Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Pelosi Betrays Her Constituents (Including Newfies)
(Congresswoman Pelosi and her co-conspirators, Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy Executive Director Greg Moore and GGNRA Superintendent Lyin Brian O'Neill, hold hands, sing "Kumbaya" and plot the end of recreation as we know it in the soon to be extinct Golden Gate National Recreation Area)
HR Bill 6305 Would Wipe Away Recreation In The GGNRA
Nancy Pelosi submitted a bill, HR 6305, to Congress on June 19, 2008. Much of the bill covers administrative details (allowing the Presidio Trust to move their visitor center, and allowing a concession contract at the Maritime Historic Park). But Section 2 is very dangerous:
"SEC. 2. GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS.
(a) Name Change-
(1) IN GENERAL- The Golden Gate National Recreation Area is hereby renamed the `Golden Gate National Parks'.
(2) REFERENCES- Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the Golden Gate National Recreation Area is deemed to be a reference to the Golden Gate National Parks.
(3) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS- The Act titled `An Act to establish the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in the State of California, and for other purposes' (Public Law 92-589, approved October 27, 1972) is amended--
(A) in sections 1 and 2 by striking `National Recreation Area' each place it appears and inserting `National Parks'; and
(B) by striking `recreation area' each place it appears and inserting `national parks'.
(b) Change of Unit From Recreation Area to National Park-
(1) IN GENERAL- The Golden Gate National Parks, as so renamed by subsection (a), is hereby designated as a national park and shall be administered as such by the Secretary of the Interior.
(2) CLARIFICATION- This section designates the recreation area known as Golden Gate National Recreation Area as a national park and renames that unit Golden Gate National Parks. Nothing in this section shall be construed as creating a new `national parks' category of designation with the National Park System."
* * * * * * * * * *
For years, off-leash advocates have been told by GGNRA staff that changing the name from "Golden Gate National Recreation Area" to "Golden Gate National Parks" will make it easier for them to further restrict recreation within GGNRA boundaries. There is no other reason for this name change. The National Park Service wants to remove recreation from the Park just as they wish to remove it from their name. It would remove any question as to whether or not GGNRA land should be treated differently from national park land such as Yosemite. This name change says the same management policies must apply.
This proposed name change ignores the historical reality that the GGNRA was specifically created to preserve land for the "outdoor recreational needs of the people of the metropolitan region", according to a 1972 Report from the US House of Representatives. The objective of the GGNRA, according to the 1972 House Report, is "to expand to the maximum extent possible the outdoor recreational opportunities available in the region." The name-change provision of this bill flies in the face of the intent behind the founding of the GGNRA and the promises made to the people of the Bay Area when it was formed and under which they gave their municipal parkland to the federal government to manage.
Section 2 of Pelosi's bill has nothing to do with the rest of the bill, which it says is "[t]o clarify the authorities for the use of certain National Park Service properties within Golden Gate National Parks and San Francisco Maritime National Historic Park, and for other purposes." Clearly Section 2 is the other purposes. Not making that part of the description of the bill is highly suspect. Was Pelosi hoping to sneak this through with the public not knowing what she was doing?
Please contact Pelosi and demand that she remove Section 2 from HR 6305:
District Office - 450 Golden Gate Ave. - 14th Floor - San Francisco, CA 94102 -
Washington, D.C. Office - 235 Cannon HOB - Washington, DC 20515 - (202) 225-4965
Also contact the Committee on Natural Resources to which the bill has been referred:
1324 Longworth House Office Building
(202) 225-6065 Fax: (202) 225-1931
MR. NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia, Chairman
MR. DON YOUNG, Alaska, Ranking Republican Member
and the Subcommittee on National Parks Forests and Public Lands to which it was referred on June 25:
1333 Longworth House Office Building
(202) 226-7736 Fax: (202) 226-2301
Mr. Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona, Chairman
Mr. Rob Bishop, Utah, Ranking Republican Member
Let Pelosi, the Committee and the Subcommittee know that you want Section 2 removed from HR 6305. The simple introduction of the bill now creates an obligation on the part of the City and County of San Francisco to institute proceedings for reversion of former City properties deeded to the GGNRA, such as Ocean Beach, Fort Funston, and Lands End. The deeds conveying these properties clearly state that any deviation from the recreation-first mandate of the GGNRA shall result in reversion of the properties. Let's get the feds out of our front yard and take back the land!
Newfies need places to swim!!!!!
This bill is not aimed soley at off-leash recreation, but at the elimination of all forms of recreation. The irony from the off-leash recreation litigation is mindboggling. In United States v. Barley, 405 F.Supp.2d 1121 (N.D. Cal. 2005), the Court cited a "March 1999" letter from "Superintendent O'Neill to the Honorable [???] Nancy Pelosi stating that the GGNRA had adopted a pet policy more liberal than pet regulations at other national park sites throughout the country." And, with respect to the GGNRA's attempts to rescind the Pet Policy, the Court found the NPS to have "wiped away two decades of policy, practice, promulgations, and promises to the public." Don't let them try it again.