Skip to main content

View Diary: Dkos Tour Series: The San Rafael Swell (That Should Be A National Monument) (51 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  thanks for posting. . . (11+ / 0-)

    ban nock, but keep me in mind the BLM cannot do what the NPS can do in the way of firm protection. Shooting at glyphs is not cool. And there is one of those pictures I posted that reveals such slander to prehistoric people. BLM can only do so much and its agency is prone to selling off huge parcels of land just to try and maintain a budget. In this case, the Department of the Interior (NPS) gets the lion's share, while the Department of Agriculture (USFS) gets second dibs. I work or have worked with both and have held permits with the BLM for select places I ran tours. I also know the BLM welcomes a more stringent protective status, such as a national monument. I'm thinking others who front such organizations will be more revealing about this. My point is to get only one point out there: the Swell needs protection given the greed and intent of fossil fuel magnets fixed on this huge tract of land for the sake of its objective and curbing the OTV's and others from their activities because it's just too much noise, too much "I don't give a damn because I'm having fun" and like it or not, the environment comes first; not people. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. I am also hoping to garner more support given this mindset. I understand your point of view but I think there is more here at stake than sacrificing a landscape, whose archeological import is akin to a sanctified setting. Let's keep it that way.

    Treat the world (yourself, and others) as part of a living organism. Everyone and everything will benefit.

    by richholtzin on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 09:02:23 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Oh I'm all for protecting the landscape, just not (6+ / 0-)

      sure what's the best way to go about it.

      I've heard the Grand Canyon has over a million visitors a year with hundreds of flights daily up and down the canyon, multi lane highways, concessionaires etc. Making a place a park is a good way to ruin it.

      Seems like the places that aren't famous don't see any people. People need trails (and guided tours ahem)

      I've mostly seen no one at all out in BLM deserts, rarely a rancher and even more rarely cows. Seems like petroglyph vandalism happens in areas no matter what designation they have, I seem to remember hearing about a recent case down at newspaper rock.

      I've also checked out the western portion of the Dominguez-Escalante National Conservation Area and there were no vehicles of any sort allowed, similar to a wilderness area. It was established to..." conserve and protect the area's unique and important geological, cultural, archaeological, paleontological, natural, scientific, recreational, wilderness, wildlife, riparian, historical, educational, scenic and water resources". They seem to have done pretty well with it too.

      It helped having a Sec of Int who was from the area. Not sure if new National Conservation Areas will continue to be established at the same rate.

      How big is your personal carbon footprint?

      by ban nock on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 10:09:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  your comments. . . (5+ / 0-)

        are noteworthy and worthy of your own diary's posting on same, ban nock. You have the background, obviously, and interest and talent to write such, and given what you just commented on says as much. So to suggest an answer to your opening remark. . .the best way to go about it is post a diary, just like you did in this comment, only expand it. I have worked at the Grand Canyon for many, many years, mainly in an educational outreach program solely endorsed by the NPS. My major gripe with the park service is how its agency continues to dodge the NOISE POLLUTION problem over the canyon, which, to me, constitutes refusing permits to the omnipotent (seemingly that) air-tour operators, who, otherwise, continue to back down the NPS on this matter. Try backpacking or hiking in the bliss and solitude of the inner canyon and having to put up with constant droning. When the NPS runs to the FAA and wants its agency to help out, the FAA says it's the NPS' problem, not really a matter of airspace. But it's both. Yet someone's hands get greased with money whenever such stuff is going on. Ergo, nothing is being done about it. That Grand Canyon West country is replete with the nosiest air traffic corridor of them all, and the Hualapai Indian Reservation and its tribal council sanctions it. (continued in the next commentary). . .

        Treat the world (yourself, and others) as part of a living organism. Everyone and everything will benefit.

        by richholtzin on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 11:13:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  continuing my epistle. . . (4+ / 0-)

        and meant to address you salient points. . .yes, you do raise the old argument of what's best for visitors in the greater or lesser sense. Hikers and backpackers, as well as rafters, are the lesser, and people who prefer vehicles of any kind are the greater. But is this argument specious when it comes to preserving open spaces and protected national park and monument spaces? And, yes, vandalism to glyphs does happen, but you won't see that sort of thing happening in national monuments and national parks by any greater degree. For some reason, having that fed status tends to shy idiots away from marring such priceless rock art. It can happen, but I'm saying it's not going to happen as much as it does evidently happen on BLM lands. . .the very agency with the least budget and manpower to do anything about the problem. Check my figures on this. I think my statement is valid. WSA's, of course, are very well monitored sites. You will also notice they are the least visited compared to NM and NPs. Still, they are dubbed "wilderness" sites for a reason. As for the Sec. of the Interior, I do not trust a man who has too much lead-way for ruinous industrious industries, such as those invested in uranium mining. Like the NPS, the Secretary is not mindful of what his position really entails, but plays the game of too much compromise. I submit we cannot afford to do given the last great stand of open spaces, these public lands, that are constantly being targeted for exploitation. I say the SAN RAFEAL SWELL turf much be granted a national monument status, at the very least. Sometimes tells me the BLM wouldn't mind moving to other pastures and letting the NPS take over. It's the best of both worlds given what we have to work with at this time. A NM status is, at least, a good start. End epistle. I welcome more views, from you and others on this matter.

        Treat the world (yourself, and others) as part of a living organism. Everyone and everything will benefit.

        by richholtzin on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 11:21:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  to paraphrase from the movie "Field of Dreams" (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        magicsister, RiveroftheWest

        "If you build a road and a visitors center, they will come and litter."  (and probably vandalize)

        I agree wholeheartedly, although I'm a little more circumspect about where BLM's priorities lie.  I think they serve at the behest of the American Cattlemens' Association, mostly, and some mining interests.

        _"Love is the rosebud of an hour; Friendship the everlasting flower."_ Brook Boothby

        by Keith930 on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 04:09:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  that comment you made. . . (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Keith930, magicsister, RiveroftheWest

          should be enshrined. . .the BLM serving at the behest of the American Cattlemens' Association. I could not have said it better. They sell off or lease off land too damn fast and I was told by others in the loop it's because they try and make do with a skimpy budget. Go figure. I also used to work with the Forest Service (GPS surveyor and topographical mapper, out of Prescott, AZ), and my boss once asked me what I would I rather see, as a choice: letting cows run free on the land or developers and such? Well, he had me there, but I think the BLM is playing that same lame card. I should have told him "Neither!" Protecting open spaces also means keeping the damn cows out, including the eco destruction to cryptobiotic soil and all other fragile ecosystems. . .all for the sake of fattening up the cows and then sending them off to you know where and what thereafter. Thanks for posting this juicy comment, Keith930.

          Treat the world (yourself, and others) as part of a living organism. Everyone and everything will benefit.

          by richholtzin on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 05:21:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  BLM (0+ / 0-)

          aka - The Bureau of Livestock and Mining.

          •  there is that. . . (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            and the popular "Bureau of Land Mismanagement." That's the key to why it's known as the other title: Bureau of Livestock and Mining. Thanks for reminding me. It's an uphill battle fighting fed agencies that are supposed to doing what their title says. But don't. Take those other sorts, the Fish and Game agency. Talk about harming more than helping. Thanks for posting your thoughts on this, Short Bus.

            Treat the world (yourself, and others) as part of a living organism. Everyone and everything will benefit.

            by richholtzin on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 01:03:49 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site