lol obama robbed you guys!(utah guys)

[Dr. Jones]

I am anti big government.
I am particularly against broad land ownership by the Feds.

Having said that, something I haven't seen mentioned here (may have missed it) is the staggering cost to the state of Utah if it were to fund all the parks and protected land without federal money.

It's part of an overall ****ty system.. but until there's a more broad fix, the way it is may be better than the way it "should" be.

 

[babe]

I am anti big government.
I am particularly against broad land ownership by the Feds.

Having said that, something I haven't seen mentioned here (may have missed it) is the staggering cost to the state of Utah if it were to fund all the parks and protected land without federal money.

It's part of an overall ****ty system.. but until there's a more broad fix, the way it is may be better than the way it "should" be.

For every corrupt local pol dingbat who'll let his cuzzins ride roughshod over the desert, there's a corrupt Fed pol dingbat like Harry Reid who can do a thousand-fold the damage to the land. And a Hillary who'll sell mineral rights to foreign interests while denigrating locals interested in the lands.
You are dead wrong thinking that outta-State taxes support the BLM, the Forest Service, or the National Parks. And if that were the case, it's proof of Fed mismanagement, not good management.

The Feds are violating the law enacted with the various Statehood Enabling legislation which required eventual and timely relinquishment of the land to the people. The Feds mismanaged grazing rights and fraudulently mislead ranchers into thinking they were only there to help with fencing and water and good advice. Now the deny the actual property interests of grazers and deny use of the land.

The State of Utah issues grazing surveys which scientifically estimate grazing use about five times what the Feds will do, and charge ranchers a proportionately higher fee. But they don't harass the ranchers or round up and haul off cattle whenever there's a dispute. Cows are beneficial to most grazing terrains, naturally spreading good species of growth and clearing the undergrowth from forests. Overall they manage fire risks for us and prevent ghastly episodic smoke pollution events and rampaging fires that destroy private property.

Quite a bit more to say, but hell what do I know. Those folks at the New York Times know everything, if you could only get them to tell the truth once.

 

[Harambe]

but hell what do I know.

Summed it up for you. Accurate. Thank you.

 

[Red]

Red, Rev, and other dreamy progressives, if they really believe in their causes, are the ultimate redneck ignoramuses. Outclassed entirely, intellectually eclipsed by the real interests, the movers and shakers, who use law to eliminate their competitiors but are above the law and lawless players themselves. That is what globalism is all about. Fascist Governance.

That's why "mainstream" controlled media won't hold an Obama, a Hillary, or even a Bush/Romney accountable publicly so long as they comply with the wholesale concentration of power and control under the levers of the real interests they serve.

Archaeologists will be kept out of the sites and we will never know the past that could have been understood. Local ranchers/Mormons and callow cityslicker youths of today would indeed destroy the sites, just as "native Americans" have always done as well, but Obama doesn't care about antiquities any more than street gang thugs.

These places hold coal and oil reserves that David Rockefeller wants locked up, until the day comes that he and his cartel buddies will apply for the rights and get them, and then they will develop the resources whiles local yayhoos hyperventilate about having a job someday.

"Archaeologists will be kept out of the sites and we will never know the past that could have been understood"

I'm surprised at this statement, babe. Surprised because I'm pretty sure you know that isn't true, so I don't know why you would make that statement. Archaeologists were among the strongest supporters of creating the monument, and this short article demonstrates why:

https://www.crowcanyon.org/e-newsletter/2016/June/2016_June_Bears_Ears.html

What you won't see is a hundred Summer Archaeological field schools cropping up all over Bears Ears. The general philosophy of American archaeology today is to leave sites un excavated in anticipation that new technology and testing techniques will likely be available in the future that will allow more information about the past to be gained via excavation. New tests, archaeology is very much a multi discipline science these days, can be expected. So let sites sleep until that happens. So, generally, the most active area for archaeology these days is what is known as salvage archaeology, conducted when sites are going to be destroyed by development anyway. Anytime federal funds are used in a construction project, for instance, an archaeological accesment must be done, and the project may be held up while a salvage dig takes place. So, there is much less actual excavation of protected sites these days, but certainly archaeologists will have access to Bears Ears.

 

[Red]

] The creation of Bears Ears is seen as a victory for Native Americans in general, and the 5 tribes in particular:

I can not wait till we turn the entire country back over to the indians an let them fight there old land battles again an let them trade squaws as script.



