chrisoravec.bsky.social
Native American Style flute and photos of Western US scenery. No DMs please.
274 posts
222 followers
294 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I may be wrong but Scrubs always looked to me like a version of the hospital novel, House of God by Samuel Shem.
comment in response to
post
Yes, good post. If you live in Colorado see today’s (June 26) NYTimes story on Breckenridge-Dillon, Moab Ut. and elsewhere in the Mountain West.
comment in response to
post
Lee is my senator. If you want public lands please call your own senator. And call the Parliamentarian to appreciate her procedural courage:
Elizabeth MacDonough
OFFICE OF THE SENATE PARLIAMENTARIAN UNITED STATES SENATE
Address S-133 U.S. Capitol
Washington
DC 20510-0001
Telephone (202) 224-1299
comment in response to
post
Paying people, no matter what side of the political spectrum, to have children is wrong.
comment in response to
post
It’s worse. The Nazi party nationalized German industry without taking over the day-by-day management, with full cooperation. Except for prison labor, of course.
comment in response to
post
The rule’s name lends itself to a number of bird-related puns….There is the “Byrd bath,” when… Ms. MacDonough scrubs and analyzes [the provisions] to make a judgment. Anything that does not survive the scrutiny is known as a “Byrd dropping,” and is removed from the legislation before it can advance.
comment in response to
post
A bit on Elizabeth MacDonough from NYTimes: “As [the Senate] moves forward with the budget reconciliation process, it now falls to Ms. MacDonough to enact Mr. Byrd’s rule.…
comment in response to
post
Give her office a call and tell her she’s being noticed for a great job. I did!
comment in response to
post
True. But the amendment would then have to come up for a vote and not even Lee wants to be voted against by any of his peers on procedural grounds. That’s why he withdrew the original wording. He’ll be back.
comment in response to
post
Not even Lee wants to be voted down by his peers on procedural grounds.
comment in response to
post
She’s been doing good so far. Not even Lee wants to be voted down on procedure.
comment in response to
post
Remember her name: Elizabeth MacDonough, the first woman to serve as Senate Parliamentarian. She’s been upholding Senate rules this whole session. She can’t respond to political issues but she can rule on what’s procedurally correct. Your Senator should know she’s doing a great job.
comment in response to
post
The Roadless Rule puts teeth into any wilderness management in National Forest lands. Support the rule.
comment in response to
post
Excellent observation! It also impacts most other urban areas in the state including St. George.
comment in response to
post
Thank you for posting her name.
comment in response to
post
@altnps.bsky.social Trails on Utah Forest land to be sold for housing by Mike Lee’s attachment to the budget bill (2 posts):
🐕 Upper Mill Creek Canyon: The dog-friendly trails around Dog Lake draw hundreds of hikers each day.
🚵♂️ Mill Creek Pipeline Trail: The path is wildly popular among cyclists.
comment in response to
post
That’s okay, all good. General knowledge about public lands is so low several posters here said acquaintances confused BLM (Bureau of Land Management.) And some posters claim the bill will privatize Yellowstone. I think it’s not good to play into red herrings, and to be precise about our objections.
comment in response to
post
Add that to the Homestead Act and Teapot Dome and you’ve got a corrupt early Interior Dept. Even TR had to move the Forest Service, a model federal bureaucracy, to Agriculture. Still in my experience, much like yours, BLM archaeologists resource managers and field personnel are true public servants.
comment in response to
post
I have no doubt this is true. Burning Man could not return year after year unless they were good stewards of the land. My own experience with BLM personnel has been to admire their sheer energy and persistence. You WILL encounter them in the remotest backcountry and you’ll be glad they’re there.
comment in response to
post
Yes. In particular, I’m for preserving the pupfish. It’s an indicator species.
