Tuesday, December 05, 2017

Happy for Utah, Sad for NM - Some initial thoughts

I'm glad that Utah benefited from the monument review process and disappointed that NM did not.

It's especially sad because each of the points made by Trump and the comments by Zinke also applied to Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks and Rio Grande del Norte.

Nothing was done here. We are left speculating "why?".

Personally, I don't believe Zinke's heart was ever in this, that left to his own devices, he would never have conducted the review and certainly wouldn't have recommended downsizing. Trump cut a deal with Hatch, Zinke is loyal to Trump, so we get the big moves in Utah. Possibly some minor changes in Nevada and Oregon, just so it won't look like a total Utah deal.

Besides, if Zinke really believed in enforcing Sec.2 of the Antiquities Act and that previous administrations had abused the law, why would he turn around a recommend a new 130,000-acre monument?

When it comes to NM, I also think Zinke blinked. He looked at NM's two Senators, with Heinrich sitting on the authorizing committee for his agency and Udall sitting on the appropriations committee for his agency, and the former Navy Seal decided to not engage.

Earlier today I posted the Outside magazine story on Zinke where they referred to him as Trump's "attack dog" on the environment. From where I'm sitting, he looks more like a whimpering pup cowering at the feet of two liberal Senators.

Next, we'll see if he really does recommend revising the grazing language in the proclamations as indicated in his report. I see where Henrich is saying no to any changes in language. So what will it be Mr. Secretary, will you saddle up or slink away?

8 comments:

LC Sons of Liberty said...

Frank you are exactly right except for one thing. It is all political. Trump and martinez had no love loss so the values and intent of New Mexicans was averted. Another reason why the progressives continue to "win" in New Mexico.

Dave Skinner said...

Eric Trump's wife is apparently a PETA-nik, and I really can't imagine WTF Zinke is thinking when it comes to not just Badger Two Medicine, but the Rocky Front, which became an NCA because of the monument threat.
I thought SEALs were brave, but it seems like RZ is still in "next self promotion" mode.

Anonymous said...

Should see Tues night's episode of the Colbert show - first his monologue was dissing the shrinking of the monuments -saying that the president stole your land, then showed an ad from Patagonia outdoor clothing company saying the same thing.

Then he had Van Jones on as a guest who said Trump doesn't believe I. The first amendment.

They need to be reminded about who was really having their land stolen & how their right to fight it was hampered because the government impinged on their first amendment rights.

Hemingway said...

I am so tired of lies told about our National Monument in our community by a small minority - lies, lies and more lies!

https://www.outsideonline.com/2235311/lies-weve-been-told-about-national-monuments?utm_medium=social&utm_source=email&utm_campaign=onsiteshare

Anonymous said...

Read about Zinke re: the UN using federal ‘public-private partnerships’ as backdoor for global policies. Article dated 11/29/17 by Karen Shumacher on the "Free Range Report" website.

Frank DuBois said...

Poor Hemingway, he misses the target again.
He says he's tired of the "lies, lies and more lies!", and then provides a link to an article that dispels four lies.
Problem is, none of those four items have ever been asserted by me in any of my writings or comments.
Better luck next time.

Anonymous said...

I read the anti-wilderness commentaries by Mr. Frank Dubois, who is an Agenda 21 conspiracy believer, that viciously attacks the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument In fact, Mr. Dubois has made this outlandish statement: "You must realize this (the wilderness proposal) will be under United Nations authority. There is much more to this story. These two senators (Democrats) need to be removed from office for such actions."

It is hard to believe that Mr. Dubois was New Mexico's Department of Agriculture Secretary for 15 years. Mr. Frank Dubois’s erroneous and misleading anti-wilderness commentary on border security is the epitome of arrogance. It seems that he wants us to envision drug mules all over the Organ Mountains. He makes it appear that the Border Patrol has no way to chase these drug traffickers except maybe by bicycle. Mark Twain once wrote: “A half-truth is the most cowardly of lies.
His remarks are just a political agenda voicing anti-Federal government rhetoric.

Frank DuBois said...

My poor friend, you’ve struck out again.

Strike One. “…Mr. Frank Dubois, who is an Agenda 21 conspiracy believer…”

I’ve been blogging since 2003 and writing a monthly column since 2010, and I don’t recall ever mentioning Agenda 21, much less characterizing it as a “conspiracy”. I look forward to you attempting to substantiate this, because I know you can’t.

Strike Two “…Mr. Dubois has made this outlandish statement: "You must realize this (the wilderness proposal) will be under United Nations authority. There is much more to this story. These two senators (Democrats) need to be removed from office for such actions."

I’ve been studying public land law since 1974 and have never uttered or written such a statement. Provide a link to substantiate your source or withdraw your statement.

Strike Three “Mr. Frank Dubois’s erroneous and misleading anti-wilderness commentary on border security is the epitome of arrogance. It seems that he wants us to envision drug mules all over the Organ Mountains”

I’ve never said or indicated there would be, “drug mules all over the Organ Mountains”. In any discussion on wilderness and border security I always quote the language in the Wilderness Act. How can quoting the language in the Act itself be anti-wilderness? If you disagree with my interpretation, please state so and explain why.

Your tactic of ascribing views I don’t have, along with providing false quotes and stringing it all together with words and phrases such as “viciously attacks”, “conspiracy believer”, “outlandish”, “epitome of arrogance”, etc., discredits your entire presentation.

There are proponents of these environmental designations who can provide spirited and reasonable debate on these issues. Clearly, you are not one of them.