Smokecreek1
Smokecreek1
Hey, let's not nit pick here! No-read I what I said again. Each NM is different-some get transferred to NPS, but usually who ever managed the Public Land before designation continues to manage the monument! And it is usually better if some one like the BLM, NWS or USFS retains management because they operate on different mandates and missions than NPS (sometimes NPS however, may be the only way to go). I agree it can be confusing-look at Alaska- you can have many different management designations all in one general area and next to each other, but that's how politics work.
That nasty word "politics" is why you need to be involved. A while back I made this comment on a similar type thread- " I don't know how many public meetings I went too that no one except the main user/interest groups (timber/ranching, environmental, etc.,) showed up, and yes their politics could become the public interest. We wanted other comments-that's what the management process calls for and we loved it when someone other the the usual suspects showed up-so show up, us old feds were bound by the rules, so show up and be a part of the process so we can keep WTWing out there . Maybe should have said each "NEW" NM is-----because most of the older NM were managed by the NPS-sorry 'bout that!
Smoke
That nasty word "politics" is why you need to be involved. A while back I made this comment on a similar type thread- " I don't know how many public meetings I went too that no one except the main user/interest groups (timber/ranching, environmental, etc.,) showed up, and yes their politics could become the public interest. We wanted other comments-that's what the management process calls for and we loved it when someone other the the usual suspects showed up-so show up, us old feds were bound by the rules, so show up and be a part of the process so we can keep WTWing out there . Maybe should have said each "NEW" NM is-----because most of the older NM were managed by the NPS-sorry 'bout that!
Smoke