]Bears Ears contains the greatest concentration of archaeological sites in the entire Southwest. More then all 5 of Utah's national parks combined. A great deal of archaeological looting by artifact collectors, grave robbing, and destruction of petroglyph panels has taken place at Bears Ears. With only two federal employees patrolling the vast property, it is hoped designation through the Antiquities Act of 1906 will result in more manpower to try and protect this incredible national archaeological heritage.[/quote]

So what? Everybody should be allowed to collect artifacts on public land. This is are land not something some special interest group called "native Americans" can claim to own for free. This is government largess, it is welfare. An not to mention they can allow oil drilling an get all the royalties. We all know how that worked out with the free casino money checks ��

Nice video of the monument at this link:

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/12/bears-ears-gold-butte-national-monument-utah-nevada/

There are two sides to this particular designation, some of that is described in the above links. But I'm sure those conservatives and proponents of the Sagebrush Rebellion can speak up for that side. Myself, I clearly side with the 5 tribes and the protection of archaeological heritage and tribal spirituality....[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
----------------------------------------------------
(Hmmm. Quote function worked a little funky here. Everything above the dotted line is a direct quote from Boris, and not simply the first sentence above. Of course he's quoting some of my previous comments as well).

I think you are assuming Bears Ears is for exclusive native usage. But that assumption is incorrect. Here's part of the statement from the Interior Department:

"(T)he monument designations maintain currently authorized uses of the land that do not harm the resources protected by the monument, including tribal access and traditional collection of plants and firewood, off-highway vehicle recreation, hunting and fishing and authorized grazing. The monument designation also does not affect valid existing rights for oil, gas, and mining operations, military training operations, and utility corridors."

It is certainly important to the tribes involved, however. Part of the statement from that tribal coalition:

"President Obama's action comes in response to the historic request of Native American people, led by the five Tribes of the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition: Hopi Tribe, Navajo Nation, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, People of Zuni, and the Ute Tribe of the Uinta Ouray Reservation," the group said in a release. "Thirty regional tribes passed formal resolutions of support for Bears Ears National Monument, as did the National Congress of American Indians, representing more than 300 tribes across the United States.

"... Today's action marks the first time in history that Native American Tribes have called for and succeeded in protecting their sacred ancestral homelands through National Monument designation by a president of the United States of America. In this way, Bears Ears National Monument represents the first truly Native American National Monument in U.S. history."

Now, that's a beautiful thing as far as I am concerned!

And a statement from the National Parks Conservation Association:

"NPCA has long advocated for the 'completion' of Canyonlands National Park through expansion to include the area that was intended to be part of the park when it was originally proposed," an NPCA release added. "Much of that area is included in Bears Ears National Monument and will now receive a higher level of protection with greater management input from the National Park Service."

Initial praise for the designation also came from the League of Conservation Voters, outdoor manufacturer Patagonia, religious leaders, and the Center for Western Priorities.

“By protecting Bears Ears and Gold Butte, President Obama has secured his legacy as one of America’s great conservation presidents. These spectacular landscapes, with their archaeological sites threatened by looting and vandalism, are in dire need of protection," said Jennifer Rokala, executive director of the Center for Western Priorities. “President Obama’s use of the Antiquities Act confirms why it is just as important today as it was when Teddy Roosevelt signed the act into law 110 years ago—when a dysfunctional Congress fails to do its job, the president must have the authority to protect America’s natural and cultural treasures for future generations."

https://www.nationalparkstraveler.c...ahs-national-park-landscape-declared-national

Boris wrote: "Everybody should be allowed to collect artifacts on public land".

I've been a surface hunter for artifacts for 60 years. The ability for a collector to pick up an artifact on public lands has been and is debated, and often pits collector against archaeologist. President Carter actually amended existing law to make it ok for a person to collect an arrowhead off the surface of public lands. But, at the urging of the archaeological community, Congress amended the Carter Clause to state it is ok to pick up an arrowhead off the surface of public lands(no digging!!), but you must put it back down and not leave the park with that arrowhead. Collectors and archaeologists are frequently at odds, but responsible collectors are also an asset to archaeology. What archaeologist really fear, and it happens in a wilderness area like Bears Ears that is presently little patrolled, is wholesale digging and looting of sites. Once a site is disturbed that way, all potential scientific value is lost. At Ancestral Puebloan sites in Bears Ears, there can be found intact pottery vessels. These can bring many thousands of $$$ on the open market. A strong incentive for wholesale looting, and one reason we should want to better protect the material cultural heritage of America, located on public lands like Bears Ears.

