Mule Deer, Elk and Western Big Game Hunting - MonsterMuleys.com

PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF
Archived thread - Read only 
Previous Topic | Next Topic 
Forums Mule Deer
Original Message

BANNOCK1877
(0 posts)
Click to EMail BANNOCK1877 Click to send private message to BANNOCK1877 Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
01:52 AM (MST)
"PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Here they go again.

Just because HR 3855 didn't go thru, (public land sale to pay for Katrina)-- doesn't mean that big piggy bank of public land is safe.

It could be YOUR hunting spot for sale to the highest bidder.

This issue will not die. Perhaps a few "conservation groups" could focus their efforts on the 'macro' crisis at hand, versus the 'micro' projects and squabbling in the ranks.

President Bush's 2007 budget includes an order to the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to sell off as much as 800,000 acres of national lands to generate money for public schools.

The proposal directs the agencies to raise nearly $1 billion for the federal treasury by selling more than 300,000 acres of national forest and up to 500,000 acres of BLM lands, mostly in western states.

The complete list of forest lands (http://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/spd.html) shows most parcels are more than 40 acres and many are in the hundreds of acres.

The BLM has not listed the lands it will sell...


CONGRESSMEN OPPOSE PUBLIC LAND SELL

March 18, 2006

La Plata County's three congressional representatives share concerns about a Bush administration plan that would sell off 300,000 acres of U.S. Forest Service lands - including a possible 440 acres in the San Juan National Forest.
The proposal is intended to assist in paying for upkeep in rural school districts.

Land for sale could include nine parcels in La Plata and Archuleta counties. It also could include up to 500,000 acres of Bureau of Land Management holdings...


