It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The right to close public land access for sport on a whim defeated in congress

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 24 2014 @ 08:52 PM
"Excerpts from
113th Congress (2013-2014)
SPORTSMEN'S HERITAGE AND RECREATIONAL ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2013 -- (House of Representatives - February 04, 2014)
Sportsmen are among the first to notice the effects of our changing climate as changes in seasonal distribution of game and diminished natural habitats becomes more evident. As the climate continues to change, we will experience worse drought, flood, wildfire, and extreme weather events.
For public lands and recreation there, climate change will mean changes in hunting seasons, migratory patterns, and the native and invasive species populations. We will experience sea level rise, wildfire, drought, and other manifestations of climate change. All of these are altering the landscape and changing the existing opportunities for hunting, fishing, and recreation on public lands. These should be considered. These will have a greater effect on sportsmen and on fishermen and hunters than all of the other things we have been talking about today.
More than 75 percent of the Federal lands are open now for recreational hunting, fishing and shooting, but climate change would transform irreversibly, and in fact is transforming irreversibly, our public lands in ways that will limit the ability of sportsmen to enjoy recreational activities in these areas.
So this amendment says the Department should consider those things. In fact, it is even more limited than that. It says nothing will prevent the Department from considering these things. That is what this amendment is. I would hope that the House will accept this. I have been joined by a number of members of the House Sustainable Energy Coalition in offering this amendment. It is supported by Defenders of Wildlife and the Wilderness Society and the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington
Now the gentleman is proposing that we give the Secretary another new tool to close lands, without scientific decision making, without accounting for their actions. The gentleman proposes that we simply grant the Secretary the sole authority to dictate that we close off any and all of our Nation's lands from hunting and fishing based simply on the Secretary's mere opinion that hunting and fishing are a threat to our Nation's land because of climate change.
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

It seems someone wanted the ability under the guise of climate control to shut down public access to government lands. This was supported by "Defenders of Wildlife and the Wilderness Society and the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council. " They wanted the right to close down access not based by the present situation only on the threat of climate change causing disruption to nature. Another power grab defeated. I have not found the vote count at this time.
This is from the 4th of February 2014. Are they through trying this? I'll expet it gets brought up again under another guise. As usual for the publics good they would be restricted. No problem about resticting access during times of drought or other natural disaster but on just the possibility of an impact?

OK First time for research item. Here we go!

posted on Feb, 24 2014 @ 09:03 PM
reply to post by datasdream

can anyone say......."agenda 21"

posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 01:43 AM
reply to post by datasdream

It's hard to decipher some of the bill language but if climate change is reducing our natural resource areas then we must be more careful about taking care of what is remaining. This means careful study and selection. No can can deny that there are many levels of use and abuse of public lands. A hunter walking through a forest creates less damage than a 4 wheeler or horses for example. Limiting some areas for different types of fishing will generally lower use by fishermen and reduce bank erosion. Of course, it would help if all sportsmen actually respected their environment and picked up their trash AND other trash left behind by others..... I hate seeing empty worm containers, lure packaging, shotgun shells, pistol and rifle casings, old fishing line, abused campsites with all limbs cut off trees for firewood, and so on. The acts of a few make everyone else look suspect. Using trails when the weather conditions are poor and cause heavy erosion and rutting out, too many tracked vehicles or horses on trails... it all adds up. What we have is limited and after all the pine beetle, droughts, forest fires, clear cuts, over grazing, and other detrimental effects, we need to take even better care of our public lands than ever. Wisely choosing how to safe keep these lands for future generations is part of government's duty and our own through our behavior. If this means some use must be stopped or curtailed, that is the price to pay, but we the public must be part of the equation with out being greedy or oblivious to the effects of use and over use and improper use.

posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 04:29 AM
You are going to see parts of the national forest in calif shut down to recreational use this summer.

Its already been planed and will start into effect as soon as the weather warms up.

top topics

log in