And Boris, though you will simply dismiss this point of view, here is one Native American's take on the designation of Bears Ears as a National Monument:

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2016/11/21/native-americans-role-bears-ears/93417562/

I know for a fact that members of Hopi clans have been making pilgrimages to ancestral settlement sites in Bears Ears and pilgrimages to secret shrines for at least the past 1000 years. Cultural memory passed down by oral tradition is an awesome and beautiful thing. It helps maintain cultural identity. Recently, for instance, it has been demonstrated that Australian aborregenies have oral memories that are accurate and some 9000 years old!! In the case of the descendants of the ancestral Puebloans, such as the Hopi, the ties to Bears Ears are truly ancient, and their memories are intact. I don't think allowing these tribes to have a say in how their ancestral homes are managed is a terrible thing at all.

And btw, Boris, you speak in a resentful way toward Native Americans in this one instance. Do you have any idea how many national monuments, national historic sites, national battle sites, etc. preserve the cultural heritage of the dominant culture?? You have a somewhat selfish take when compared to the big picture where national cultural heritage and its preservation and protection is concerned. IMHO....

 

[Red]

basiclaly he doesnt trust local state government to be responsible and take care of their land themself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

it is pretty unconstitutional for the government to "own" land.

john locke said so in the federalist papers, the way a republic is preserved

What the hell did John Locke know about preserving national cultural heritage? And would you have us abolish all our national parks?

How do local/state governments have the kind of resources the national government has for maintaining such vast tracts of land? All local control by itself would do is ensure selling off the properties. And, once again, the land was already administered by three different federal agencies, the BLM, the National Forest Service, and the National Park Service. It was already public land, what part of that fundamental fact escapes you?

 

[babe]

"Archaeologists will be kept out of the sites and we will never know the past that could have been understood"

I'm surprised at this statement, babe. Surprised because I'm pretty sure you know that isn't true, so I don't know why you would make that statement. Archaeologists were among the strongest supporters of creating the monument, and this short article demonstrates why:

https://www.crowcanyon.org/e-newsletter/2016/June/2016_June_Bears_Ears.html


What you won't see is a hundred Summer Archaeological field schools cropping up all over Bears Ears. The general philosophy of American archaeology today is to leave sites un excavated in anticipation that new technology and testing techniques will likely be available in the future that will allow more information about the past to be gained via excavation. New tests, archaeology is very much a multi discipline science these days, can be expected. So let sites sleep until that happens. So, generally, the most active area for archaeology these days is what is known as salvage archaeology, conducted when sites are going to be destroyed by development anyway. Anytime federal funds are used in a construction project, for instance, an archaeological accesment must be done, and the project may be held up while a salvage dig takes place. So, there is much less actual excavation of protected sites these days, but certainly archaeologists will have access to Bears Ears.

I'm sure what I said is a generality that will prove to be the dominant trend in the "Science". Guvmint doesn't finance studies that don't promise some utility for management.

Unless someone is willing to fight hard for a bit of contrary research, things won't happen. Like the remains of Kennewick man, "Management" prefers to bury the controversial stuff and whatever flies in the face of authoritarian "settled science".

The Army Corps guy who drove the back hoe insists he buried Kennewick man before the case to keep him for study was made. Says it's a crock he didn't bury those bones, says that if they got him out, the remains would have been damaged both in the re-burial and the re-excavation, and that the context, the scene was irreparably destroyed.

 

[babe]

What the hell did John Locke know about preserving national cultural heritage? And would you have us abolish all our national parks?

How do local/state governments have the kind of resources the national government has for maintaining such vast tracts of land? All local control by itself would do is ensure selling off the properties. And, once again, the land was already administered by three different federal agencies, the BLM, the National Forest Service, and the National Park Service. It was already public land, what part of that fundamental fact escapes you?

John Locke knew a lot you don't know. Perhaps if you read something he wrote you might find out his ideas are a national cultural heritage worth preserving.

 

[Red]

John Locke knew a lot you don't know. Perhaps if you read something he wrote you might find out his ideas are a national cultural heritage worth preserving.

Yeah, he was a genius I'm sure. A major figure of the Enlightenment. I don't have anything against the man. I just don't think I turn to him for permission for public lands. I don't think Teddy R needed to check his volumes of Locke first to see if a National Park system was a good or bad idea.

 

[Red]

I'm sure what I said is a generality that will prove to be the dominant trend in the "Science". Guvmint doesn't finance studies that don't promise some utility for management.

Unless someone is willing to fight hard for a bit of contrary research, things won't happen. Like the remains of Kennewick man, "Management" prefers to bury the controversial stuff and whatever flies in the face of authoritarian "settled science".

