State Trust Lands are an interesting piece in this puzzle. The manner in which these lands [controlled by the State Land Office] are managed is crucial to ALL people who value our natural resources as more than a launchpad for resource extraction. The most valuable resource extracted from these magificent places are the experiences and the memories shared by families as they experience nature in it's full glory.
Hunting, fishing, gathering, camping....these are among the oldest traditions known to the human species. There is ONLY 1 candidate for Land Commissioner in New Mexico who values these traditions as much as the membership of The United Bowhunters of New Mexico.
As the President of the UBNM, it brings me great pleasure to announce our official endorsement of our next State Land Commissioner....Garrett VeneKlasen!
The next few months will require the kind of tenacity sportsmen usually reserve for an elk hunt. If hunting [regardless of weapon choice] matters to you, you will be tenacious in your support of Garrett VeneKlasen.
The future of hunting public land is at stake. I appreciate your vigorous support!
Jesse W. Deubel President- United Bowhunters of New Mexico
Imagine having a SLC that advocates for camping on State land! Or pushes for access to landlocked State parcels! It's time for a change ladies & gentlemen...
We can definitely reserve as many "Bowsite Tables" as are needed. For all Bowsiter's who wish to be seated with fellow members of this forum, please send me a PM with how many tickets you have purchased. This will allow me to reserve the appropriate number of tables. Due to the venue's firecode capacity there are ONLY 100 tickets available. I've not checked how many are left, but if you would like to attend please don't delay.
Again, if you're a Bowsiter who wishes to be seated with other Bowsiter's send me a PM so I can arrange that.
Thanks for your support of public lands!
The facts about Hillary indicate she is very dishonest, anti 2nd amendment, ext. ext.
my 2 cents
IMO party lines are a thing of the past, I am not sure where I even fit anymore, there isn't any party that I feel represents me, at least Garrett has our backs as SLC.
My 2 cents
my other 2 cents
Randy Newberg has often said, "I belong to the sportsmen party...hunting, fishing and public lands." Well, that's my party also.
Regarding any comments about Hillary, I don't know what was said or the context in which it was said nor do I care. What I DO care about is passing our hunting heritage on to my kids the same way my Dad passed it to me. Garrett is by far the candidate in this race best suited to help me ensure the opportunity exists for me to do that.
2) Apparently unable to comprehend the corruption of the Clintons. How can he be expected to understand what does, and does not, constitute corruption at the SLO?
Beware the environmentalist in sportsman's clothing.
The State Land Commissioner can absolutely open camping on State Trust Lands on DAY 1! Grazing permittees are permittees. Hunters are also permittees. Why should hunters require permission from grazers to camp when both are paying permittees of the same tract of land?
Get ready for Garrett VeneKlasen and get ready for a "NEW" New Mexico!
Another likely candidate is Ray Powell. He has been endorsed my multiple animal rights groups. Last time in office Ray outlawed coyote calling contests on state trust lands. Given his recent endorsements, I would expect his expectations in the animal rights arena to be much more exaggerated.
Environmentalist in Sportsman's clothing?? How many elk have you killed with a long bow? If you think you need to destroy the environment to be a sportsman, we're on different pages. What does KUIU or SFW do for sportsmen? Utah politicians are our worst enemy!
If you don't know Garrett, then you obviously don't know Garrett! Well, this issue is damned important to me. I know Garrett and I also know most of the other candidates.
Newberg didn't show up to support this event because Garrett is an "environmentalist in sportsman's clothing".
Shane Mahoney has expressed tremendous support for Garrett VeneKlasen for State Land Commissioner!
Again [knowing that Dunn is DONE, because he is a criminally dishonest politician] who would you prefer to hold the position of State Land Commissioner?
I don't care if he's killed 800 elk with a longbow. I don't know Garrett, so I'm my questions remain:
How does he explain the disconnect between Clinton corruption and SLO corruption? How does he explain NMWF's support for Obama's clean water rule?
THOSE are material issues. With real impacts. this whole "Sagebrush rebellion" of States somehow getting Federal Lands has ZERO chance of ever happening. ZERO. To support a candidate because of that is to support a candidate because of an issue that is practically immaterial.
