quote:

Originally posted by tanksoldier:

quote:

Originally posted by arabiancowboy:
Answer: a private individual should not be the gatekeeper for public land.

...and government should be?

How about "We the People" through our representative form of government.

quote:

Answer: a private individual should not be the gatekeeper for public land.

And under what reasoning does that private land owner have to sell, forced sale, confiscation, at what price, imminent domain? and which land owner, all of them or just one have to suffer losing their family land, we're talking thousands of acre size ranches with generations of same family owners.

Who gets to decide who must capitulate...

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

quote:

Answer: a private individual should not be the gatekeeper for public land.

And under what reasoning does that private land owner have to sell, forced sale, confiscation, at what price, imminent domain? and which land owner, all of them or just one have to suffer losing their family land, we're talking thousands of acre size ranches with generations of same family owners.

Who gets to decide who must capitulate...

Where did you get the idea that "forced sale" or "confiscation" or "eminent domain" for the purpose of obtaining public access is occurring?

Typically, the loss of public access to public land happens when a ranch is bought by some out-of-stater (let's use a Californian who just sold their 3 bedroom home as an example). They decide that the historic access through their new hobby ranch is inconvenient or a potential liability if a member of the public hurts themselves on ranch property, so they deny access.

I have never heard of a rancher "with generations of the same family owners" being forced to sell in order to allow public access. Please provide some evidence that this is happening.

quote:

Originally posted by Dakor:
Wyss is my former boss' boss at Synthes, which was sold in 2011 for just over $21 billion - the largest acquisition in J&J's history. Wyss owned a majority of the company and was a multibillionaire before the sale even. The Wyss Institute at Harvard is named after him, following the $125 million gift to his alma mater. He's not a saint however if you do your research on some of his medical device decisions.

We know the same people.

Small world.

-----------------------

quote:

Originally posted by Dakor:
Wyss is my former boss' boss at Synthes, which was sold in 2011 for just over $21 billion - the largest acquisition in J&J's history. Wyss owned a majority of the company and was a multibillionaire before the sale even. The Wyss Institute at Harvard is named after him, following the $125 million gift to his alma mater. He's not a saint however if you do your research on some of his medical device decisions.

We likely know the same people.

Small world.

-----------------------

As a Constitutional Conservative, I would prefer the feds release the land currently "in hock" so-to-speak, to the STATE and let the state work out access. The private land being "donated" to the feds could easily be donated to the state.

We have been going down the wrong trail for a long time and a little common sense is needed. With the Wilderness Area notation, you can't build roads or cut dead trees for firewood. So when there is a fire, you can't get to it to stop it's progress and put it out.

Even the National Forest has been limited recently to cutting timber so the old roads have become overgrown and impassable in places. Maybe Steve495 has the right idea of letting the State take control.

Here is a New Mexico organization that seems to be interesting:

https://www.nmwild.org/

Check out their newsletter under Resources at the top right:

https://www.nmwild.org/resources/newsletters

quote:

Originally posted by joel9507:

quote:

The area is surrounded by private land

This seems unlike a crisis to me. Isn't nearly everything surrounded by private land?

What am I missing?.....

Where i live/lived, there is much government land with a county road along side. One can park the truck, and walk onto the government land, and hunt/fish. Where ever there is government land surrounded by private, it is inaccessible to me. Only those with permission from the surrounding land owner(s) can walk onto the government land. Thankfully, there is much, much, government land i can walk onto.

Update: Sabinoso Wilderness Will Finally Open to the Public, Secretary Zinke Announces BLM to Accept Land Donation

The 16,000-acre Wilderness has been landlocked since 2009
By Alex Robinson August 11, 2017

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke announced on Wednesday that the Bureau of Land Management would accept a land donation that would finally allow public access to the Sabinoso Wilderness.

The 16,000-acre Wilderness has been landlocked—it was surrounded by private ranches— since it was first designated in 2009 (read more here about how the Sabinoso ended up in that predicament).


