Colorado canyon latest Obama “monument” land grab

By |2015-03-02T11:42:26+00:00February 24th, 2015|CFACT Insights|78 Comments

Continuing its pattern of bypassing Congress and acting unilaterally through administrative fiat, the Obama White House in February designated three new areas as “National Monuments.”

While two of the designations — one in Illinois, the other in Hawaii — involve relatively small parcels of land, the designation of 21,000 acres of Brown’s Canyon in Colorado represents a significant federal lockup of land.

Browns Canyon ColoradoThe move was welcomed by environmentalists and Democrats.  Sen. Michael Bennett (D-CO) told the Washington Times (Feb. 19) that the canyon has “a rugged and unique beauty that attracts outdoor enthusiasts from around the world.”  Bennett added that “Coloradans have been very clear they wanted this protection, along with assurances that existing uses will be protected.  We’re glad the Administration heard those voices and provided those assurances.”

But Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) doesn’t trust the Administration’s “assurances,” and he scolded the President for making the designation without the consent of Congress.  “He is not king.  No more acting like King Barrack,” Buck told the Times.  “This is not how we do things in the U.S.  Actions like this lead the American people to view Mr. Obama’s presidency as an imperial presidency.”

Contrary to Buck’s assertion, this is exactly how thing are done in the U.S.  Beginning with the designation of Utah’s Grand Staircase Escalante as a national monument in 1996, the Clinton and Obama Administrations have used the Antiquities Act of 1906 to create national monuments without the formal approval of state officials or members of the congressional delegation from state where designations were made.   And in its eight years in office, the Bush Administration made no effort to overturn monument designation on federal land in Utah.

The Colorado Cattlemen’s Association (CAA) doesn’t put much stock in the Administration’s assurances, either.  Together with the Public Lands Council (PLC), the cattlemanCAA, according to (Feb. 22), wants the following points clarified in the monument designation:

  • Motorized access must continue to be allowed for permit administration, range improvement, and water maintenance.
  • Explicit language must be written into the designation that allows cattle and sheep producers to trail their livestock to and from their federal grazing allotments through portions of the designated area.
  • Weeds and weed control must also be addressed in the rules of implementation, particularly in headwaters areas.
  • Language must be included in the designation implementation to ensure that changes in the numbers of authorized livestock are based on facts, and not on the whims of land managers.
  • Language that would explicitly ensure that permits are transferable to new permittees/owners in the exact same manner as was the case prior to designation of the national monument is also required.
  • Water rights must be expressly recognized in wilderness acts that further codify states’ water laws.

Between this wish list and the Obama Administration’s determination to tighten its grip on rural economies, particularly those in the resource-rich West, lies a wide gap.  Ranchers, hoping to preserve a way of life that has existed for generations, have their work cut out for them.  The Administration’s “assurances” mean nothing.


  1. CaptTurbo March 2, 2015 at 2:21 PM

    Not to worry. He’s from the government and here to help.

    • Rick Schmidt March 2, 2015 at 3:00 PM

      The two worst things anyone can be told… right?

      • CaptTurbo March 2, 2015 at 3:03 PM

        Most frightening of all!

    • Abel March 2, 2015 at 5:56 PM

      Oh, HELL yes! He’ll help himself!

  2. ron44 March 2, 2015 at 2:35 PM

    cutting out all incursion into the area including any cattle and farming interests..this is a our green grab by the obamas.

  3. james walls March 2, 2015 at 2:35 PM

    I do not trust our communist gov at all I think if no one is smart enough to do any thing about this Gov take over of any thing they want .its time to talk to MR BUNDY HE HAS GOT THE GUTS TO STAND UP FOR OUR RIGHTS WHAT IS WRONG WITH US American CITIZENS LOOKS LIKEWE HAVE ALL LOST OURBALLS

  4. bigjohn767 March 2, 2015 at 2:38 PM

    You just need to investigate Agenda 21. It’s a real UN project. Do yourself a favor and do some digging. This is EXACTLY what it says needs to happen. Open lands federalized and then made off-limits to the citizens. Eventually all citizens will be relocated to an urban area. All in the name of sustainability. ANY time you hear that word, be afraid, be very afraid….

    • arschloch March 2, 2015 at 3:29 PM

      The word castration comes to mind. Hum…………………..