ENVIRONMENTALISTS are your biggest threat. Not the SLO somehow "land grabbing" your federal lands. You gotta focus on material and immediate threats.
I'm not sure who I support. Dunn was an absolute disaster and the poster boy for why ANY candidate should be screened for his ability to comprehend corruption. Which is why Garrett has a LOT of explaining to do for his Clinton support.
Corruption and wolves. That's what I care about. Longbows be damned.
I'm not sure where you've been, but most hunters ARE environmentalists! Hunters are conservationists right? How can we conserve wildlife without adequate habitat? How can we have adequate habitat without a healthy environment? This "far right" and "far left" stuff fails to describe the majority of voters anymore. This is not about R's and D's, not about Blue and Red.
The office of the State Land Commissioner centers around two things...preserving land and raising money for public education. Garrett has a plan to do both more effectively than any candidate who has ever held the position. You might allow your party affiliation to interfere with your ability to support that, but I cannot.
As for corruption and wolves, I also care about those issues. Both of those issues exist within NM right now. Both need to be controlled by well regulated hunting.
As far as this "Clinton support" thing you keep referencing, I know nothing about it. Regardless, anybody who supported Clinton or Trump in the last election could easily be accused of supporting corruption. Who a person supports in a disgusting excuse for a Presidential Election is not my concern.
hunters are not permittee s either. they are granted access to STL thru an easement purchased by the NMGF. whether or not a hunter can camp overnight is up to the surface lessee. I don't think the SLC can walk in his first day on the job and alter the leases.
You keep saying you know nothing about nor do you care about Garrett hitching his wagon to the Clintons is BS.
wish I was hunting elk right now
I'm afraid you've taken the land transfer red herring hook, line, and sinker. It's been going on since the 1970s and, the leftist papers have really hyped it up since the Oregon standoff to make the threat seem real and immediate. Sure, I know what Bishop and Chaffertz in Utah have tried to do. The GOP platform, as you conveniently fail to mention, also provides for continued hunting and recreational access. That, also, is not new.
This is a guy that said those opposed to wolf reintroduction should "step out of the way." And he's all for the feds regulating every single ditch and ephemeral arroyo in the lower 48. Which means he's all for big government controlling every acre of land. That's an environmentalist. His support for the waters of the USA clean water rule proves that.
Moreover, it's shown that he's willing to turn a blind eye to corruption as long as it fits his agenda. That's why his Clinton support is relevant. In other words, his election would be a wolfer's wet dream. The fact that he hunts appeals to the sportsman on the margins, but PLEASE don't confuse an environmentalist with a conservationist. That alone would take more text that I'm willing to type here.
Again, not sure who to support. Do the rest of the candidates support federal land transfers? The clean water rule? How do they feel about wolves? Most important, do they seem to support corrupt politicians? THESE are all relevant questions, and they are extremely appropriate in a thread that was started solely to raise funds for a particular candidate.
Again, corruption and wolves. These are the pressing questions.
HDE, I'm thinking your definition of environmentalist might be different than mine? This is what my google search produced, "en·vi·ron·men·tal·ist in?v?r?n?men(t)?l?st/Submit noun 1. a person who is concerned with or advocates the protection of the environment. synonyms: conservationist, preservationist, ecologist, nature lover;" I'm guilty of fitting that definition. Keep in mind the very first synonym listed is "conservationist". Are hunters not conservationists???
Intruder, what difference does it make that the movement started in the 70's? There were gays who wanted to get married in the 70's and people said, "That will never happen!" I'm not opposing gay marriage here. What I am doing is saying that countless things that "will never happen" happen every single day. Some schools now require transgender restrooms. Wolves impact hunters for sure. The impact wolves will have though is NOTHING compared to the impact the loss of public lands will have on hunting. You can believe I'm the purchaser of snake oil all you want. The threat is real, it is present, and it is ALREADY HAPPENING! Public lands are being privatized at an alarming rate. This is fact, not a partisan-based opinion.
