Oil and gas is looking to take 80,000 acres of public land near Moab to exploit.

[Acolle]

Oil and gas is looking to take 80,000 acres of public land near Moab to exploit. If you care, and agree with the preservation of land, and keeping what little untouched land this country has left free, add your voice to keep Moab undefiled by oil fields.

The petition takes 30 seconds to sign if you're interested.

Save Moab

 

[Boostpowered]

I signed but unfortunately the deep pockets win nearly every time. Texas used to be offroad friendly 25 or so years back, oil won then environmentalist finished us off creating regulations that made offroading on the remaining public land difficult. Now we have 2 national parks with offroading options ( barely) and a hand full of offroad parks built because all the public land was sold off and now the Texas parks and wildlife dept requires you to buy a yearly sticker just so you can be in those offroad parks without getting ticket even though you already have to pay to offroad at the park. Alot of the offroading here is done on the dirt county roads after it rains.

If there is in fact oil or any other resources under moab you can bet they will have their way with it, if not now eventually

 

[EXPO_D1]

signed and sent in. i agree with the above, money seems to always win.

 

[Sylvester]

Drill - Need Oil & Gas for my Jeep, Plus we need high Paying Jobs -

 

[Sylvester]

There is Mining & Drilling in Moab currently, You would know that if any of you have Been there - This is only more Mineral rights going up for Auction, They may or May not Ever Drill in the area But the Money will be dispersed among the communities to spend how they Like. Oil & Gas - Mining is all Needed & required for a Balanced Economy, The Only difference between a National Park or Monument and BLM or Forest Service is how the Land is used, All protect the land some Just Limit the uses of the Land, No MINING, No Cattle, No drilling, For now you Can drive across the Trails but eventually they will Limit that also...

 

[Greenebelly]

Everyone wants and does different things. If you say that someone can’t get minerals and oil, then be prepared for someone to say that vehicles don’t belong. The saying is “ Stand up for me and my rights, or I won’t be around to stand up for you and yours.” I don’t agree with some things, but I don’t think I have the right to tell someone “ this is a jeep trail and hikers shouldn’t be aloud.” Everyone breath and let’s all learn what comprise is all about again. It is public land. We need to share.

 

[MidOH]

Land that can be drilled, can be wheeled.

Might actually be a good thing. Should lobby for them to make access roads and such for campers.

 

[Acolle]

There is Mining & Drilling in Moab currently, You would know that if any of you have Been there - This is only more Mineral rights going up for Auction, They may or May not Ever Drill in the area But the Money will be dispersed among the communities to spend how they Like. Oil & Gas - Mining is all Needed & required for a Balanced Economy, The Only difference between a National Park or Monument and BLM or Forest Service is how the Land is used, All protect the land some Just Limit the uses of the Land, No MINING, No Cattle, No drilling, For now you Can drive across the Trails but eventually they will Limit that also...

I have been. And I'd like to see it preserved better moving forward. The line between "private" and "public" property is no longer clearly drawn. Mineral rights are part of that blur from what I can tell. Federal Land Policy and Management Act does not directly resolve disputes between competing public and private demands. The BLM faces a difficult challenge in reconciling these competing demands, particularly when private development rights conflict with collective values, such as environmental. Nevertheless, it is difficult to enforce or prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the lands when mineral rights are granted. The blurring of this boundary can be seen in public land law, it is also occurring in other contexts. Private expectations of gaining advantage through control of property must change if the land, water, and air of the Earth are to continue to supply our needs. Governmental powers should be used to protect collective values wherever possible. Private property rights should not include the ability to unnecessarily or unduly degrade the environment upon which all rely. In other words, a property rule protects public land that satisfies distinct collective values. We need to remain fired up about keeping public lands in PUBLIC hands. AND hold lawmakers accountable for subtle attacks on public land management.

 

[Sylvester]

I have been. And I'd like to see it preserved better moving forward. The line between "private" and "public" property is no longer clearly drawn. Mineral rights are part of that blur from what I can tell. Federal Land Policy and Management Act does not directly resolve disputes between competing public and private demands. The BLM faces a difficult challenge in reconciling these competing demands, particularly when private development rights conflict with collective values, such as environmental. Nevertheless, it is difficult to enforce or prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the lands when mineral rights are granted. The blurring of this boundary can be seen in public land law, it is also occurring in other contexts. Private expectations of gaining advantage through control of property must change if the land, water, and air of the Earth are to continue to supply our needs. Governmental powers should be used to protect collective values wherever possible. Private property rights should not include the ability to unnecessarily or unduly degrade the environment upon which all rely. In other words, a property rule protects public land that satisfies distinct collective values. We need to remain fired up about keeping public lands in PUBLIC hands. AND hold lawmakers accountable for subtle attacks on public land management.


