Cavechat.org

(forwarded from New Mexico email list)

The Fort Stanton - Snowy River National Conservation Area is part of the National Landscape Conservation System.

Three amendments were offered to H.R. 1, the FY11 Continuing Resolution bill.

· They are ugly: One will completely DEFUND the National Landscape Conservation System and another two will prevent any funds to be used for the implementation of the Antiquities Act.

1. Amendment 92 by Rep. Heller and Amendment 205 from Labrador that would eliminate any funding to be used for the implementation of the Antiquities Act

2. Offered By: Mr. Bishop of Utah
AMENDMENT NO. 515: At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for the National Landscape Conservation System.

This new amendment would eliminate ALL funding for the places you care about- the entire National Landscape Conservation System.

You can easily send a message to your Senators and representatives:
https://secure.wilderness.org/site/Advo ... on&id=2237

After reading some of their missions and actions, I, like many here have my own thoughts. Remember it is illegal to poison the environment. The policies and laws that groups like this are a BIG waste of taxpayers money. They lead to less useful land to be enjoyed by the general public, and they promote (as in their statements) global warming agendas that we all should know by now are just as bad of planning as White Nose Syndrome is. I have to say that at least some one out there is using their brain. Sorry, but Maybe some one has been listening to the truth about our environment. If private contributors want to waste their money on these groups, that is their decision, but don't grab mine for so called environmental protection. I would like, and am promoting that the dept of Interior eg; USFWS follows in this same path of de-funding.

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but the US governement needs to start cutting funding for lots of things, including conservation and caving. We have a bunch of drunken sailors spending other people's money and it has to stop. I am glad to see funding cut for anything. Flame on!

If you read the Bio's from supporters in operations, one guy quotes his snowmobile fondness, if he only knew that the group want them banned.

batrotter wrote:I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but the US governement needs to start cutting funding for lots of things, including conservation and caving. We have a bunch of drunken sailors spending other people's money and it has to stop. I am glad to see funding cut for anything. Flame on!

Rah, rah, sis boom bah. Go batrotter.

batrotter wrote:I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but the US governement needs to start cutting funding for lots of things, including conservation and caving. We have a bunch of drunken sailors spending other people's money and it has to stop. I am glad to see funding cut for anything. Flame on!

Please stop raining on my parade... it's such a nice parade.

Cutting spending is a conservative principle... so cutting funding for conservation is like a double negative. I'm not sure how much money the US government is spending on caving, but it's not much. I think there are better ways to cut the deficit. Spending public money for public good is acceptable to me. Spending public money on corporate welfare is a problem. I don't think cutting funding on everything, as a blanket statement, is good policy.

I work for the government and yea, there are places that need trimmed...hard. Then again the REAL money gets dumped into corporate welfare, kickbacks and "incentives" for big industry, and of course the pork for the districts.

Too bad our citizens are lazier and whinier than egyptians. We should have SHOT ever member of congress who voted for the bailout. Since when does ANY business need a "economic incentive" besides profit? In this case they just took our money and gave the corporations billions in profit for not producing ANY goods or services for the people. Yea...Thats sustainable.

The problem isn't with the government owning land...its with distribution. We plowed under a wetland larger than the everglades in Indiana to grow corn and build wallmarts. But Utah is essentially owned by the government......

derekbristol wrote:Cutting spending is a conservative principle... I'm not sure how much money the US government is spending on caving, but it's not much. Spending public money for public good is acceptable to me. Spending public money on corporate welfare is a problem. I don't think cutting funding on everything, as a blanket statement, is good policy.

Yes, cutting spending is a conservative principle and that's where you and I disagree. The government has no right to take money by force from taxpayers and give it others. Even if the government is spending very little on caving, they shouldn't be spending any. It's just fine with you when you get to define what the "public good" is.

You are probably a lot younger than me, so you will get to reap the "benefits" of all this spending. I'll be dead and gone. Like I said earlier, this stuff has to stop. If you want to spend on something, spend your own money.

wyandottecaver wrote:I work for the government and yea, there are places that need trimmed...hard. Then again the REAL money gets dumped into corporate welfare, kickbacks and "incentives" for big industry, and of course the pork for the districts.

Too bad our citizens are lazier and whinier than egyptians. We should have SHOT ever member of congress who voted for the bailout. Since when does ANY business need a "economic incentive" besides profit? In this case they just took our money and gave the corporations billions in profit for not producing ANY goods or services for the people. Yea...Thats sustainable.

The problem isn't with the government owning land...its with distribution. We plowed under a wetland larger than the everglades in Indiana to grow corn and build wallmarts. But Utah is essentially owned by the government......

Can't disagree with much that you said other than the REAL money is spent on entitlement programs. 57% of the federal budget is spent on social secuity, medicare and medicaid. Not a single dime has been proposed to be cut from these programs.

conservative and conservation both mean the same in all aspects. Any Boy or Girl Scouts out there? Conservation doesn't mean close something that you can't fix. Conserving our environment for all Americans to enjoy, means that if we want to enjoy the environment, it must properly conserve it! Closing caves is not conservation. WNS is a disease that confronts bats that use caves as well as outside insects as their own environment. Bats diseases are a problem that conservationists try to understand be cause we are concerned for them, but in an understanding that we cannot help them, we must concede this. If bat environmentalist wants to study them, that is fine, but it is their dollar, and mine if I choose, that should be spent. It is like closing the ocean because some kid pissed in a stream. It is a loss of environment use because of one aspect of the environment that we cannot control. This cannot happen if we are to conserve for everyone.

Most environmentalists are not conservationists! Most Environmentalists have a narrow selfish agenda that fits their territory, but cares less what anyone with a broader understanding cares.

BrianC wrote:Most environmentalists are not conservationists! Most Environmentalists have a narrow selfish agenda that fits their territory, but cares less what anyone with a broader understanding cares.

I think you summed it up Brian. It took me a long, long time to realize the truth to what you are saying. I think the internet and caving forums have brought these realizations out into the open.

Perhaps we should be using the word preservationists to define those actions. Although lately there seems to be a huge blur between preservationist, conservationists and environmentalists.

BrianC wrote:It is like closing the ocean because some kid pissed in a stream.

tncaver wrote:

BrianC wrote:Most environmentalists are not conservationists! Most Environmentalists have a narrow selfish agenda that fits their territory, but cares less what anyone with a broader understanding cares.

I think you summed it up Brian. It took me a long, long time to realize the truth to what you are saying. I think the internet and caving forums have brought these realizations out into the open.

Perhaps we should be using the word preservationists to define those actions. Although lately there seems to be a huge blur between preservationist, conservationists and environmentalists.

That word is "preservationist" is the correct term. Unfortunately though, it would not speak to recruits in the meaning they would like to support.

Ps; I did state that MOST, being the word that doesn't bring ALL into this group.