To your point about "continued access to hunting and recreational activities" what the hell are you talking about? We all know if federally managed lands are transferred to the states they will be sold! At that point the person who decides access is the PRIVATE owner of those lands. Hunting and recreational acrivities might receive continued access....but at what price???
Shane Mahoney is about to release a book about the North American Model of Wildlife Management. It would serve all hunters well to read that book as soon as practically possible upon it's release. Shane is not a US Citizen, so his book is likely not persuaded by the R's or the D's of our perverted electoral system.
I am not anti rancher. My cousin has 200 acres of deeded land in unit 13 and I don't know how many leased acres. The only land closed to hunters is the deeded acres. I am against ranchers who think state land is their land because the have a grazing lease. I am not going to try to convince anybody how to vote. I will vote for Garrett because of meeting and talking to him, I like the issues he stands for. I know where Randy stands on issues and if he is backing Garrett then that is a good enough endorsement for me. I am ready for some serious change in the SLO, whether you are or not is up to you and your vote.
I like energy too much, so I guess I am not a conservationist since I definitely am not an environmentalist. It is not a science discipline but merely a concept for those who sit around and talk about it.
I am calling you out now. You said that Garrett "best" represents your Interests. That's entirely different than saying you "like" where he stands on the issues. So, implicit in your claim is that you now where the others stand. SO, where DO they stand?
As for transfers wold be immediately sold...prove it. You said "we all know thais." HOW? You do realizr the gop platform language is the 3d time this has happened right? And you do realize that everytime this has happened it came as the gop took the white house after expansionary dem administrations. After LBJ, Carter, and now Obama. Why? According to strategists, every time the gop runs on a primarily "repeal big government" platform,the Dems, taking a play from Alinskys playbook, call them out on it. How? By making them own up to their word and say they are against "Americas best idea." The Party adopts the vague language of transfer with the "continued access" language that you say "don't know what the hell im talking about." And what does it turn around and do? Have the president Disown it. Reagan did it, and now Trump says he'll do it.
Again, a red herring. Political platforms aside, this is a government that can't even repeal Obamacare. You think they'll be able to repeal the USFS?
Show me the "alarming" rate of land transfers from fed to states.
As long as you come on here and campaign with your head in the sand, you can count on me being there to explain to others why they can't see your head.
not sure what it really means but thanks
That's why I anxiously await arctic's take on the other candidates given the issues. He's actively campaigning for one candidate, selling $100 event tickets, and that makes him wholly accountable for his view that Garrett is the best choice and for the fearmongering he's spreading regarding land transfers.
Believe me, anyone who campaigns will get the same treatment.
what does intruders residency have to do with it? Intruder asked legit questions about Garrett and so far they haven't been answered.
Surely there is a better reason to back Garrett other than because arctic says so.
fyi Big Fin is from Montana you guys aren't questioning his motives. Why not?
I pay NM state income and property taxes - plenty of them. I vote in AZ but try to have some semblance of NM control, as a NM native, in whose campaign I contribute to. You can count on me, and many more NRs, to contribute to your political races. Who are the biggest landowners in NM? You got it - NRs with very deep pockets. While I'm not one of them, I know I will get behind AND CONTRIBUTE TO the SLO that best represents me, both individually and as a trustee. So will they.
Garrett may very well be that guy, but it will take more than some amateurish chicken little land transfer theory for that to happen.
Arctic, we're waiting.
At least one other poster is interested in the same answers as me....
Sorry for the delayed response. I don't visit Bowsite daily.....especially not in the fall.
There are more than a handful of candidates throwing their names in the hat for the State Land Commissioner position. I don't have the time to outline every position of every candidate. Interestingly, over the past 24 years our State Land Office has been run by only 3 people [Aubrey Dunn, Pat Lyons and Ray Powell]. Here are the three most likely to have a chance at the office during the next election cycle:
1) Ray Powell: He's a Democrat who has held the office before. I know Ray fairly well and we get along well enough. Ray opposes Federal Land Transfer. Ray banned coyote hunting contests on State Trust Lands during his last term. While he held the office, I met with Ray to discuss allowing camping on State Trust Lands. Ray said he would do what he could. Nothing was done. Ray Powell's most recent notable endorsement is from the "NM Animal Protection Voters".
