Comments about ‘Will public-lands rules be changed?’
BLM wants different way to protect from development
What You May Have Missed
Most Popular
Across Site
In Utah
- Bottom 30 elementary schools in Utah by test...
- Top 30 elementary schools in Utah by test scores
- Growing pains: Rate of young men struggling...
- New president to lead Mormon Tabernacle Choir
- BYU student killed after falling 70 feet in...
- Gail Miller gets engaged to Salt Lake attorney
- Glenn Beck unleashes his dogs of war
- Charges: Runaway teen caused accident that...
Most Commented
Across Site
In Utah
- Make it a small: N.Y.'s ban on large...
37 - Glenn Beck unleashes his dogs of war
34 - Cottonwood High School football coach...
25 - Rep. Jim Matheson favors getting rid of...
15 - Idaho awaits No Child Left Behind waiver
14 - Poll shows Utahns think Legislature's...
14 - Man shot brother while showing him...
13 - Jon Huntsman Jr. is done pulling punches
12






Hooray for the Bush administration.
The rule the Bush appointees are trying to repeal comes from Section 204(e) of the Federal Land Policy & Management Act of 1976. It was written in to take care of situations where the Secretary of the Interior might refuse to use his withdrawal authority to protect lands of great public value. That's exactly what happened when Kempthorne refused to protect the Grand Canyon. He should be following the law, not rewriting the rules.
Lord, protect us from those claiming they're protecting us. Good for the Bush Administration!!
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
— About comments