  5. Wayne D March 2, 2015 at 2:39 PM

    They promised to “grandfather” activities in the Escalante/Grand Staircase monument. Within two years, they implemented a “maximum” heart beat rule, outlawing all organized trail rides and killing the wonder “Outlaw Trail” endurance ride that went through the area. BLM restrictions get more and more stringent and group activities become impossible. Further, as with what happened near Kanab, Utah, ranchers will eventually see fees imposed that will force then off the land. If I remember correctly, the BLM actually rounded up the rancher’s cattle in that area and confiscated them. While that may not be the current intent, I have watched with sadness how the bureaucrats eventually decide on “land use” from an office they seldom leave.

    • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:42 PM

      Wayne D, you’re spot on! Clinton exchanged the Andulux mine for contributions from his Indonesian donors. Such actions forced 1 or 2 of the rancher’s into bankruptcy and “shuttered” the town of Escalante.
      We need to remind Hillary of such “payoffs.”
      Clinton bastardized the Antiquities Act beyond recognition. He and Bruce Babbitt are responsible for crippling cow calf operations – in particular in the west!
      Brown’s Canyon is yet another “takings without just compensation” on steroids.

      • pittpaul April 8, 2015 at 1:49 PM

        I could find no reference to the Andulux Mine or Andulux Corporation. You’re making sh!t up RonitaM

        • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 2:39 PM

          My mistake…it’s referred to as Andalux, Andulex.
          Here’s one of many articles on the matter.

[email protected]/msg64147.html

          • pittpaul April 8, 2015 at 3:12 PM

            It’s a subsidiary of Murray Energy Corp – you know, the company that ignores OSHA and kills it’s miners? And clean coal hahaha! We have low sulfur coal in my state – but when you burn it you still have 10% of the original volume as toxic ash! Plus the FGD sludge, and whatever heavy metals go up the stack. What do you do with that? Let’s put it on Federal Land!

            • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 3:29 PM

              Naw. Put in in China where our need for rare earth minerals is already polluting their rivers.
              Do you think property theft is alright?

              • pittpaul April 8, 2015 at 3:35 PM

                Who is stealing property? It’s the fed’s land.

                • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 3:38 PM

                  The feds own only the naked land…It’s a split estate. Study up on it and you’ll answer your own question. Thanks for the questions and chat. I need to get outside and do some tractor work now.

                  • pittpaul April 8, 2015 at 3:53 PM

                    Likewise – it’s nice to exchange ideas with someone who can keep to the subject at hand. we may never agree, but the sharing of ideas is useful and of interest to me. Be well.

  6. J_R_K March 2, 2015 at 2:53 PM

    Why is it that every time I hear or read the name Barack Obama, it just irritates the crap out of me?

    • lrn2play March 2, 2015 at 3:21 PM

      You are in good company numbering too many to count.

      • J_R_K March 2, 2015 at 4:20 PM

        Yeah, well, a lot of them don’t tone down the rhetoric the way I do… I mean “irritates the crap out of me” …?? What kind of language is that to express what so many of us really think? There might be genuine ladies out there somewhere reading this.

        • lrn2play March 2, 2015 at 4:37 PM

          Those genuine ladies are as disgusted as you and I. The key word being genuine.

          • J_R_K March 2, 2015 at 7:04 PM

            Yep, genuine ladies are getting harder to find all the time … on the other hand, so are real men. I think the problem is that it’s socially unacceptable to be a real lady and almost illegal to be a real man. Not to long ago I found myself telling my grandson “I remember when men were men, women were women, and a fella didn’t have to be afraid to say so to anybody.”

    • KLH6 March 3, 2015 at 10:13 AM

      Me too! I think it’s because I research lots of websites that tell me a lot more than just the pablum that MSM puts out there. After this evil man we have in Whitehouse is gone, the MSM can go with him. We will have no use for them. All we’ve gotten is lies. I want real news, not what Obama wants us to hear. He doesn’t have a clue. I don’t know how anyone can stand to work for this man.

      • J_R_K March 3, 2015 at 10:48 AM

        “I don’t know how anyone can stand to work for this man.”