What part of Private - Public confuses you? To discuss Your Points & Questions you would have to share more of your opinions Openly - There is a Difference between Leasing your Private Lands to a Mining Company and the federal Gov doing it and the distinction & laws governing Both are different, Of course the Environmentalist think they can Control Both and Some Judges have agreed with that Perhaps that is why you are Confused? You do Confuse Private & Public Lands in your Comment above

"Private property rights should not include the ability to unnecessarily or unduly degrade the environment upon which all rely"
!!!WRONG!!! THE PROPERTY IS PRIVATE THE OWNER SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO WHAT HE WISHES - IF HE LEASES HIS MINERAL RIGHTS TO MOBIL OIL HE SHOULD BE ALLOWED

 

[Acolle]

What part of Private - Public confuses you? To discuss Your Points & Questions you would have to share more of your opinions Openly - There is a Difference between Leasing your Private Lands to a Mining Company and the federal Gov doing it and the distinction & laws governing Both are different, Of course the Environmentalist think they can Control Both and Some Judges have agreed with that Perhaps that is why you are Confused? You do Confuse Private & Public Lands in your Comment above

"Private property rights should not include the ability to unnecessarily or unduly degrade the environment upon which all rely"
!!!WRONG!!! THE PROPERTY IS PRIVATE THE OWNER SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO WHAT HE WISHES - IF HE LEASES HIS MINERAL RIGHTS TO MOBIL OIL HE SHOULD BE ALLOWED

My apologies. I was generally speaking of private vs public interest with land use. The "privatization" of resources on public land seems to be very complicated. And you are right... With PRIVATE THE OWNER SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO WHAT HE/SHE WISHES. This is why the mineral rights are hard to wrap my brain around... The blurring of this boundary can be seen in the law with examples like the mineral rights thing. The leasing owners of the public lands are in fact going to do as they please to extract the very resources they desire from public land. As I said above BLM faces a difficult challenge in reconciling these competing demands, particularly when private development rights conflict with collective values, such as environmental. I'm no expert here. I'm just a guy with an opinion.

 

[Sylvester]

Your asking people to sign Something and you don't understand it??? To Limit anyone's right's is to Eventually Limit your Own rights - No one can just look at something as environment vs Oil you must look at the total picture. Yin & Yang For every good there is a Bad for Every Bad there is a good, But to just sign Something with out thinking is Foolish! Mining - Oil - Timber - Cattle all supply good Paying jobs to families and to Deny the Mineral Rights to be Leased is denying Those Family's to earn Wages from Good paying Jobs - The land is also Still Public - heck even the minerals mined will be used for the Public's good

 

[grubworm]

I'm no expert here. I'm just a guy with an opinion.

its easy to know who the experts are on here...they'll tell you!

 

[Acolle]

Your asking people to sign Something and you don't understand it??? To Limit anyone's right's is to Eventually Limit your Own rights - No one can just look at something as environment vs Oil you must look at the total picture. Yin & Yang For every good there is a Bad for Every Bad there is a good, But to just sign Something with out thinking is Foolish! Mining - Oil - Timber - Cattle all supply good Paying jobs to families and to Deny the Mineral Rights to be Leased is denying Those Family's to earn Wages from Good paying Jobs - The land is also Still Public - heck even the minerals mined will be used for the Public's good

I was sharing something I believe in. I believe the land (OUR LAND) deserves to be maintained in a healthy way and not exploited by private industry. So, you are right, collective value(s) are debatable... Though I value the public's interest, in the property that belongs to them, over any private industry exploiting the "collective value" for personal gain(s). If you disagree, cool. Don't sign it. That is your choice. I signed it. That was mine.

 

[EXPO_D1]

Drill - Need Oil & Gas for my Jeep, Plus we need high Paying Jobs -

ill never understand the point of view where "i disagree with you and let me tell you why." if you do not agree, cool. move on. why waste your time debating the other side?

 

[Acolle]

ill never understand the point of view where "i disagree with you and let me tell you why." if you do not agree, cool. move on. why waste your time debating the other side?

Little.jeep called me out. Just trying to explain my POV as to why I posted. Healthy debate is good. We all can learn from each other.

 

[EXPO_D1]

Little.jeep called me out. Just trying to explain my POV as to why I posted. Healthy debate is good. We all can learn from each other.

clarified my statement

 

[Sylvester]

Might Intent was not to call any one out - My Intent was to say Think about what your signing. You think your stopping a Oil lease what your really doing is Effecting peoples Lives in a State you don't live in. I logged in Alaska Almost 30 Years ago and They closed the Pulp mill "Louisiana Pacific - Ketchikan" and People who lived and worked there for 30 - 40 years Lost there Jobs Because of People in other states suing the Forest Service about the Timber sales... There Lawsuits Changed Thousands of peoples Lives - Some Change was good - some Bad. Just think before you do something

 

[Pathkiller]

Drill baby drill!
Frack baby FRACK!
Mine baby mine!

Forestry & mining have done a LOT to make overlanding & wheeling BETTER!
Just look at all the BLM, forested & mining land out there. The roads & camps weren't built with wheeling & overlanding in mind.
But, we have all benefited from such activity.

 

[grubworm]

But, we have all benefited from such activity.

exactly! and when was the last time you left a tip at the gas pump for appreciation??

 

[Sylvester]

exactly! and when was the last time you left a tip at the gas pump for appreciation??

GrubWorm your being Argumentive We were having a Conversation.