Buz Groshong wrote:I backed into it. I followed your link. Then I went back up, whereupon I got a 404 with a link to the one that I cited. You see, I've worked in DC, so I know about the required chasing one's tail in circles that you have to go through to get to the right place for answers in Federal Govt.

If you can't get to it by a directly-accessible URL, it is probably an older, incorrect document.

tarol wrote:Why on earth would NPS or FS administrators get a whipping?

Maybe for being petty and for bullying?

Perhaps the law says they have to close facilities, but do they have to hang around in their vehicles and chase people away and even fine them in some cases? That is what is happening in some places.

Tactics like that will make people quickly turn on those who are "just doing their jobs."

I don't want to make this too political in this forum, but I do feel very strongly that one side is very clearly to blame for this whole shutdown fiasco. However, the way the NPS and some other agencies are handling this, by essentially harassing people who want to enjoy their public lands, is likely to make a lot of people start placing their anger (and pressure) elsewhere. And with a holiday weekend that many have been planning for a long time coming up, this is a prime time for the agencies to keep making this worse, or not.

Bob Sihler wrote:I don't want to make this too political in this forum,

Do you mean that you don't want other people to make sotto voce political comments? I don't think that's the impression you meant to give, but at first reading, that's what I got. I'm sure a lot of people here have strained political feelings about this broader issue. But I'm amazed and impressed that people have been able to avoid those tangents. Maybe I'm missing the behind-the-scenes editing.

Back on topic: as Buz G's comments indicate, quite possibly a lot of conflicting regs have been given out to DOI employees, so they may think they are acting on DOI orders, but really don't know what the latest policy IS. So if you do choose to visit "non-maintained" BLM lands, it might be wise to print out:

http://www.doi.gov/shutdown/fy2014/upload/BLM-FAQ.pdf

...and have a copy with you. It's often hard to get a ticket reversed; much better if you can avoid the ticket in the first place.

MoapaPk wrote:

Bob Sihler wrote:I don't want to make this too political in this forum,

Do you mean that you don't want other people to make sotto voce political comments?

No. My point is that even though I and others may have strong feelings on this issue and support a certain side, our support could waver because of being fed up with how the NPS and other agencies are acting in some cases, and I was trying to explain that without naming names or pointing fingers at certain groups or issues. That's all.

LOL.

The Mineral King guy is back!



Bob is right though... before this all went into place I put 100% of the blame on the House. Now that Obama is intentionally allowing the NPS to inflict maximum pain over all these petty parking lot and trailhead issues onto the public he no long has my support. He's practically bragging about closing the parks in every speech he makes. He thinks Republicans will get all the blame, but most folks who use these parks know full well who runs them.

There is no law that says these things need to be closed... just that they can't spend any money. Close the bathroom... but no reason prople can't walk on a trail.

mrchad9 wrote: He's practically bragging about closing the parks in every speech he makes. He thinks Republicans will get all the blame, but most folks who use these parks know full well who runs them.

I put the blame squarely where it belongs: on global warming, and reality TV.

There is snow in that pic MoapaPk. Global warning is dead.

I take it you folks know that Utah will try to open its Nat Parks this Saturday.

MoapaPk wrote:

Buz Groshong wrote:Interesting. I can find no similar statement for NPS, which is also part of Interior. I did find:

Due to the lapse in appropriated funds, all public lands managed by the Interior Department (National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, Bureau of Land Management facilities, etc.) will be closed. For more information, FAQs, and updates, please visit http://www.doi.gov/shutdown.

Where exactly did you find the statement: "Due to the lapse in appropriated funds, all public lands managed by the Interior Department (National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, Bureau of Land Management facilities, etc.) will be closed. " ? When I search for that statement via google, several doi pages come up as choices, but I cannot find that statement on any. Perhaps it was taken down when they realized it was incorrect?

In any case, I would recommend printing out the statement that I cited, and bring it with you when you visit any BLM lands that seem to be "OK."

That may have been on the 404 page.

mrchad9 wrote:LOL.

The Mineral King guy is back!

MK.jpg

Bob is right though... before this all went into place I put 100% of the blame on the House. Now that Obama is intentionally allowing the NPS to inflict maximum pain over all these petty parking lot and trailhead issues onto the public he no long has my support. He's practically bragging about closing the parks in every speech he makes. He thinks Republicans will get all the blame, but most folks who use these parks know full well who runs them.

There is no law that says these things need to be closed... just that they can't spend any money. Close the bathroom... but no reason prople can't walk on a trail.

Fact check please!

These laws are vague, which means that they are subject to interpretation. I'm always discussing with folks what exactly was intended by the Wilderness Act. It's like asking for a non-controversial interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.

MoapaPk wrote:These laws are vague, which means that they are subject to interpretation. I'm always discussing with folks what exactly was intended by the Wilderness Act. It's like asking for a non-controversial interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.

Interesting case. Whenever Wilderness is mentioned you hear all this talk about "solitude," but that isn't really what Wilderness is about - it's about man being no more than a visitor. When you hear the talk about solitude you know you are hearing a human-centered (and thus self-centered) concept of wilderness rather than a nature-centered concept.

http://news.yahoo.com/feds-let-states-p ... nance.html

yes!