Secretary Ryan Zinke puts Senator Tom Udall (left) and Senator Martin Heinrich (right) in a headlock during his trip to New Mexico last month.

Last year the Wilderness Land Trust bought one of the ranches bordering the Wilderness and intended to donate it to the BLM to ensure public access. New Mexico Senators Martin Heinrich and Tom Udall (both Democrats who had been working on the project for a decade) saw this as a slam-dunk opportunity for finally securing access. Zinke (a Republican) gave the green light to accept the donation weeks after he traveled to New Mexico to tour the area on horseback.

"I'm happy to announce today the Department intends to finalize the process to consider whether to accept 3,595 acres to make the Sabinoso Wilderness area accessible to hunters and all members of the public for the first time ever," Zinke said in a press release Wednesday. "Expanding access to hunting, fishing, and recreation on federal lands is one of my top priorities as Secretary. I originally had concerns about adding more wilderness-designated area, however after hiking and riding the land it was clear that access would only be improved if the Department accepted the land and maintained the existing roadways. Thanks to the donation of a private organization, we continue to move toward delivering this nonpartisan win for sportsmen and the community."

This is good news for sportsmen and women for a couple reasons. First and foremost, New Mexico sportsmen and non-resident hunters traveling to the Land of Enchantment are about to get a new place to hunt. The Wilderness should be open to the public in about 3 to 4 months, according to the Sante Fe New Mexican. The Sabinoso is rugged canyon country that’s home to elk, mule deer, turkeys, and black bears (it’s also rumored to hold trophy aoudad).

“We thank Senators Heinrich and Udall for their leadership to get us to this date and look forward to continued partnership with Secretary Zinke and his staff to finalize this long awaited agreement,” says Jason Amaro, the Southwest Chapter Coordinator for Backcountry Hunters and Anglers.

Opening the Sabinoso could be a good sign of more good things to come from the Department of the Interior. Sportsmen’s groups like the BHA initially celebrated Zinke as the pick for Secretary of the Interior. But half a year into his term, those same groups started to wonder if Zinke had turned his back on sportsmen.

Maybe, hopefully, the Sabinoso is an indicator that he hasn’t.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/upd...o-accept-land#page-2

More good news for hunting and fishing

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hopes to Expand Hunting and Fishing at These Wildlife Refuges

Posted at 6:15 pm on August 15, 2017 by Erika Haas


The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is hoping to expand hunting and fishing at 10 national wildlife refuges (NWR) in eight different states.

The proposal includes:

Opening moose hunting at the Des Lacs NWR in North Dakota
Opening moose and turkey hunting at the Souris River Basin NWR in North Dakota, as well as expanding upland game and big game hunting
Expanding migratory game bird hunting, upland game and big game hunting at the Savannah River NWR between Georgia and South Carolina, the Minnesota Valley NWR in Minnesota, the Patoka River NWR in Indiana, and the Horicon NWR in Wisconsin
Expanding big game hunting at the Fox River NWR in Wisconsin
Expanding upland game and big game hunting at the Sequoyah NWR in Oklahoma
Expanding migratory game bird hunting at the Baskett Slough NWR in Oregon
Opening sport fishing at the Siletz Bay NWR in Oregon

Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke made the announcement last week.

“I grew up in the mountains of northwest Montana, where I spent my time hunting and fishing on our shared public lands. I was lucky to take my boys out on the same land that my dad and granddad took me,” Zinke said in a statement. “As the steward of our public lands, one of my top priorities is to open up access wherever possible for hunting and fishing so that more families have the opportunity to pass down the heritage.”

“The last thing I want to see is hunting and fishing become elite sports,” he added. “These ten refuges will provide incredible opportunities for sportsmen and anglers across the country to access the land and connect with the wildlife.”

There are currently 566 national wildlife refuges in the United States. If the proposal is approved, the public will be able to hunt on 373 of them and fish at 312.

https://bearingarms.com/erika-...at-wildlife-refuges/

Just right

Zinke looks to move 3 agencies' headquarters to Denver

Kellie Lunney, E&E News reporter
Greenwire: Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke reportedly has said Denver "will probably" become the headquarters for three major agencies within the department as part of an ambitious reorganization effort slated to get underway in fiscal 2019.

The Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Bureau of Reclamation could eventually move their headquarters operations from Washington to Denver, according to employee notes obtained by E&E News detailing a July meeting between Zinke and U.S. Geological Survey senior executives in Denver.

Zinke provided an overview of his reorganization plans to the senior executives during a July 21 lunch, USGS spokesman Dave Ozman confirmed. It included discussion of the secretary's desire to shift more department resources and personnel from Washington to field offices across the country and empower front-line employees with more decision making authority.

But more authority might not translate into higher salaries for employees outside the Beltway.

The notes indicated that Zinke believes Interior is too top-heavy with managers. He told senior executives during the Denver meeting that shrinking the workforce would be achieved without layoffs, something he has said publicly before.

"Zinke believes the DOI organization is an upside-down pyramid — there are too many high-graded employees," the notes said. "There needs to be more lower grades, and they need to be in the field. Example, when a GS-14 retires, we should hire a GS-6 or 9."

Zinke has told lawmakers that he wants to reduce the department workforce by 4,000 full-time jobs through a mix of attrition, separation incentives and reassignments to meet the recommendations of the Trump administration's fiscal 2018 budget request.

The Montanan, a former Navy SEAL, also outlined for career managers his plan to have field offices report to regional joint management areas (JMAs) based on watershed and wildlife corridors. The idea is based on the military's joint command structure. Leadership at the JMAs "could change or rotate between bureaus in the JMAs," the notes said.

"They are looking to select two to three cities in each of the 13 regions which will compete to be site of the regional/JMA office," the meeting notes said. "Cities have to be no more than two hops from D.C. (by air), affordable and with good community infrastructure."

Birmingham, Ala., and Boise, Idaho, were specifically mentioned as "two good candidates."

Ozman, who contributed to the meeting notes, said they "seemed to be accurate." He emphasized, however, that the information represented "a collection of informal notes that reflect the recollections" of those present at the meeting and are "not precise."

Interior spokeswoman Heather Swift said the department didn't have "anything to announce on the reorg right now" in response to several questions about issues discussed during the Denver meeting with senior executives. "The secretary plans to release his plan once everything has been finalized," Swift said.

Federal agencies submitted draft reorganization plans to the White House Office of Management and Budget at the end of June as part of a March executive order aimed at improving government efficiency. OMB has said the workforce plans will be made public with the release of the administration's fiscal 2019 budget proposal, presumably in February 2018.

The Denver notes, which jibe with much of what Zinke has said publicly so far about his reorganization plans, said President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence had approved Zinke's restructuring proposal centered around JMAs.

Lynn Scarlett, a former Interior Department deputy secretary and chief operating officer who also served as acting Interior secretary during the George W. Bush administration, said leaders must ask themselves what their goals are and what it will cost to achieve them when they undertake large-scale management changes.

"Reorganization is not free," said Scarlett, now global managing director for public policy at the Nature Conservancy. "It comes with political costs, practical costs, human capital costs. So you really have to ask, what is it that you are trying to accomplish, and what are the best ways to accomplish that?"

Interior is a "very complicated department with a great deal of dispersed activity and many authorities," Scarlett said. Of Zinke's joint management area concept, Scarlett said coordination and collaboration are important, especially in instances where there are "blended missions." Individual agencies, however, also have specialized missions that don't necessarily overlap with one another but still need to be carried out, she said.

"I've seen comments about the desire to reorganize and push people to the field and sort of combine agencies into these joint units," the former Interior official said. "But what I haven't seen a clear expression of is what's the management problem one is trying to fix, what are the goals one is trying to achieve?" She added that unless those are clearly articulated and the costs are carefully considered, "you can end up with a lot of effort on something that ultimately is going to have a hard time moving forward."
'Congress doesn't like to be surprised'

The part of Zinke's preliminary reorganization plan that so far has attracted the most attention was the reassignment of dozens of senior executives at BLM in late spring. While the department hewed to senior executive notification rules, some employees and lawmakers viewed the reassignments as hasty and not particularly transparent. A second round of reassignment notifications for other senior executives at BLM and the National Park Service has been expected all summer, but to date details are scant.