The Army Corps guy who drove the back hoe insists he buried Kennewick man before the case to keep him for study was made. Says it's a crock he didn't bury those bones, says that if they got him out, the remains would have been damaged both in the re-burial and the re-excavation, and that the context, the scene was irreparably destroyed.

Didn't destroy the DNA, and it was the DNA that added to our knowledge of the peopling of the Americas in the case of Kennewick Man.

I'm not at all sure what point you're trying to get across here, babe. It's too late to save "settled science" where the study of Early Americans are concerned. Clovis-First was the settled science. Pre-Clovis is the contrary. Don't know what you mean when you say "things won't happen". The peopling of the Americas is the most wide open field in American archaeology at the moment. Nobody's trying to suppress Pre-Clovis research. Those days are over. I wish I would live long enough to see what our understanding looks like in another 50 years, but I won't. Still, I help out working at the largest Clovis Era camp site in North America, located in the Connecticut River Valley of Ma. I'm enjoying helping out in our understanding of Paleo sites in New England. Working with one of the real mavericks of Early Man studies in the United States, and consider myself lucky that he lives and works right here in my region.

Anyway, I don't pretend to understand you, babe.

 

[Red]

John Locke knew a lot you don't know. Perhaps if you read something he wrote you might find out his ideas are a national cultural heritage worth preserving.

Posted elsewhere, but repeated here so babe understands I do not need to justify my opinion to him. I do not answer to babe, I could not care less if babe approves of my opinions. I do not need to justify my existence or my beliefs to babe or anyone else. Don't like my opinion? Who cares?

OK, then let me tell you how I really feel....

I've always loved Southwest archaeology, and been fascinated and deeply attracted to the cultures that inhabited the mesas and Canyonlands of that region. Reading Frank Water's The Book of the Hopi changed my life. The migration stories of the clans, the prophesies, the realization that there was a connection to the Mesoamerican civilizations to the south, a connection that existed with the Hohokam as well, this lost history attracted me like no other. It still does. I can't put what that has meant to me in a forum comment. It's been 40 plus years now. Since Water's book introduced me to that ancient world. And two trips to visit the region. Whatever best protects the sites of the Ancestral Puebloan, what I'm still more used to calling the Anasazi, is what I want. I never want to see the relationship still in place between Hopi and Bears Ears, the still living remnant of that distant time and place, when that culture of Pueblo and cliff dwelling and high civilizations to the south existed, in jeopardy ever.

That's what I want. You don't always get what you want, and I am admitting to a lot of personal investment with just this subject. Call it progressive, or liberal, or socialist, or whatever is a foul epitaph in your lexicon, I'll likely always side with historic preservation and protection anyway. That's me, I don't have to apologize for that. I know it's easy for me to say, and local concerns are not meaningless to me, but I will not apologize for my opinion here. Nobody has to join me on my journey through the past, nobody has to love what I love, nobody has to agree. Whatever best protects Anasazi sites wins in my world. Nobody has to root for my team here. But nobody is going to blame it on being "progressive" either. It is as I've described, for the reasons I've described.

On one end of the scale, we have ISIS destroying the past. I'm on the other side where the past is concerned. I have this thing for deep time, and the things of deep time. Meteorites, deep time of the solar system. Fossils, deep time of life. Artifacts, deep time of man. And a landscape replete with some of the best preserved Anasazi sites in the SW? I want whatever is best for those sites. I'm selfish. That's what I want. It pleases me no end that Bears Ears received that particular status where public lands are concerned. I'm pleased the tribes, especially the Hopi from my point of view, had a say and will continue to have a say.

And if all of the above somehow makes other posters here angry, for some reason, I don't care. That's my opinion, and the reasons behind it. What are you gonna do about it? Order me out of the country? Put me on trial for "being a progressive"? Feel free to call me, label me, anything you want. I will not apologize for my opinion or the reasons behind it. It takes all kinds after all, even kinds like me.

Is that clear now, babe? Understood? It's my life, my opinion, you have no say in it whatsoever. It's essentially none of your business.

 

[green]

I am anti big government.
I am particularly against broad land ownership by the Feds.

Having said that, something I haven't seen mentioned here (may have missed it) is the staggering cost to the state of Utah if it were to fund all the parks and protected land without federal money.

It's part of an overall ****ty system.. but until there's a more broad fix, the way it is may be better than the way it "should" be.

It's ironic that we receive more federal dollars per capita than any other state...yet we hate the federal government so much. What would/will happen with Hill gets shut down, all the I-15 money goes away, pell grants/other student federal aid dries up?

