If you wanted to give those saying you exceeded your authority a good argument when they take you to court, you did it about as well as could be done by carving Moon House Ruin out of monument status.
Of all the archaeological sites on Cedar Mesa, Moon House is often considered the best. It has been called, "literally a vast outdoor museum of Anasazi ruins and rock art." (hikingwalking.com/destinations/ut)
Doll House Ruin, a building believed to have been a food processing and storage facility, is also among the sites losing monument status.
When you come arguing that Bears Ears National Monument was an overreach by the Obama Administration, saying Obama stretched to include land the Antiquities Act never intended to protect, you are going to have a hard, hard time making your argument that Moon House and Doll House are not textbook cases of sites that The Antiquities Act was created for. That act gives authority to designate as monuments, "historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest." How does that not include Moon House and Doll House? How is it that you say Obama exceeded his authority by placing them in a monument?
What are the other comparable sites being removed from monument status that qualify for it? One can see a lawyer, arguing the case in court, listing site after site as qualifying for monument status.
When you trimmed back the size of Bears Ears, you should have left them in one of the monuments -- or made them each a monument of their own. It seems clear to me that protecting such sites with monument status is exactly what the Antiquities Act was created to do.
(Note: Edited and changed 12/5/17)
No comments:
Post a Comment