frozenframe wrote in post #18372280
I read that document linked to, and could not find anything in the document stating the reason for this review was for oil drilling.
While that is possible, it seems more like a review due to the previous administration's massive land grabbing. There's a lot of land that was snatched up, for no legitimate reason. Some of this land needs to be returned to their owners. Then if the owners choose to allow drilling that's the owner's choice to do so.
However there indeed is mentioned:
In a separate but related process, certain Marine National Monuments will also be reviewed. As directed by section 4 of Executive Order 13795 of April 28, 2017, “Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy” (82 FR 20815, May 3, 2017), the Department of Commerce will lead the review of the Marine National Monuments in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior. To assist in that consultation, the Secretary will accept comments related to the application of factors (i) through (vii) in Executive Order 13792 as set forth above to the following Marine National Monuments:
Marine National Monuments Being Reviewed Pursuant to Executive Orders 13795 and 13792
Marianas Trench CNMI/Pacific Ocean 2009 60,938,240
Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Atlantic Ocean 2016 3,114,320
Pacific Remote Islands Pacific Ocean 2009 55,608,320
Papahanaumokuakea Hawaii 2006/2016 89,600,000
Rose Atoll American Samoa 2009 8,609,045
To the point raised earlier in the thread about a region of Alaska not appearing to have valid reason for status as a National Monument, the document does refer to only ONE review of a monument in Maine, "National Monuments Being Reviewed To Determine Whether the Designation or Expansion Was Made Without Adequate Public Outreach and Coordination With Relevant Stakeholders"
What also is lacking is any explanation of WHY the need to review any of the other 21 National Monuments up for review, placed into that designation most between 1996- 2016...eleven of them attained that status during Bill Clinton's administration, ten of them attained that status during Obama's administration...seems to be very strongly smacking of political overtones, and not truly a periodic review of all national monoments in a rotational review process.
"... shall conduct a review of all Presidential designations or expansions of designations under the Antiquities Act made since January 1, 1996, where the designation covers more than 100,000 acres, where the designation after expansion covers more than 100,000 acres, or where the Secretary determines that the designation or expansion was made without adequate public outreach and coordination with relevant stakeholders, to determine whether each designation or expansion conforms to the policy set forth in section 1 of this order."
And oddly one national monument under review was put on that status in 1924 during a Republican administration but simply renewed under a Democratic administration.
Another oddity is why one national monument would be declared so, and renewed just recently in 2017 yet is up for review YET AGAIN ?!?!
This review is under direction of Executive Order 13792, and while that order has no overt reference to oil drilling/exploration, unfortunately.we have no idea if the executive briefing to the Secretary of the Interior contained an explicit or covert instruction to "go find if any of these areas have oil to tap".