Wyoming long has had an independent streak in its right-leaning politics, but a position on federal lands staked out by a Republican gubernatorial candidate still might cause some in the state to catch their breath: Taylor Haynes would open Yellowstone National Park to mining and grazing.
Mr. Haynes, whose diverse background includes degrees in urology and mechanical engineering and time spent ranching, said if elected one of his first tasks would be to send letters to the federal land-management agencies telling them to turn their lands over to the state and get their operations out of Wyoming.
“Then, in whichever county they attempt to have any official activity, they will be arrested for impersonating a law enforcement officer in Wyoming,” he told the Casper Star-Tribune last week.
The 68-year-old Republican bases his plan on the grounds that the U.S. Constitution allows the federal government to own just 10 miles of land, in Washington, D.C., for offices and operations, and that the state could do a much better job of managing the federal lands.
How successful would Mr. Haynes' proposal be in terms of the state's tourism industry? Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks likely would fare well for their iconic status. But other park units in the state? Do you remember Shoshone Cavern National Monument? The site outside Cody, Wyoming, was designated in 1909 by presidential proclamation, and given to Cody in 1954. Have you heard of it?
Before Mr. Haynes can put his plan to work, he has to win the GOP gubernatorial nomination next month (current Gov. Matt Mead, a Republican, is seeking re-election), and then the general election in November.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Mr. Haynes has not said anything that has not been said before. It appeals to thier contituents so he pretty much has to say it.
EC-Your immigrant correlation is way off base. There are a half a dozen things I want to bring up to counter your comment, but this is not the forum.I am not saying you are the kind of perons who blocks a bus full of children from entering a processing facility for medical screenings, but I seriously question the morals of any human being who goes out of thier way to NOT help a child in need, and who exploits the situation for political media coverage. Show some empathy man.
Rambler,
You think it is showing empathy to encourage parents to abandon their children and send them unaccompanied and without resources to a foreign country?
This is a self made disaster. We don't have the resources to "save" every child in the world. We are providing false hope to these children and their parents who end up dieing in the river or in the desert or exploited by gangs and other vermin or ravaged by disease. That isn't empathy, it is cruelty.
Our country is already overwhelmed by those that are unable or unwilling to care for themselves. We don't need to encourage more to flood our borders.
You and Adam Kwasman.
"When we try to pick out any one thing in the universe by itself, we find it is hitched to everything else." -- John Muir
EC and Rambler are both right, and therein lies the problem. Numbers do matter, but yes, we are a country displaying empathy, and so we keep refusing to face the numbers. Let's get right to the bottom line: Can all 7 billion people in the world live in any one country--the United States, China, Russia, Australia, or anywhere else? Of course they can't, but we would like to think they can live here because that is how Americans are predisposed to think. "Give me your tired, your poor, your hungry masses yearning to breathe free." It's written in celebration of a national park. No one wants to be the Scrooge that closes the door. In Wyoming, Mr. Haynes wants us to think he can pry the door open again by allowing all of the riches to flow out of Yellowstone. The reality overwhelms him, too. Read Peggy Noonan's excellent commentary last Saturday in The Wall Street Journal. That perfectly sums it up. There are needy children on the lawn of America--again--but our own house is falling apart. We can tax the rich, for a time, but the repairs are beyond us all. And now comes the drought in California. It seems we were warned about all of this in the 1960s, but hey, the party was still going on.
Al, agree with you except I'm not convinced Haynes want to drain the ricjes of Yellowstone. Show the evidence.
The evidence? Because he hasn't cleared the air on his website after dozens of newspapers picked him apart. All he needs to say is that the reports are false. As my dear mother used to say, where there's smoke, there's fire, and this guy's pants are burning off. You mean he doesn't have a campaign staff talented enough to throw him some water? Repeat after me, Mr. Haynes. I love Yellowstone and would never do anything to change it--harm it--or remove that wonderful name "national park." Just who do you think I am? James Watt? Yes, as a matter of fact, I do.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/16/mead-haynes-differ-on-re...
In other words, his disclaimer should have read: "I did not close off all but one lane to the George Washington Bridge, but I sure got your attention!"