All the teabaggers...I mean tea partiers should think about that before they run Hatch out of office. That man has done some real shady ****...but he has also brought a TON of money to the state.

 

[babe]

It's ironic that we receive more federal dollars per capita than any other state...yet we hate the federal government so much. What would/will happen with Hill gets shut down, all the I-15 money goes away, pell grants/other student federal aid dries up?

All the teabaggers...I mean tea partiers should think about that before they run Hatch out of office. That man has done some real shady ****...but he has also brought a TON of money to the state.

Hatch has some good points. He alone of the Utah elected federal politicians stood solid for Trump.

I wish there were no infamous data center on the hill above Camp Williams. Utah does have better freeways than California. I think CA is so anti-growth they don't even want paved roads anymore.

Bishop and Chaffetz were on board with a Bears' Ears monument, just quibbled about some details.... but still willing to unecessaryily prohibit future resource claims. That is the worst thing about the idea, ever.

 

[babe]

Posted elsewhere, but repeated here so babe understands I do not need to justify my opinion to him. I do not answer to babe, I could not care less if babe approves of my opinions. I do not need to justify my existence or my beliefs to babe or anyone else. Don't like my opinion? Who cares?

OK, then let me tell you how I really feel....

I've always loved Southwest archaeology, and been fascinated and deeply attracted to the cultures that inhabited the mesas and Canyonlands of that region. Reading Frank Water's The Book of the Hopi changed my life. The migration stories of the clans, the prophesies, the realization that there was a connection to the Mesoamerican civilizations to the south, a connection that existed with the Hohokam as well, this lost history attracted me like no other. It still does. I can't put what that has meant to me in a forum comment. It's been 40 plus years now. Since Water's book introduced me to that ancient world. And two trips to visit the region. Whatever best protects the sites of the Ancestral Puebloan, what I'm still more used to calling the Anasazi, is what I want. I never want to see the relationship still in place between Hopi and Bears Ears, the still living remnant of that distant time and place, when that culture of Pueblo and cliff dwelling and high civilizations to the south existed, in jeopardy ever.

That's what I want. You don't always get what you want, and I am admitting to a lot of personal investment with just this subject. Call it progressive, or liberal, or socialist, or whatever is a foul epitaph in your lexicon, I'll likely always side with historic preservation and protection anyway. That's me, I don't have to apologize for that. I know it's easy for me to say, and local concerns are not meaningless to me, but I will not apologize for my opinion here. Nobody has to join me on my journey through the past, nobody has to love what I love, nobody has to agree. Whatever best protects Anasazi sites wins in my world. Nobody has to root for my team here. But nobody is going to blame it on being "progressive" either. It is as I've described, for the reasons I've described.

On one end of the scale, we have ISIS destroying the past. I'm on the other side where the past is concerned. I have this thing for deep time, and the things of deep time. Meteorites, deep time of the solar system. Fossils, deep time of life. Artifacts, deep time of man. And a landscape replete with some of the best preserved Anasazi sites in the SW? I want whatever is best for those sites. I'm selfish. That's what I want. It pleases me no end that Bears Ears received that particular status where public lands are concerned. I'm pleased the tribes, especially the Hopi from my point of view, had a say and will continue to have a say.

And if all of the above somehow makes other posters here angry, for some reason, I don't care. That's my opinion, and the reasons behind it. What are you gonna do about it? Order me out of the country? Put me on trial for "being a progressive"? Feel free to call me, label me, anything you want. I will not apologize for my opinion or the reasons behind it. It takes all kinds after all, even kinds like me.

Is that clear now, babe? Understood? It's my life, my opinion, you have no say in it whatsoever. It's essentially none of your business.

temper, temper.

you won't post anymore? gee whiz. You and Kicky and Rev just running off.

I get to say what I think about anyone's posted comments, really. And I don't expect anyone to agree necessarily. My offerings are a contribution to a discussion. You have just been a bit sensitive because somehow you think I should just agree.

I take exception to the ownership/management schema, not the protection. Just the termination of people's rights to locate valuable resources and..... complying with all the necessary preservation principles.... access and develop those resources. Indian artifacts are principally local surface, a few acres in extent with perhaps clusters extending some distance. The reources are typically underground and can be developed with small drilling and pipes. Oh, Uranium is in local lenses less than a mile in extent, but immensely valuable, and such operations would of course require archaeologists to thoroughly go over the site until it's archaological values are safely outlined and preserved.

I think I'll be sending Trump a tweet.