Well this doesn't look like a promising beginning...
MNRazorhead's Link
MNRazorhead's Link
Yes, time for them to pay the piper and learn to manage money the way we all have to...
I don't know what I'd do if public lands went away. It would literally end the history of hunting in America, reducing it to a high fence, pay for play shootfest in most cases.
1) Washington Post: F-
2) Environmentalists: F-
3) Democrats: F-
4) Strong Federal regulation: F-
If all 4 cast a poor light on this, then there's more to it than meets the eye. Remember this: at any time, Big Brother can decide to kick every hunter off their lands for whatever reason they decide. We came way close to that happening with this last admin., but garden-variety mass-media news wasn't interested in "talking about it".
Now... about handing it over (so to speak) to the states: any better? Who knows. Here in NY that would be fantastic, we have excellent liberty on State lands, and grass roots groups guard its status ferociously. But as we all know... its all dust in the wind isn't it?
These are not "Big Brother's" lands. They belong to every citizen of the United States of America and are managed by departments of the federal government.
They were not taken from the states and were never the state's to begin with.
In truth, the fed can close hunting and shooting on public land anytime they want. In truth, the fed can close designated public land for the sole interest of special groups anytime they want.
In truth, the state can close hunting and shooting on public land (if held by the states) and can designate state held land (if it were all transferred) as state parks and close hunting and shooting just the same.
We're lucky in New Mexico, I guess. As much as I don't agree with democrat policies and platforms, if the land were to be transferred to the states, the dem held majority in the state gov't wouldn't sell it off either, they'll just raise state taxes to fill in the gap. Unless they fall sucker to the tears streaming down cheeks diatribe of old landgrants and cultural traditional use...
I think both sides of the argument only have half the information. How else do you think the fed can cut taxes, which everyone wants, without getting rid of some expenditures? As I said above, get rid of giving out money to those who are too lazy to earn it themselves. Then the burden of running federal lands may not be so much.
HDE, Legally the feds cannot close access to public owned land anytime they want. They could try. And, would I'm certain. But, they will loose in court.
The whole understanding of this debacle is unbelieveable. We have voted in liberal officials that had zero accountability to control spending, to indebt us to this point. And, we now want to pick a political party based on where they seem to stand? Here's the deal. Dem's and Reb's could care less about us as a whole. Most are liberal regardless of party affiliation. You want to stop this in the future? Vote conservative. We would never be indebt had that been the case. God Bless
And by designated public land I mean monuments and/or national parks.
It's safe to say that as long as the land doesn't get put into hands to sell, or designated as some special government title that no longer requires public input for management, we hunters are good. God Bless men
I personally think many in the hunting community are getting all lathered up over nothing. At least I hope so, as I am a public lands hunter and darn sure don't want to see this drastic move. The FS and BLM are big cumbersome tax wasting Federal Agencies that make up their own regulations (CFR's) and by pass congress anyway. Most of us here in the west look down our noses at employees of these agencies and many are our neighbors and family members. For the big part they are bloated agencies with a history of make work, do nothing attitudes. So much waste and misdirection of taxpayer money. The biggest cancer is the humongous Fire Fighting Division. Talk about a huge over spending waste of our tax dollars. No wonder our western Congressmen are wanting change.
Say goodbye to a lot of federal lands.
Whether you are a supporter of the new President Elect, or not it will not matter. Just recall some of his words
"To many regulations. We are going to change that. Get rid of / reduce regulations that inhibit / hurt the growth of business."
Politically this is advantageous for business, i.e. logging / timber industry, mining, certain ranching interests, and last but certainly not least the people who wish to develop the these lands for commercial purposes.
We need to look at his selections for cabinet positions and those selected to head up various agencies. Look at their backgrounds and their former or current positions in business, or their political positions regarding these / this issue. (National Lands).
The rhetoric of "It cost the taxpayer to much money for the Government to oversee this agency and lands" is a shallow reasoning or argument in order to take away land that rightfully belongs to all of us !
Our children and to our descendants stand to lose far more than we do. We may loose our opportunities to hunt these lands. They may never have the right to see or enjoy these lands ever again !
Yes elections do have consequences !
What is next ? The "Constitution" ? What part ( s ) of the Constitution that someone or a political party or faction thereof doesn't agree with ?
Time will tell regarding this election even if it appears to be on a fast track to take over / give away Federal Lands, and our rights to hunt, fish, traverse the grounds WE paid for (taxes, fee,s, permits, etc.) as did our forefathers.
Now is the time to lend one voice to stop the take over of our heritage. Contact your congressman and Senator. To speak out against the proposed give away / take over by the state of Federal Land.
Perhaps it is time to stop the rhetoric of discord. He / She is a Democrat, a Republican or the other (often silly) remarks regarding another's political view or persuasions.
I am a Husband, a Father, a Grandfather, a Veteran, a Hunter, a Christian, and yes a Democratic. I want to protect our rights, including our Federal Lands. I want to insure myself, my children, my family and yes my fellow hunters the right to enjoy the great outdoors on all Federal Lands.
If this makes me an outsider ? So be it !
When Ferderal Lands are gone it will be forever regardless of all the silly comments made by a few !
Somehow the thought of our rights as citizens can so easily be trampled on by the greed of a few and is just a vote away is indeed and should be, frightening to all of us!
Once land is gone, or off limits, it's never coming back. Ever. If an economic policy fails, it hurts, but can be turned around relatively quickly in the grand scheme of things. Land loss impacts my kids grand kids. Similarly, bad environmental policy could negatively impact my kids grand kids. I mean look at work a group like TU does with helping local organizations fund and orchestrate dam removal's and stream restoration. It helps the coldwater fisheries present, and the land's surrounding those coldwater systems. That work wouldnt have been needed if we knew over most of the past 200 years, what we know now. We learned, government has tried to help regulate business growth and environmental interaction as a result... it's had warts and sure as heck hasn't worked all the time... But in terms of regaining and sustaining a healthy environment for "us" to hunt, fish, hike, bike, or do whatever we want to in... It's been a success.
So circling back... Federal land sell off, it's a part of that same thing to me. I think you can be pro business and pro environment. It's possible... People are smart enough to make it work. Just need the constraints placed on them to be creative and figure it out.
this is your lands I guess if you like it so much then give your house to the states.
2. Some you can, some you can't.
3. There needs to be some kind of 'sarcasm' indicator for posts for those who are socially challenged...
People in this country had best return to some good old fashioned conservative wisdom. And quit this nonsense .
It's not a scare tactic. It's reality. I would suggest that all of you get your Congressional Representatives on speed dial and let them know that you value your public lands, because as Will said they aren't coming back once they are gone.
The Senate still has to pass its own rule package. Randy Newberg (aka Big Fin) offered up an interesting course of action: write your Senators and ask them to reject the language adopted in the House Rules package and let them sort it out.
If the Senate adopts the same language as the House, it basically (I'm explaining in layman's terms here, please correct me if I'm wrong) would make it easier from an accounting/fiscal statement perspective to dispose of public lands.
As for Zinke, he still claims his opposition to PLT and says that this is not a contradiction to that. Time and actions will speak louder than words.
As to a wolf in sheep's clothing? He's a Republican. There has been no secret among the R's that the party platform directly supports the PLT movement.
Keep the heat on. Write well and write often, it is very important.