        I do. It’s really pretty easy to understand. There are only 3 types of liberals (I have to say liberals because you can’t blame the Democrat party for Republican rubberstampers)

        1) the a__kissees
        2) the aspiring a__kissees
        3) the A__kissers

        Nothing gets in the way or inspires the ire of any of those three categories more than “common sense” and moral courage.

        If “sense” were really “common” a whole lot more people would have it. As for moral courage, you know, the old “A man is a man and a woman is a woman, good is good and evil is evil kind of thinking… that REALLY gets in the way It’s written all over the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution… and they hate it about as much as demons hate the preaching of the gospel.

        Having already pretty much assassinated common sense and the American work ethic (A man isn’t going to milk the cow if he can get someone else to do it for him, so they invented the Democrat party) …they are after moral courage as well. Stand for anything right, honest or decent or adding to the strength of the United States of America or to an understanding of what REALLY made us exceptional from the moment of our founding and they’ll find a way to sue you, jail you, destroy your livelihood or threaten you into shutting up. (We were the first nation in the history of the world to create a Constitution that guaranteed the rights of the governed and limited the power and authority of the government)

        They hate anything that they see as an obstacle to their own ability to dictate to and control every one else. Especially those who know the differences between right and wrong, good and evil, and have the courage to say that there IS a difference.

  7. arschloch March 2, 2015 at 3:27 PM

    This, and other moves by the ‘moo-slum in chief’, is ‘lil berry’ doing his part to aid the UN (ugly numbskulls) to press forward with agenda 21. Scum is as scum does.

    • pittpaul March 2, 2015 at 4:27 PM

      Did you write your comments with your Klan outfit on? “lil barry”? That sounds pretty racist. Besides, Barry’s a Christian. Not a Muslim. How many times do you have to be told?

      • senior74 March 2, 2015 at 4:57 PM

        You need to check out & see all the muslims in this administration and there is a utube out there with Obama pledging his allegence to the muslims. And I for one saw Obama being interviewed by George Stephanoupolis on ABC before becoming president saying “McCann hasn’t said anything about my muslim faith” & George correcting him saying “you mean Christian faith”!!!

        • pittpaul March 2, 2015 at 5:05 PM

          So I go to the website to mentioned and the first thing I see is that arrogant @sshole Donald Trump (the worst person in the world) still spreading his bull crap about Obama’s birth certificate. Do you remember that their is a Honolulu newspaper that published his record of birth in 1959? And you actually believe anything posted on this website? Don’t you remember the trouble that Obama got into because his Baptist preacher was some kind of reverse racist that he finally disavowed? Can we get beyond his religion here and talk about the topic at hand?

          • Abel March 2, 2015 at 6:05 PM

            He has no real religion, he’s a muslim, and that is an ideology, or idiotology as I prefer. One thing about Islamism/muslimism is that like communism and socialism, if they are to be defeated we must talk about them. The majority of his problem is that he is a muslim with world domination as his goal via the UN and NWO.

            • pittpaul March 2, 2015 at 8:38 PM

              Abel, sorry i thought i could have a topical discussion on the subject at hand with you but unfortunately you’re f#cked in the head and can’t get beyond your bigotry. You probably hate papists and Jews too. Are you KKK?

          • KLH6 March 3, 2015 at 10:38 AM

            Oddly,the only person that could have actually verified his actual birth certificate was the only person killed in a very small
            plane that crashed in Hawaii about the time all the controversy was brewing. How is it that he immediately had all his records sealed? No president in modern history could pull that off. Every Republican they dig to find the stupidest, irrelevent things. Where shall we start? Nursery school?

            • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:33 PM

              If memory serves, the Kenyan Weekly Standard wrote something about its native son Obama in `91 and was ransacked in 2006. Anyone know why?

          • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:30 PM

            Please remember though, when one discusses “Muslim” it’s inseparable from Sharia Law – which is not a religion, it is pure politics.

      • Abel March 2, 2015 at 5:54 PM

        Actions speak much louder than words. He is a CINO, Christian in name only, a splinter off irreverent jeremiah wright. His actions derive from the extremist qur’an. Your words tell me you are an extremist liberal, and probably a muslim who is permitted to lie to anyone other than another muslim as long as it promotes your agitprop. Crawl back under your rock. GTH!

        • pittpaul March 2, 2015 at 9:55 PM

          So Abel you are a Christian telling a perfect stranger to Gth? Nice. You’re only full of vitrol and get off by name calling. What was the subject we were discussing?

