I believe the public deserves a detailed accounting of these questionable expenses, particularly now that you are proposing enormous budget cuts across your Department.

Do you agree the Department should have a permanent Inspector General, and that the IG should operate independently from your office, and that funding for that IG office should be sufficiently increased in the next budget cycle?

It is disgraceful to blame veterans and seniors who have already sacrificed and given so much to this country.

I think it was President Ulysses S. Grant who passed the Mining Law of 1872, very liberal and very progressive.

In the specific case we are referencing, a USGS scientist resigned because he felt he was being demanded to see data before it was made public.

The rationale provided does not withstand scrutiny, and cancellation would result in the waste of approximately $400,000 in taxpayer dollars.

To blame a fee hike on admission to the most visited national parks on veterans, people with disabilities and the elderly is uninformed, hurtful, and frankly unconscionable.

That is a false choice that the American public does not support.

While I am glad to see an interest in finding money to support our public lands, the proposal in the budget is backwards.

I do have concerns regarding operating funds and the fact that diminishment of operating funds in the Fiscal Year 2018 and Fiscal Year 2019 budgets, as examples, do nothing more than contribute to that deferred maintenance backlog.

the more successful programs in the National Park Service... are those where there is a known and reliable funding source well into the future.

the budget document justifies this massive elimination and cut as an opportunity to then focus on deferred maintenance and other land management priorities.