Comment on FR Doc # N/A
AnonymousOpposeIndividual
Summary: The commenter opposes any efforts to reduce the acreage of publicly protected lands or reduce protections for threatened and endangered species. They argue that federal officials are stewards of public land and that exploitation of these lands by private companies without public return is a "taking."
I oppose any/all efforts by the Trump Administration and associated federal agencies to reduce acreage of publicly protected lands, land in national parks, forests, monuments, and spaces that are currently being used for wildlife habitat and human recreation. These are PUBLICLY-OWNED LANDS and are NOT owned by Trump. He has no right to take them away from the public. Technically, all federal officials are only stewards of these lands. You can not open them up for mining, logging, or other exploitation without following existing adopted policies, procedures, and processes. It is unequitable to assign exploitation rights to private companies without creating a Sovern Wealth Fund that returns all profits to the public. That is a “taking”. Furthermore, it is illegal and unethical to reduce protections for T/E species by changing word definitions within the adopted ESA - flora and fauna need HABITAT to live and taking of habitat remains an illegal “taking” under the law.