Interior has roughly 225 or so senior executives across the department.

Democratic Sens. Martin Heinrich and Tom Udall of New Mexico are among the members of Congress who have expressed concern over the reassignments and Interior's larger reorganization effort. BLM's New Mexico Director Amy Lueders was among the senior executives transferred in June (Greenwire, June 27).

Just before the Senate left for August recess, Udall and Heinrich told E&E News that the topic of reorganization came up during a late July trip the two took with Zinke in New Mexico, where they toured the Sabinoso Wilderness on horseback.

"I have some concerns," Heinrich said when asked about the reorganization. Udall, ranking member of the Senate Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, said Zinke spoke in broad terms about the reorganization and did not offer "much in the way of details."

Udall, who sent a letter to Zinke in June seeking information on how many career senior executives Interior reassigned, why the department relocated them and how much it will cost the government, said he's still waiting for specific information (Greenwire, July 14). "The devil's in the details," Udall said.

Agencies have to be as transparent as they possibly can with Congress, Kristine Simmons, vice president for government affairs at the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service, said during a forum last week on agency reform efforts. Panelists at the event hosted by the Center for Organizational Excellence at the National Press Club discussed the executive order and OMB guidance to agencies on restructuring their workforce.

"Congress doesn't like to be surprised," Simmons said. The legislative branch "likes to be engaged earlier in the process and have some input into designs" rather than receiving a finished product from agencies, she said.

"The more that can be done on the front end to engage and actually develop a working relationship between the branches, that's going to serve the agencies much better as they are trying to be innovative and do some different things," Simmons added.

Scarlett echoed those sentiments, saying, "Congress is a big player in any federal department organization rethink." Lawmakers care about the fate of federal offices and employees in their districts, as well as mission delivery and the bottom line, she said.

"I can tell you that even small organizational changes of a scale that is wildly more modest than what Secretary Zinke appears to be talking about resulted in a lot of dialogue on the Hill in order to move forward," Scarlett said of her own experience.

Employees — the ones most affected by a reorganization — also are hungry for information. In some cases, however, they might not be aware of what's coming. Ozman said there "weren't a lot of questions" at the Denver meeting with senior executives about the reorganization. "I think for a lot of people, maybe this was the first time they'd heard about it," he said.

Simmons spoke generally to E&E News about the need for communication between an organization's leaders and employees during major restructurings.

"If you look at private-sector data, mergers and acquisitions fail most often because of poor communication; the importance of communication with employees is enormous," Simmons said. Any kind of reorganization is something you should do "with employees, and not to the employees."

Linda Springer, former director of the Office of Personnel Management during the George W. Bush administration who also served as controller at OMB, said during last Wednesday's National Press Club event that engaging employees during a major agency reform effort is critical.

But she also said OMB and agencies should "take advantage" of the fact that the effort is happening under the radar with fewer outside distractions that can derail such major management initiatives. "I was talking to [OMB] Director [Mick] Mulvaney about this one day, and he said, 'You won't see tweets about this,' and I said, 'That's a good thing,'" Springer added.

Springer was asked during the event whether OMB's decision not to release agencies' draft plans due in June was a good choice. "I don't have a lot of insight into that. ... I am guessing because it's part of the [fiscal 2019] budget process, it's all considered pre-decisional," she said.
'Department of everything and everywhere'

The idea of moving the headquarters of some Interior agencies from Washington out West is not new. Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) and Rep. Scott Tipton (R-Colo.) in May introduced legislation that would shift BLM's headquarters from Washington to one of 12 Western states, with their stated preference being Grand Junction, Colo.

Interior Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt also has expressed support for moving BLM's headquarters out West.