comment in response to
post
Well I could say ergonomics is marketing (the Model T was “ergonomic” too), the contract was specified ten years ago, the efficiency ratio of the electric to the internal combustion engine is irrelevant at scale, and the VW Beetle is popular despite an “ugly” design. But I won’t. They’re just cute 🙂
comment in response to
post
Thanks for your reply. Many urban areas are smack up against Federal lands in Utah. NYTimes just had a feature story arguing to sell off desert tortoise habitat north of Mall Drive in St. George. The bearclaw poppy field is being traded for SITLA land. It all goes for winter resort/second homes.
comment in response to
post
I agree!
comment in response to
post
*Yellowstone
comment in response to
post
Huh? Okay, I guess if you think joking about Yosemite is a way to persuade the two people (not you by the way) on this thread who said the government owned too much land, then be my guest.
comment in response to
post
I agree. Though I think as a platform we should be better at arguing our positions to a larger audience. Some folks here don’t get our inside jokes—I’ve run across at least two today—and we should want to reach them.
comment in response to
post
The Church owns a good part of Little Cottonwood Canyon adjacent to Wasatch National Forest land which is my water source. The downstream municipalities have a contract with the Federal Government to use the water. You can’t bring a dog up there—it’s culinary. When will they dig sewers for housing?
comment in response to
post
Nah, this admin doesn’t care about that for real. They want you to think the problem wears a dark face while they sell off water and minerals you yourself own.
comment in response to
post
The West is so varied. Each parcel of land deserves special consideration. Forest and Land Management lands are managed multiple use and highest use, I get that. Why can’t we lease instead of sell? But not in anybody’s watershed.
comment in response to
post
You’re right. But the senator from my state pitches it as a homestead bill to relieve pressure on the housing market, and a mainstream news outlet has framed it that way (NYT, reference on request.) The majority of lands on the map suitable for homesteads are National Forest Service lands, in green.
comment in response to
post
Can’t speak for Nevada, with their lithium deposits. The point is , though, not what foreign ethnic group worthy of scapegoating is buying—it’s that the Federal Government, including my senator, is selling. He’d love to have you think it’s the Chinese or the Saudi’s fault for bellying up to the bar.
comment in response to
post
If I were Chinese or Saudi I’d buy Iowa land too. Black soil, level, plenty of beans and corn. But for much National Forest and BLM (Bureau of Land Management) land we’re talking arid. Water is the commodity.So far, Chinese and Saudi companies are not buying muni water districts—or their AAA bonds.
comment in response to
post
Oh gosh, we’re trying Beth. It will take a while. The argument does not depend on tourism at this point, although it’s true the Wasatch canyons are at risk. Rather they say it’s for developing housing up in our urban watersheds. As if I want to live downstream from somebody’s sewer.
comment in response to
post
It’s not Yosemite yet. But it is the Front Range, the Wasatch Front, Big Sky and Targhee. The Olympic Penninsula. King’s Canyon. I could go on….
comment in response to
post
Somebody here can talk about the Tennessee Valley Authority and how it started the nation’s recovery from the Great Depression. I’m too exhausted right now.
comment in response to
post
Last time I looked, the congressional delegation from Utah was neither Saudi nor Chinese.
comment in response to
post
Know where your water comes from…and where it’s going.
comment in response to
post
So—which land do you think will be sold first, and why?
comment in response to
post
Now look at the yellow. That’s BLM or Bureau of Land Management lands, from the old Homestead Act, abandoned or never settled. Would you buy a house there?
comment in response to
post
Let’s look at the map closely. Forget the yellow for a bit. Look at the green. That’s where the West’s urban water supply comes from—National Forest lands that could be developed into housing etc. Would you want to live downstream from a sewer?
comment in response to
post
Hi, MichiganBlue. Let’s be more precise. The bill is about National Forest and BLM or Bureau of Land Management lands, mostly in the West. It would be as if Michigan sold off the forest adjacent to Porcupine Mountain State Park in the UP ostensibly for “housing development.” 😒
Unbelievable? Yes.
comment in response to
post
Not National Parks—not yet. But National Monuments (Bears’ Ears, an ancient Puebloan site), National Forests, and Bureau of Land Management lands. They are coming for water, forest, and minerals. Don’t hit a straw man—not yet.