2) Pat Lyons: He's a Republican Candidate whose actions have been extremely questionable during his time in office. This guy is considered by many to be an absolute criminal. If you detest corruption then it's inherent that you detest Pat Lyons. A book could be written about his SLO legacy but for the Cliff's notes version just google "Pat Lyon's, White's Peak."
Here's the good news for NM Public Land users, I've been working with RMEF who has been working with the SLO to fix the White's Peak mess. You will see great news regarding access there before the end of September. I apologize in advance to any elk hunters who might be affected by the start of construction of an access road (primitive 2-track) which I expect to start about Sept. 15th!
3) Garrett VeneKlasen: While Garrett and I have battled on things over the years I have grown to know him very well. We don't always agree on everything, but he tells the truth and cares as much about Public Lands as I do. The way the State Land Office is currently being run is a disaster. 2 of the 3 candidates I mention have had their chance to fix it. Neither did. Garrett is NOT a career politician. He's a sportsman who sees a problem and believes he can fix it. Of all the candidates running for this office, Garrett is my choice BY FAR! Those who follow public land issues know that Randy knows a few things. He is a non-resident, but his passion for public lands is not limited to his home state of Montana.
If residency matters that much though, keep in mind that Garrett has been endorsed by Senator Martin Heinrich. If one chooses to let party affiliation affect one's vote then so be it. Nobody can deny though, that Martin Heinrich is a champion for public lands. The picture here features Martin Heinrich, Garrett VeneKlasen, Tom Udall, Ryan Callaghan, Land Tawney and a host of other public land powerhouses fighting to get the Sabinoso Wilderness opened up to the public....they are fighting so YOU can access this great treasure!
The only thing standing in the way of Ryan Zinke signing that deal which sits on his desk in front of him is the fact that his "party" has a commitment to some Utah Politicians and the Koch Brothers that they will not expand existing Wilderness areas.
Most the other candidates running for the State Land Office are banking on the fact that most NM voters don't even know the scope of responsibility of the State Land Commissioner. Some of the people running know less than most of those voters.
With all that said, Garrett may not be your ideal choice for NM State Land Commissioner. In fact, as you mentioned there are numerous wealthy LO's who own incredible tracts of private land in our Land of Enchantment. I expect the majority of those individuals will likely NOT want to contribute to Garrett's campaign. Garrett has always been very outspoken about public access issues and about the problems that exist within our State's LO tag distribution policies. I wouldn't expect every NM landowner who is the recipient of "authorizations" to harvest our State's wildlife to jump on board the VeneKlasen express.
They aren't going to answer cause there isn't a good answer. My last $00.02
As I said I look at issues and one has been pointed out, a lot of big land owners are holdings out of state. They don't live here or vote here but they pay to have their interest represented by lobbyist. As a member of the NRA I am sure some of my money is used in states for gun rights and I don't live there.
Here is what I am tired of as a lifelong resident, state lands landlocked and no access to them even though we are paying for access to them. I thought Dunn would work to increase access when he held the G&F hostage to increase hunters fees. Just another way to squeeze water from the turnip.
If those blue squares were green (USFS instead of State Land) would the access be different. I am betting it would be. Making corner hopping legal would open up all those lands but the big fight will be against out of state land holders and the NM Cattle Ranchers Association in my opinion.
Anybody know about the Cooks Peak debacle? National land was being blocked off by private land. Years were spent negotiating with the landholder to have access by paying for an easement. The landowner fought it all the way, keeping the public land blocked off like he thought is should be. A road was built around the private land on public land. As soon as the road was completed the lock on the private land came off. Rancher is doing the same thing in 21A blocking off the north part of the Gila Forest off the Plains of San Augustine.
Same thing with access to Marquez WMA in unit 9. A new road had to be built around the private land. You can guess why. I actually got drawn to hunt Marquez and told the "private land hunter" to get off the WMA and it was not part of the ranch. Threatened to take pictures with GPS locations on a cell phone since we weren't allowed on the ranch and ranch hunters weren't allowed on the WMA.
So those are my reasons I am supporting Garrett. Choose to or not is up to you.