Posted on 11/22/2016 10:54:40 AM PST by yoe
U.S. officials are blocking new mining claims outside Yellowstone National Park as the Obama administration races in its last days to keep industry out of natural areas.
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — U.S. officials plan to block new mining claims outside Yellowstone National Park as the Obama administration races in its last days to keep industry out of pristine and environmentally sensitive areas.
[snip]
The latest move comes after a pair of gold exploration proposals north of Yellowstone drew strong opposition from local business owners, environmentalists and Montana elected officials.
The opponents argue that mining would industrialize wild areas populated by grizzly bears, bighorn sheep and other wildlife; harm streams that drain into the Yellowstone River; and dampen tourism, which is a mainstay of the region's economy.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
Obama joins other presidents in preserving our magnificent lands for generations of humans to come and animals to live on, all to enjoy.
Scorched Earth: everything is going as predicted by Michael Savage.
The article indicates blocking mining *outside* Yellowstone. From the article, its not clear who owns these lands outside Yellowstone. If the Feds own them, that’s one thing. If the lands are privately owned, that’s another thing, and use of one’s private property should not be infringed without due compensation.
No one is talking about mining “inside” a national park. These are claims outside the park but liberals want to extend “protection” iron fisted control far beyond the boundaries.
U.S. officials plan to block new mining claims outside Yellowstone National Park.....??? How far OUTSIDE? Are you willing to give up the REST of the US, also? Just for the Progressives to shut down jobs?
The EPA is now wanting to or is controlling private land that has “water” running through it...Even if it is a dry stream bed...They are saying what the land can and can’t be used for...
Eliminate the EPA....
I agree. Even if it is outside the park. I trust the locals have a stake in preserving the natural habitat of the area in order to have a thriving economy. Yes local governments and residents should have a say on how some property is used it’s called zoning and land use. The risks of allowing a mining operation vs the benefits should be taken into account. If the effects of mining were insulted on the subject property that would be one thing but real risks to other properties and waterways does cause concern.
insulated. Sheesh.
It says “outside” Yellowstone.
Absolutely!! Most are privately held lands...you will have to do a little research to see where or if there might be a problem....hope not.
Let EPA mine your land and they with turn your pristine rivers orange.
The feds do not OWN these lands...they are managed by either the Bureau of Land Management, or the US Forest Service.
Both entities should be eliminated and these lands should be managed by the states.
AMEN!!!
If this is so obviously correct, and so important, why wait until the waning days of his 8 years?
There is a fundamental asymmetry to federal land ownership that seriously distorts our politics. The western states have huge federal land holdings. The federal presence is very minor in most of the eastern states. If it were up to me, I would privatize a lot of BLM and Forest Service land in the west and use the proceeds to expand national park assets in the east. I would not touch the crown jewels, but a large part of the federal estate in the west has traditionally been leased to farmers, ranchers, and timber and mining companies. From time to time, the feds get imperial and decide to force the locals off land they have worked for generations. That's where a lot of the bad blood comes from.
Meanwhile, the east is crowded and would benefit from significant park expansion. Again, if it were me, I'd start with riverfronts, floodplains, and historic sites and build out from there. There's no magic "percentage of federal ownership" figure, but I find it crazy that we're paving Civil War battlefields, with bitter fights to save a few acres here and there, while the Forest Service and Park Service in the west are adding buffer zones to protect buffer zones that protect parks in states that may already be over 50 percent federally owned.
Clear case of ‘federal overreach’ and a slam dunk in court.
Sorry but Tucson crap hole vs the rest of Arizona.
“If it were up to me, I would privatize a lot of BLM and Forest Service land in the west and use the proceeds to expand national park assets in the east. I would not touch the crown jewels, but a large part of the federal estate in the west has traditionally been leased to farmers, ranchers, and timber and mining companies. From time to time, the feds get imperial and decide to force the locals off land they have worked for generations. That’s where a lot of the bad blood comes from.”
I would privatize the lands too. But, if there is anything of use - minerals, timber, oil - we should mine and log. These are under utilized lands, and we should get what is needed from them. Everything would be up for grabs including the “crown jewels.”
I ain’t a preservationist. :)
Empty gestures that can be undone by Trump with a stroke of the pen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.