And Democratic Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper in March expressed support for relocating BLM headquarters to the West during an event sponsored by the American Petroleum Institute.

"We should go get 'em," Hickenlooper said at the time. "I think there's too much concentration of decisionmaking in Washington already. Having some of that spread out in other parts of the country is not necessarily a bad idea."

BLM and the Bureau of Reclamation "are largely already weighted to the West," said Scarlett, adding that Interior overall has a significant presence in Denver; Phoenix; Portland, Ore.; and Sacramento, Calif.

BLM is headquartered in Washington, has a national operations center in Denver and has a national training center in Phoenix. Reclamation has Washington headquarters, but it also has several offices already in Denver. FWS, which has "a national role" with refuges in every state, Scarlett said, has headquarters offices in Washington and Falls Church, Va., a Beltway suburb.

Not all the agencies' responsibilities "lie in the West," Scarlett said.

"It is sort of the department of everything and everywhere in many respects," the former Bush administration official said. "It isn't by serendipity that there is a main Interior building [in Washington] in which leadership positions across all the agencies exist. They are there because there are some cross-cutting functions where you do want really strong leadership coordination, and frankly also, closeness to the Hill."

Scarlett said that the during the Clinton administration, one of the "perceived challenges" was that the department was in so many places that it needed more people in senior positions in headquarters to better coordinate and bring more consistency to planning processes.

"It may be that there is a perception that that pendulum swung too far and that there would be benefit from some re-examination of opportunities for some different kind of leadership in the field," Scarlett said. "But again, there's a lot of homework [to do] here."

The shape of Interior's reorganization, and its success or failure, rest squarely on the secretary and his leadership team. And Zinke has demonstrated that he competes to win, a trait the note takers in Denver homed in on.

"Zinke is very emphatic about being number one. ... He made several references to his military experience and playing college football," according to the meeting notes.

https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060058790

I like this phrase..the organization is an upside-down pyramid which has been my observation of Government organizations I have worked with in the past.

Get'er Done

Interior secretary recommends Trump alter at least three national monuments, including Bears Ears
By Juliet Eilperin and Darryl Fears August 24 at 5:46 PM

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke recommended Thursday that President Trump alter at least three national monuments established by his immediate predecessors, including two in Utah, a move expected to reshape federal land and water protections and certain to trigger major legal fights.

In a report Zinke submitted to the White House, the secretary recommended reducing the size of Utah’s Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments, as well as Oregon’s Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, according to multiple individuals briefed on the decision.

President Bill Clinton declared the 1.9 million-acre Grand Staircase-Escalante in 1996, while President Barack Obama designated the 1.35 million-acre Bears Ears last year. Cascade-Siskiyou, which now encompasses more than 113,000 acres, was established by Clinton shortly before leaving office and expanded by Obama in January.

Trump had ordered Zinke to examine more than two dozen sites established by Clinton, Obama and George W. Bush under the 1906 Antiquities Act. The nearly four-month process pitted those who have felt marginalized by federal actions over the past 20 years against backers who see the sites as bolstering tourism and recreation while safeguarding important relics, environments and species.

The Interior Department did not give specifics on Zinke’s recommendations, instead releasing a report summary that described each of the 27 protected areas scrutinized as “unique.”

Yet his proposal takes direct aim at a handful of the nation’s most controversial protected areas out west, according to several individuals who asked for anonymity because the report has yet to be made public. Zinke, who had called for revising Bears Ears’ boundaries in an interim report in June, is recommending a “significant” reduction in its size, an administration official said.

The report also calls for changing the management rules for several sites, such as allowing fishing in marine monuments where it is currently prohibited, and would affect the boundaries of other monuments beyond the three officials identified Thursday.

“No President should use the authority under the Antiquities Act to restrict public access, prevent hunting and fishing, burden private land, or eliminate traditional land uses, unless such action is needed to protect the object,” Zinke said in a statement. “The recommendations I sent to the president on national monuments will maintain federal ownership of all federal land and protect the land under federal environmental regulations, and also provide a much needed change for the local communities who border and rely on these lands for hunting and fishing, economic development, traditional uses, and recreation.”