      • KLH6 March 3, 2015 at 10:27 AM

        Why did he accidently slip up & say, “As a Muslim, oh yeah, I mean Christian, only after Stephanapolous (spelling?) corrected him. No Christian I know would say that. But aside from that start researching his actions. He consistently sides with Muslims every time, particularly Muslim Brotherhood. He gets his marching orders from Iranian Valerie Jarrett. Live in your fantasy world. The only president to have the cross at Georgetown covered during a speech. Christianity offends him. Just pray & ask God to open your eyes to the truth of what this man is.

        • pittpaul March 4, 2015 at 11:11 AM


          It’s context and your reference is out of context. He was replying to a question that in 2008 the McCain Team was calling him a Muslim! See

          That last sentence was a straightforward statement: Senator Obama was not proclaiming his “Muslim faith”; he was acknowledging that Republican nominee John McCain had not specifically promulgated the false rumor that he (Obama) was a Muslim.

        • pittpaul March 4, 2015 at 11:11 AM


          It’s context and your reference is out of context. He was replying to a question that in 2008 the McCain Team was calling him a Muslim! See

          That last sentence was a straightforward statement: Senator Obama was not proclaiming his “Muslim faith”; he was acknowledging that Republican nominee John McCain had not specifically promulgated the false rumor that he (Obama) was a Muslim.

      • Thomas Faddis March 4, 2015 at 1:56 AM

        Alinsky taught that a lie repeated often enough is soon believed…obviously you are proof that, as despicable as he was, he had a point! (If you believe wright’s church is Christian in anything but name only, then I pity your ignorance)

        • pittpaul March 4, 2015 at 11:15 AM


          Sounds like the Republican party has read Alinsky as well! What does Obama’s faith have to do with a National Park in Colorado? Do things change if he’s Muslim, or Catholic or Jewish? Can we talk about policy here?

          Just for the record: In 1967 Wright enrolled at Howard University in Washington, D.C., where he earned a bachelor’s degree in 1968 and a master’s degree in English in 1969. He also earned a master’s degree from the University of Chicago Divinity School.[11] Wright holds a Doctor of Ministry degree (1990) from the United Theological Seminary in Dayton, Ohio, where he studied under Samuel DeWitt Proctor, a mentor to Martin Luther King, Jr.[16] (Wikipedia)

          Just because your brand of Christianity doesn’t match Wright’s doesn’t make you any holier. I was raised a Catholic and the nuns taught us in school that Catholicism was “the one true faith”. I now believe there are many paths up the mountain.

  8. pittpaul March 2, 2015 at 4:25 PM

    So we should heed the needs of two dozen cattle ranchers rather than the preservation of this land for all Americans? What am I missing here? “And in its eight years in office, the Bush Administration made no effort to overturn monument designation on federal land in Utah”. So even W respected the public trust over individual use.

    • Bob Armstrong March 2, 2015 at 4:43 PM

      You don’t think they are as devoted to maintaining their land as you who will likely never be there , much less bureaucrats 3000km to the east are ?

      Collectivist arrogance .

      • pittpaul March 2, 2015 at 4:58 PM

        The federal employees that look after the land will live near the park. Have you been to a National Park and talked to a Ranger? They are all about taking care of the land. Ranchers will do to the land what makes the best economic sense for their own benefit. It’s capitalism my friend, that is what capitalists do. Besides, why do ranchers think they can use the land for grazing without paying for it? Do farmers farm land they don’t own without cost to them?

        • Bob Armstrong March 2, 2015 at 5:12 PM

          Why involve WDC ? It’s Colorado land .

          When I see the criminal fraud of their war against the building block , the equal partner with H2O , I don’t trust them in charge of any land .

          See also , Sean Paige’s op-ed : .

          • pittpaul March 3, 2015 at 4:55 PM

            What is WDC? H2O = water? “Building block”? Don’t understand your coded language. Thanks for the reference to Sean Paige’s rebuttal to the Denver Post’s editorial in favor of the designation. While I disagree, it is good to see a reasoned opinion put forth instead of the other mostly offensive name calling in some of the comments here. Please read Susan Fromm and Bill Dvorak’s comments to Paige’s piece at the same link you provided. Note that the Wilderness Study Area designations are only used as temporary measures of protection until it is decided what to do with the land. Also, the designation proposed by Obama will prevent mining operations in this area.

            • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:52 PM

              “prevent mining operations…” From that angle it looks like another payoff to foreign contributors.

              • pittpaul April 8, 2015 at 1:40 PM

                What about the phrase “preventing mining operations” is insidious to you?

                • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 2:30 PM

                  Note: “insidious” is your word. Not mine.
                  Preventing mining operations is inaccurately worded. Should be: Denying people use of their property.

        • Abel March 2, 2015 at 6:18 PM

          What a load of bullshiite you put out. You’re basically a liberal puke with a freight train of a mouth and a humming bird butt. I was taught never to argue with the unformed, so I’m out of here. Have a nice day.

          • pittpaul March 3, 2015 at 4:36 PM

            Abel, Why to ranchers think they can use the land without paying the rightful owners? Is that a Muslim plot too? Can you write a sentence without calling people names? Go have a drink or a smoke and relax a little.

            • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:51 PM

              Oh pittpaul…Please study my earlier post, then think on it and do some research. You’re making mistakes.

        • Allen Barclay Allen March 4, 2015 at 2:11 PM

          John D Rockefeller bought all these existing US parks with his own money, Unselfishly for the American citizen, not himself!

        • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:50 PM

          See earlier post.

    • senior74 March 2, 2015 at 5:04 PM

      I agree, but consider the fact that the elder Bush was the first to sign on to the UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21 & every president since. They plan on taking all the land. I found the document on line & 1 thing it says is “it isn’t equitable for some to buy & sell property & make wealth when not everyone can afford to”. Share the wealth!!! A good place to find info is even the liberals hate this when they find out about it & this person did because she is in real estate & found out about the rules pertaining to the land. I believe this agenda will make the US part of a Communist one world government!!

    • Abel March 2, 2015 at 6:11 PM

      When all the land becomes a monument, the muslims can build a great big mosque and all the muslims of the world can come here and pay a fee to pray there. If just most of the land is made a monument, the infidels can be easily contained in the urban areas; it is hard to control widely spread people. Agenda 21 is alive and well, but it is nearly pure Bullshiite.

    • Thomas Faddis March 4, 2015 at 2:05 AM

      I took the Colorado hunter education course a year and a half ago. It was taught by the dept. of wildlife here in Colorado. I thought it was interesting how they explained to us the difference between ‘conservation ‘ and ‘preservation’…they even had Two questions on the test relating to this! (The Only item with Two questions on the whole test!) Conservation is defined as the proper stewardship AND Use of the land. Preservation is defined as the complete dis-allowance of Any human use, resulting in the destruction of habitat, forestry etc.!

      • pittpaul March 4, 2015 at 10:45 AM

        I appreciate the difference between conservation and preservation you defined above. What does the conservation concept say about water resources allocation? How about mining – could you mine coal on land set aside for conservation? For that matter, is there a legal meaning to lands set aside for conservation – you’re allowed to hunt but no mining, or no grazing? Would it be a state law?

        • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:56 PM

          Private property on federal land is the business of the state. Regards said private property on federal land, Forest Service (under the USDA) and BLM (under the DOI) agents are only responsible for “administrative” (as in keeping track of AUM’s who owns and where), and not the management of private properties “business.” Federal only owns the “naked” land.

          • pittpaul April 8, 2015 at 1:20 PM

            Who said anything about “private property on Federal Land”? That doesn’t even make sense. Is it Federal Land or private land?

            • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 2:23 PM

              It’s a fact pittpaul. Entities do have “private property on federal land.”

      • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:53 PM

        That’s excellent Thomas. Thank you for that info. You’re dead on!

    • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:49 PM

      pittpaul, in reading your posts I’m frankly at a loss as to where to begin explaining the whole picture to you.
      So instead of giving you the full meal deal, I’ll give you one fact that mostly everyone misses:
      There is Private Property Ownership on federal land. The Federal government has accrued millions (perhaps billions. No one’s ever done a full accounting.) in debts to these property owners, and even though the feds have been court ordered to pay some of the millions, they refuse.

