Talk:House Subcommittee on National Parks
From dKosopedia
| Discussion formatting hints: |
|---|
|
Start a new thread with a section header. Put the subject on a line by itself with two = signs on either side. (Use three or more ='s to make sub-sections.) Sections show up in the Table of Contents, and can be edited separately. Use indentation to show thread structure. Indent your replies by starting them with ":", one for each indent level. Indent your comment one more level than the one to which you're replying. Put your reply after other replies to the same comment. Sign your comments. After your comment, type two "-"s and four tildes: (-- ~~~~). This will be converted to a signature with your user name and a timestamp. |
Here's a comment Nov. 29, 2006 on dailykos by duckpin: PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility) calls needed attention to the officers of federal land management agencies - National Park Service, US Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management - who are intimidated, injured and killed as the result of assault, and otherwise are prevented from doing their jobs. The National Park Service does not keep reliable records on this outrage. The Interior Inspector General in a year long study, said that NPS crime statistics "aren't worth the paper they're printed on." Officers of the National Park Service are killed or injured as the result of assaults at a rate of 15/1000 officers per year. The FBI rate is 1.3/1000; the DEA rate is 1.2/1000. This comes from a five year long study by the Dept of Justice. PEER has been and continues to be a valuable ally to those trying to protect our environmental heritage. The NPS response: cut the number of commissioned park rangers.
Here's a comment from Neon Mama on Mon Nov 13, 2006:
Check if they made the changes they were trying for last year. "Selling off" lands in Parks to "private citizens" at expected price of $1,000-1, 500 per acre. Sounds nice? Not. (Also if you get a Texan, some article I read was converting Texas public lands to put up for sale as "private.")Didn't cache at time I read it. LATER -- I read something else about the really high profits of mining all sorts of weird minerals needed for modern technology. Some rare ones were located out by same parks. Guess what ----those parklands won't go to homesteaders if sold. My read is that commercial cronies and plutocrats know exactly what goodies can be gouged out of those lands at really bargain prices. Taking it out of park -- make the ravaging a private matter. I could be tinfoil -- but my robber baron radar went BLINK. If the do-nothings held it up --- check it for litmus?
Another valuable comment 11/24/06: For Sale: Our National Parks by Zen Warrior http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/24/215341/04 with links to other articles such as
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/3359 Everything's for sale: National Parks Service considers opening parks to 'bioprospecting' by Geov Parrish | Nov 24 2006
See also http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/28/195855/91 Gold-digging in our National Parks by Sharon in MD for more on the give-away of resources in the parks.
Also: http://biotech.indymedia.org/or/2006/10/5442.shtml
and NPS site http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkId=442&projectId=12515&documentID=16763
See this article about major changes in the Resources Committee: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/12/11/131645/41
![[Main Page]](../../../../upload/banner-blue-135.jpg)