Just a heads up: The Trump administration has announced a "review" of all national monuments created in the last 20+ years, including the San Gabriel National Monument. Nobody knows for sure what the goal of this "review" is, but if you want to have your say on whether the San Gabriels are worth protecting, the comment period ends at 11:59 PM Eastern on July 10.
Action
Notice; Request for comments.
Summary
The U.S. Department of the Interior is conducting a review of certain National Monuments designated or expanded since 1996 under the Antiquities Act of 1906 in order to implement Executive Order 13792 of April 26, 2017. The Secretary of the Interior will use the review to determine whether each designation or expansion conforms to the policy stated in the Executive Order and to formulate recommendations for Presidential actions, legislative proposals, or other appropriate actions to carry out that policy. This Notice identifies twenty-seven National Monuments under review and invites comments to inform the review.
The goal of this so-called "review" is to reverse national monuments and open the land to logging, mining, and cattle grazing. And all at far below market rates for favored insiders.
A review per se means nothing. You can review a ham sandwich. It is totally unclear what authority, if any, one president has to undo the national monuments created by a predecessor under the Antiquities Act of 1906. It is guaranteed that any such decision would be in the courts the same day.
RichardK wrote: ↑The goal of this so-called "review" is to reverse national monuments and open the land to logging, mining, and cattle grazing. And all at far below market rates for favored insiders.
A review per se means nothing. You can review a ham sandwich. It is totally unclear what authority, if any, one president has to undo the national monuments created by a predecessor under the Antiquities Act of 1906. It is guaranteed that any such decision would be in the courts the same day.
I couldn't agree more, both as to the goal of the "review" and its legality. I can't imagine that there's any real industry pressure to reverse the SGNM's status, but I figured it was worth submitting a comment anyway.
