Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They shouldn't. The state that the land resides in should own it.
I agree the federal govt has no business being a landlord. I would rather see the land given to blacks as reparations than the govt own it. and I hate reparations
If that was the case the Everglades in Florida would be a shopping mall and suburb. Its easy to dismiss things like public lands in far out areas but Florida has many close to and surrounded by developed areas.
I don't think anyone who lives or visits Florida would agree that our state, with our history of governors and congress, should be in charge of conservation of certain areas in the state.
You would trust DC more than the state that actually occupies the land? That makes no sense. Conservation should be up to the state in most cases. Nobody is building a strip mall on a swamp and if they did so what.
If that was the case the Everglades in Florida would be a shopping mall and suburb. Its easy to dismiss things like public lands in far out areas but Florida has many close to and surrounded by developed areas.
I wouldn't expect a shopping mall to be built in the Everglades, about 8% of the land in FL is controlled by the feds and that is pretty high for Eastern states. On the other hand 84% is controlled by the feds in Nevada.
President Barack Obama has seized more land for the federal government than any other president in American history. To date, he has unilaterally taken over 260 million acres of land and water, giving control and ownership over to the feds.
Obama used the antiquities act to bypass congress and shut out public input into the use and management of those lands
'Western states are particularly sensitive to federal land ownership..."
the refrain for decades has been complaints about Washington elite making decisions about the management of western lands.
Well it makes sense to have the policy makers where the policies will be implemented.
why did Obama do it?
not because of his love for the environment, it was payback for votes to the environmental lobby and to “..... systematically abused executive powers through unilateral rules, orders and memorandums designed to make energy and resource development uneconomical.” remember his promise to cause energy prices to skyrocket????
If that was the case the Everglades in Florida would be a shopping mall and suburb. Its easy to dismiss things like public lands in far out areas but Florida has many close to and surrounded by developed areas.
I don't think anyone who lives or visits Florida would agree that our state, with our history of governors and congress, should be in charge of conservation of certain areas in the state.
Then fix it.
Far better to fix your own state than to expect a state "in far out areas" to be governed by a group of people that have no skin in that game.
and Yellowstone Park could be one vast mine, I don't see why anyone would disagree with our park system or wildlife preserves. This new head has little interest in protecting the environment, he felt Zinke was too moderate so that's a bad sign. I thought someone in this position should have an interest in preserving the environment.
There is nothing wrong with preserves, it should be the state's responsibility to preserve them since it's within their borders. Why do you act like the fed gov is so much more benevolent than state gov's? They both can be compromised due to the consequences of elections. That's why voting matters.
Doesn't matter. The country is a collection of states. The states created the Feds and gave them their power. If the people of the state don't like what their state government is doing with the land they can do something about it.
When your in a state the size and population of Florida, that whole "Can do something or march and band together" goes out the window. One or two marches and some yelling will do nothing when the big money comes to town. It takes Millions of dollars to run a campaign here so NO ONE makes it through without owing a ton of favors.
Rick Scott spent $63 million for a senate run after spending $100 million campaigning during his 8 years as governor. He says he used his money but lets be honest, no one spends $163 million dollars to make 100-200 thousand a year.
Floridians know that our protected areas are under constant pressure for development by huge corporations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
