell these clowns to go pound sand. They are PHONY-BALONEYS, and when you just research it for about 30 seconds, you will laugh this thread right off the board-)

Few minds will stir when they learn that the US federal government owns a grand total of 640 million acres of land: that figure is so vast that it becomes meaningless [1]. The sum of all that acreage adds up to about 28% of the nation's total surface, 2.27 billion acres.
Just How Much Land Does the Federal Government Own — and Why?

 

[imawhosure]

There are not many things Obama did that I approved of, but this was one of them. I don't think we need to have that much drilling and mining operations going on public land, and preserving areas such as Bear Paws is IMHO a good thing. I would also say that any private industry taking place on public land ought to have a certain amount of money set aside up front to pay for restoring the land when the operations cease. Which is not to say leases cannot be granted for private use, but we should be pretty sure the economic benefits are worth it.

Are you aware of this act..?
Typically mining companies are required to do reclamation mandated by state and federal laws, including the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, returning the land to some approximation of its original state or preparing it for an alternative “beneficial use.”
This use to be a strip mine that has been recovered.
View attachment 134250


In Appalachia, former sites of mountaintop removal coal mining – where mountain tops are literally blasted off and transformed to gently rolling hills and flat plains after the coal is extracted – often become home to golf courses, subdivisions, industrial parks or even prisons. Coal companies tout such uses as ongoing engines of economic development in impoverished areas, though studies by environmental groups and media outlets indicate that only a small percentage of former mining lands become economically profitable.
Recovered coal mine land creates bargain rural retreats – but at what cost?

I wasn't aware, thanks for posting this.

The major problem with anything to do with the Federal government is duplicity of efforts.
This is a major example.
So we have a former President Obama who thinks he is protecting the environment while taking land away from productive activities.
So he passes more rules and regulations including taking off the revenue generating land and making the land dependent.
It doesn't have to work that way.
My brother-in-law had over 4,000 acres of land that was once a surface mining site that WAS reclaimed and now this area is a top flight bass fishing spot
with 15 varieties of game fish stocked again under that 1977 Surface Mining Act. Much of it like the image I submitted above.
But we don't hear about that because it is "good news" regarding the responsible actions of ordinary Americans!

How much land does the federal government control in the United States? Anybody interested?

Well, what if I said to Fakey and friends, we were willing to allow the feds to control 25% of the land. Would that be fair?

If you agree it is FAIR, (using lefty phrases) then watch how MUCH land comes back to citizens control. You would be amazed.

See, the left doesn't want to tell you how much they already have or you would tell these clowns to go pound sand. They are PHONY-BALONEYS, and when you just research it for about 30 seconds, you will laugh this thread right off the board-)

Few minds will stir when they learn that the US federal government owns a grand total of 640 million acres of land: that figure is so vast that it becomes meaningless [1]. The sum of all that acreage adds up to about 28% of the nation's total surface, 2.27 billion acres.
Just How Much Land Does the Federal Government Own — and Why?

View attachment 134284

And so, they want to INCREASE what they have! IC, IC, and of course, the lefties are all for it! Oh this poor group, and that poor group. We need legislation to insist upon how much land in these United States, the feds can control. And honestly, they want more land, let them take Illinois. They are going to have to bail their over extended derriers out anyway-)