New Nat'l Monuments in CA

[Bluhdow 16]

I am, admittedly, pretty naive when it comes to the legalities of land access. That said, this seems bad for us:

http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-monuments-20160212-story.html

Verdict?

[Bagstr 287]

"Much of the land was purchased more than a decade ago by private citizens and the Wildlands Conservancy, then donated to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management in anticipation of its eventually receiving the protection of national monument status."

[Bluhdow 16]

Right, I recognize that. But does that mean that previously open BLM spots will now be closed? Or would these areas have been designated off-limits already (even under the BLM jurisdiction) due to their intended path to monument-ation?

[Mikey777 44]

The big change is that National Monuments are run by the National Park Service (aka Parkies) versus BLM or the California State Park system like AB. Parkies are notorious for blocking off-road use. It also looks like a giant land grab largely to prevent solar energy farms from popping up in the desert. I find it odd that environmentalists want renewable energy, but then cut off the ability to develop it. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Couple this with the EPA's attack on modifying street vehicles (including motorcycles) for racing and it is an all out govt. war on our sport.

http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-monuments-20160212-story.html

[Bagstr 287]

Any News on the Utah South Monument status. I.E. Bullfrog to Hanksville. The Mineral Interest want to Dig it Up.