That’s not what land trusts do. Land trusts are common in other countries and raise funds through donations and use fees. They also utilize brigades of volunteers. Land held in conservation trusts can’t be used for economic gain. Therefore, it’s protected forever.

did you read the article? There are, literally, hundreds of members of the public taking care of parks right now.... as I said, there needs to be private conservation Trusts in charge.

@SkotlandSkye Yes I read it. And to be sure, there are people stepping up. But changing toilet paper in a latrine is a small fraction of what Park Service personnel do. Maintaining a national park or forest is a much more complex thing than you realize.

@BlackDove You do realize that other countries have private trusts that care for public lands. It's not an unknown concept. For example, most of the public lands in GB are held by trusts such as Earth Trust. [earthtrust.org.uk]

@SkotlandSkye That may be fine for Great Britain, but just how large is Great Britain, as compared to the U.S.? The distric that I work on manages over 570,000 acres of grassland and national forest. We have millions and millions of natural forest and wilderness across the country; how many public trusts do you think that it would take to manage all that land?

@BlackDove Several, but it could be done. It's time to think progressively and take these resources out of the hands of bureaucrats who will rape and pillage them for profit....or neglect and abuse them.
Just because something hasn't been tried in this country doesn't mean it wouldn't work....it just takes people to want things to change.

@SkotlandSkye Well, I can't argue with you on that one. But it's going to be a hard sell; it might work for a wetland that borders a large city, but when you're smack in the middle of the Frank Church Wilderness, or the Klamath National Forest, for example; enabling a trust to maintain and protect it might be a difficult endeavor. I encourage you to visit such areas, then you'll get an idea of what I'm talking about.

@BlackDove LOL I've been to all over that area. Oregon was a second home to me at one point. You should look through my photos on here.

@SkotlandSkye Oh and this:

Intellectual Takeout - Right BiasRIGHT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 43/180

History

Intellectual Takeout is a think tank co-founded by Devin Foley. They describe themselves in their about page as an: “American think tank promoting rational discourse informed by the Western tradition. We do it primarily by engaging millions of readers on current events and Western principle.” Further, they describe what they use in order to realize their mission “We use our powerful communications tools to initiate millions of Americans each year into the Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian”

Funded by / Ownership

Intellectual Takeout is a 501(3) nonprofit organization that is funded through donations. The CEO is Devin Foley.

Analysis / Bias

Intellectual Takeout covers topics such as “culture, economics, education, history, philosophy, politics, and religion.” They utilize sources that are factually mixed such as Heritage Foundation, CNS News, and the Daily Signal. They also have a poor track record when it comes to support for the consensus of science. The majority of stories are favorable to the right and negative to the left.

Overall, this is a think tank that is strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and mixed factually due to poor source selection. (M. Huitsing 8/28/2017) Updated (6/13/2018)

Source: [intellectualtakeout.org]

Caveat emptor...

@SkotlandSkye Then you know what I mean then

@BlackDove So, as I said, private conservation trusts are a big thing in other countries...and preserves the natural environment from horrendous political decisions. That is a fact no matter who reports it. I can easily go find 1000+ other articles about private land trusts for public lands written by 1000+ more websites. Judging an idea based on an article written by just one author is like saying that you won't trust the weather that is the same on three channels just because you don't like one of those 3 channels.

@SkotlandSkye I'm just saying, you posted that one article, which is heavily biased. And yes, I see you've been to a lot of parks and monuments and you've patronized them as well. That's good, that's what we want. We want the public to enjoy their public lands, but it takes a lot of effort to maintain them, and we already work with private entities and partnerships to help maintain some of those areas that are heavily visited by the public. We work hard out there to help maintain, preserve, and protect our parks and forests, and when we're shutdown as a result, it prohibits us from doing what we love.