A White House official confirmed that Trump had received the report but would not say when it would be released or when the president would act on Zinke’s recommendations. The secretary had earlier taken six monuments off the review list without any detailed explanation of why.

“Comments received were overwhelmingly in favor of maintaining existing monuments and demonstrated a well-orchestrated national campaign organized by multiple organizations,” Zinke said in the statement on Thursday. He acknowledged supporters’ point that monuments can bring economic benefits to local communities.

But he also noted opponents’ concerns that designations had translated into reduced public access, confusing management plans “and pressure applied private land owners … to sell.”

Zinke did not recommend abolishing any monument. Still, some of the key constituencies most critical of sweeping restrictions for federal lands and waters — ranchers, fishing operators and local Republican politicians — won key concessions in his final set of recommendations.

“Quite frankly, previous administrations got a little too greedy,” said Ethan Lane, executive director of the public lands council at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.

Nearly 3 million people submitted comments to Interior on the review, which stemmed from an executive order Trump signed in late April. The overwhelming majority of those comments supported the idea of preserving public lands and the sites’ existing boundaries, though Interior officials noted that many of the comments received were form letters.

Zinke traveled to five states during the process, visiting Bears Ears, Grand Staircase-Escalante and Cascade-Siskiyou plus Katahdin Woods and Waters in Maine; Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks in New Mexico; and Gold Butte and Basin and Range in Nevada. He also discussed the fate of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument, which lies roughly 130 miles southeast of Cape Cod, with a top official from the New England Aquarium and then later with fishing and industry groups in Boston.

While the president’s executive order targeted designations of at least 100,000 acres, Zinke later made an exception and added Katahdin Woods and Waters. Maine Gov. Paul LePage (R), a Trump ally, ranks as one of that monument’s most vociferous opponents.

The administration plans to leave six designations in place: Colorado’s Canyons of the Ancients; Idaho’s Craters of the Moon; Washington’s Hanford Reach; Arizona’s Grand Canyon-Parashant; Montana’s Upper Missouri River Breaks; and California’s Sand to Snow. In each case, according to Interior spokeswoman Heather Swift, there was “very little, to no, local opposition.”

Zinke focused instead on the most contentious designations by the three past presidents — mostly by Clinton and Obama.

Environmental groups have made clear that they would file legal challenges in an effort to preserve these sites’ existing boundaries and protections. While Congress can alter national monuments easily through legislation, presidents have reduced their boundaries only on rare occasions.

Woodrow Wilson nearly halved the acreage of Mount Olympus National Monument, which Theodore Roosevelt had established six years earlier. In 1938, the U.S. attorney general wrote a formal opinion saying the Antiquities Act authorized presidents to establish a monument but did not grant them the right to abolish one, and several legal scholars argue that Congress indicated in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 that it reserved the right to alter any existing monument.

Robert D. Rosenbaum, who serves as counsel to the National Parks Conservation Association, said Wednesday that no president has sought to shrink a monument’s boundaries in the past four decades: “If the president attempts unilaterally to take adverse action on any of the monuments under review, he would be on very shaky legal ground, and we expect the action would be challenged in federal court.”

Tribal officials have lobbied hard to preserve Bears Ears, which boasts extensive ancestral Pueblo artifacts and rock art. Seven tribes in Utah and the Fort Peck Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes of Montana, which counts Zinke as an adopted member, passed resolutions this month calling for the monument’s boundaries to remain in place.

But many western Republicans criticized such large protected areas as a distortion of the law’s original intent. In a call with reporters on Thursday, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) said that “Congress never intended one individual to unilaterally dictate land management policies for enormous swaths of federal land.”

“It’s about how we protect our resources, not if we protect them,” said Bishop, noting that Obama had applied his authority under the Antiquities Act to more than 550 million acres of land and sea. “That’s 190,000 acres of land and water locked up for every day he was in office.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com...m_term=.d097bc922fca