      • pittpaul April 8, 2015 at 1:22 PM

        Private Property Ownership on federal land??? Who owns the land Ronita? We have a national forest in my state, and the Feds must give permission for any use (logging, mining, drilling, grazing, etc). Why is this any different?This must be a western state thing.

        • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 2:25 PM

          17 – mainly 16 western states have the lions share of federal land. On said federal land there are grazing allotment owners, loggers, miners, etc. who have “vested rights.”

  9. stinson47 March 2, 2015 at 4:41 PM

    Obamanitis is a disease that’s attacking every aspect of our being.It is unrelenting and is becoming more aggressive each day. There seems to be no real warning where and when this disease will strike and what damage it will do. Be highly vigilant of many government employs and agencies as they appear to be very active carriers of this disease. It may be 2016 before a cure for this disease is found and can be eradicated. Hopefully all will not be lost.

  10. wally12 March 3, 2015 at 1:26 AM

    We need to impress on the next president to act and begin to sell federal lands. It will provide more benefits than being held by the government. Overturn previous land grabs. The one that I think of first is that which was rented by Bundy. Let him purchase that piece since he is the rightful candidate for all the troubles he went through with Obama and Reid and the BLM.

    • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 1:00 PM

      American Lands Council is doing a excellent job clarifying the facts and encouraging congress to finish the rightful return of federal land to the states; in particular the 17 states west of the 100th meridian that are so inequitably encumbered with federal’s naked land.

      • pittpaul April 8, 2015 at 1:31 PM

        The 13 colonies gave up there claims of all lands west of the Atlantic many centuries ago. Now we’re going to gift it these come lately states? rightful return my butt.

        • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 2:27 PM

          their… Anyway, it’s not a “gift.” Study the statutes and you’ll readily understand what American Lands Council is working on; and – for the benefit of all!

          • pittpaul April 8, 2015 at 3:05 PM

            Whatever the American Land Council believes or struggles to change, “1. WE URGE THE TIMELY AND ORDERLY TRANSFER OF FEDERAL PUBLIC LANDS TO WILLING STATES FOR LOCAL CONTROL THAT WILL PROVIDE BETTER PUBLIC ACCESS, BETTER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, AND BETTER ECONOMIC PRODUCTIVITY; ” under the current law these lands belong to the USA. NOT private. NOT the state. They were since the beginning of this country. Now the states want the land? Talk about a government handout…Are you a sham for the mining industry or some such?

            • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 3:06 PM

              Study the history, statutes, constitutions and grandfathered rights. Then you’ll understand what’s happened in the past, and what should be done to correct those mistakes.

      • wally12 April 9, 2015 at 12:47 AM

        I am not aware that there has been any successful return of lands to the states. However, I have read that there are disputes from landowners that are being harassed by BLM on rights etc. I hope you are correct of the return of lands to states as long as Reid and other politicians don’t get first choice.

        • RonitaM April 9, 2015 at 9:22 AM

          After years of dedication, Thomas Hart Benton finally got federal to return the land to Missouri.

  11. pgrove March 3, 2015 at 6:44 PM

    This should have gone through congress not just through our imperial king.

    • RonitaM April 8, 2015 at 12:57 PM

      That’s correct.

  12. Allen Barclay Allen March 4, 2015 at 2:03 PM

    If Obama wants that for a national park. Let him Buy it like everybody else has to do by law with his OWN money not ours. Such transactions,OUR MONEY, are negotiated through CONGRESS LAWFULLY, not by WANT TO BE DICTATORS. National Park systems throughout the United States was Brought by John D Rockefeller, with his own money, for the American people and not selfishly for himself.

    • Doug Lowthian March 8, 2015 at 2:39 PM

      You do realize the land at Browns Canyon has been managed by the Federal Government and owned by the People of the United States for decades, right? You also realize that no “National Park” has been proposed?

  13. Allen Barclay Allen March 4, 2015 at 2:18 PM

    Below not true These Park systems were Bought and Payed for with John D Rockefeller’s money for the American Citizen. National park systems bought by him are in every State !!

    Contrary to Buck’s assertion, this is exactly how thing are done in the U.S. Beginning with the designation of Utah’s Grand Staircase Escalante as a national monument in 1996, the Clinton and Obama Administrations have used the Antiquities Act of 1906 to create national monuments –

Comments are closed.