  Top


  Table of Contents  

 Subject   Author   Message Date   ID 
 RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-19-06   1 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  bobcatbess      Mar-19-06   2 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  huntindude      Mar-19-06   3 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  JohnnyLegend      Mar-19-06   4 
     RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Skunkterd      Mar-19-06   5 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  COSA      Mar-19-06   6 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  mtmiller      Mar-19-06   7 
 RE: PUBLIC LAN...  OddNut1      Mar-19-06   8 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-19-06   9 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  mtmiller      Mar-19-06   10 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-19-06   11 
     RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Oakbuck      Mar-19-06   12 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  huntindude      Mar-19-06   13 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  COSA      Mar-19-06   14 
       RE: PUBLIC LAN...  BANNOCK1877      Mar-20-06   15 
 RE: PUBLIC LAN...  BANNOCK1877      Mar-20-06   16 
 RE: PUBLIC LAN...  tibbs      Mar-20-06   17 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-20-06   18 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Oakbuck      Mar-20-06   21 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  bobcatbess      Mar-20-06   20 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  tibbs      Mar-21-06   22 
 RE: PUBLIC LAN...  donedeal      Mar-20-06   19 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  tibbs      Mar-21-06   23 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  daggertine      Mar-21-06   24 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  easymoney      Mar-21-06   25 
     RE: PUBLIC LAN...  headbones      Mar-21-06   26 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  MNHunter      Mar-21-06   27 
       RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-21-06   28 
        RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Oakbuck      Mar-21-06   29 
         RE: PUBLIC LAN...  BANNOCK1877      Mar-21-06   30 
          RE: PUBLIC LAN...  bobcatbess      Mar-22-06   31 
           RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-22-06   32 
            RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Bob D.      Mar-22-06   33 
       RE: PUBLIC LAN...  easymoney      Mar-22-06   34 
        RE: PUBLIC LAN...  MNHunter      Mar-22-06   35 
         RE: PUBLIC LAN...  paid2hunt      Mar-22-06   36 
          RE: PUBLIC LAN...  org      Mar-23-06   37 
           RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-25-06   38 
            RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-25-06   40 
       RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-25-06   39 
        RE: PUBLIC LAN...  easymoney      Mar-25-06   41 
         RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-25-06   42 
          RE: PUBLIC LAN...  JohnnyLegend      Mar-25-06   43 
           RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-25-06   46 
        RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Oakbuck      Mar-25-06   44 
         RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-25-06   45 
         RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-25-06   47 
          RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-25-06   48 
           WAIT JUST A FR...  bobcatbess      Mar-25-06   49 
           RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-26-06   50 
            RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-26-06   51 
             RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-26-06   52 
              RE: PUBLIC LAN...  JFWRC      Mar-26-06   53 
               RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-26-06   54 
                RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-26-06   68 
              RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Oakbuck      Mar-26-06   55 
               RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-26-06   56 
                RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Oakbuck      Mar-26-06   57 
                RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Oakbuck      Mar-26-06   58 
               RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Bob D.      Mar-26-06   60 
                RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-26-06   69 
             RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-26-06   62 
 RE: PUBLIC LAN...  eelgrass      Mar-26-06   59 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Bob D.      Mar-26-06   61 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-26-06   63 
    LISTEN UP!!! Y...  bobcatbess      Mar-26-06   64 
     RE: LISTEN UP!...  buttshot      Mar-26-06   66 
      RE: LISTEN UP!...  bobcatbess      Mar-26-06   73 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  D13er      Mar-26-06   67 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-26-06   65 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-26-06   70 
     RE: PUBLIC LAN...  D13er      Mar-26-06   71 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  BuzzH      Mar-26-06   72 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-26-06   74 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  BuzzH      Mar-26-06   75 
     RE: PUBLIC LAN...  D13er      Mar-26-06   76 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-26-06   77 
     RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-26-06   78 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  BuzzH      Mar-26-06   79 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-26-06   80 
       RE: PUBLIC LAN...  BANNOCK1877      Mar-27-06   81 
        RE: PUBLIC LAN...  bobcatbess      Mar-27-06   82 
       RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-27-06   88 
        RE: PUBLIC LAN...  bobcatbess      Mar-28-06   90 
         RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-28-06   91 
 RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-27-06   83 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-27-06   84 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-27-06   87 
 RE: PUBLIC LAN...  eelgrass      Mar-27-06   85 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  bobcatbess      Mar-27-06   86 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-27-06   89 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Bob D.      Mar-28-06   92 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-28-06   93 
     RE: PUBLIC LAN...  bobcatbess      Mar-28-06   94 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Mar-28-06   95 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  tracker12      Mar-30-06   96 
     RE: PUBLIC LAN...  Zigga      Mar-30-06   97 
 RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Mar-30-06   98 
  RE: PUBLIC LAN...  BANNOCK1877      Mar-31-06   99 
   RE: PUBLIC LAN...  buttshot      Apr-02-06   100 
    RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Apr-02-06   101 
     RE: PUBLIC LAN...  mtmiller      Apr-03-06   102 
      RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Apr-03-06   103 
       RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Apr-03-06   104 
        RE: PUBLIC LAN...  mtmiller      Apr-03-06   105 
         RE: PUBLIC LAN...  TFinalshot      Apr-03-06   106 

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

  Messages in this topic  

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
04:47 AM (MST)
1. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

How ironic that Conservatives don't seem to conserve.

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
06:15 AM (MST)
2. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"


I'VE SEEN SOME PRESIDENTS THROW SOME LOW-BLOWS BUT THIS IS BULL$HIT!!!

ALL YOU BUSH LOVERS GO AHEAD AND BRAGG ON HIM NOW,GO AHEAD RUN YOUR MOUTH!!!

THE SNEAKIEST PART IS SAYING THE MONEY IS GOING TO SCHOOLS,95% OF BLIND AMERICANS WILL SUCK THAT ONE UP!!!

OUR GOVERNMENT IS BROKE & GETTING MORE BROKE BY THE DAY!!!

I SEE WHERE THEY PUT IN FOR ANOTHER 780 BILLION DOLLARS FOR THE WAR IN IRAQ,CAN WE AFFORD THIS???

LISTEN UP,THEY COULD SELL EVERY PIECE OF PUBLIC LAND IN THE UNITED STATES & WE'D STILL BE IN THE HOLE,SO ARE YOU GONNA JUST SET AROUND & LET THEM DO IT???

I DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS & I DON'T CARE WHO DOESN'T LIKE MY OPPINION!!!

YOUR BUDDY BUSH HAS PULLED SOME GOOD ONES,ADMIT IT!!!

THE ONLY bobcat THINKING THE SELL OF PUBLIC GROUND SHOULD EQUAL NO LESS THAN IMPEACHMENT!!!

  Top

huntindude
(0 posts)
Click to EMail huntindude Click to send private message to huntindude Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
07:58 AM (MST)
3. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I like the way they spend the money for schools and everything else on a war that will never end. then ear mark the money from the land sales for schools and Katrina so all the Bubbas and Goobers will go for it. one thing about it boys come this November it's judgement day and there's going to be BIG changes in Congress, Bush won't even be able to get approval for his dinner menu . now I just hope it doesn't go to far the other way.

  Top

JohnnyLegend
(0 posts)
Click to EMail JohnnyLegend Click to send private message to JohnnyLegend Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
08:46 AM (MST)
4. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I lived in Texas (no longer now) when Bush was governor and at one point tought he was a decent government official, but he is wrecking this country in many ways. The public land for sale initiative is the last straw for me. Guess I am willing to take a little more risk with respect to the 2nd amendment in order to preserve and protect our public lands. I have never been a big demy or Gore fan, but he did protect our lands and did alot of good for preserving and protecting our awesome public lands. At the end of the day I want to make sure that our public lands stay presrved and protected, so I can cruise the high mountains whether I am carrying a gun, bow or camera. You can bet I am writing my state representatives/public officials on this one. Encourage you all to do this as well. Ultimately, the states will have a final say on this, so let you polticians know your views as I believe we can beat this one if we make ourselves heard! Good thread folks, as this one should not be ignored by any of us. I am a D-I-Y public land hunter and there are hearing from me here in my home state! Best of luck to you all this hunting season!

  Top

Skunkterd
(0 posts)
Click to EMail Skunkterd Click to send private message to Skunkterd Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
09:10 AM (MST)
5. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

This would be a great idea if they were selling land locked ground!!!!!!

  Top

COSA
(824 posts)
Click to EMail COSA Click to send private message to COSA Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
09:19 AM (MST)
6. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Yeah, but I'm wondering why would anyone buy landlocked ground since you basically already own it and don't have to pay taxes on it?

  Top

mtmiller
(990 posts)
Click to EMail mtmiller Click to send private message to mtmiller Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
12:38 PM (MST)
7. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

>This would be a great idea
>if they were selling land
>locked ground!!!!!!

Do you think land exchange would be a better idea?


  Top

OddNut1
(548 posts)
Click to EMail OddNut1 Click to send private message to OddNut1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
02:13 PM (MST)
8. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

When would all of this happen? Actually go on sale? How long does the public have for input, etc?

ODDNUT1
Kirt C.
Hunt Odds.com

  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
03:47 PM (MST)
9. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I think the better idea would be to have anyone that uses public land buys a permit like when you go to the National Parks. It's ridiculous to even think that Hunters own the animals, therefore Hunters must pay for them. Wildlife and wildland require management, which requires money and the land and animals are state owned, not hunter owned. If it's money we really need then everyone needs to pay. Not just hunters. That would generate way more money than a Public Land Sell-Off and we, the Public, would have it forever. If the Public Land Sell-Off goes through then everyone loses.

  Top

mtmiller
(990 posts)
Click to EMail mtmiller Click to send private message to mtmiller Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
04:55 PM (MST)
10. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-19-06 AT 05:02 PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Mar-19-06 AT 04:58 PM (MST)

Zigga, pretty sure we are on the same page; however I don't want this land issue sale to be clouded on where the $$$ are going. This is not an issue of supporting wildlife and wildlife management, but supporting rural schools. Do they need the money, probably, but don't sell our public lands to do it.

Never mind...just hope most see what Bush is doing for the sportsman. What a joke.

  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
05:46 PM (MST)
11. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-19-06 AT 06:18 PM (MST)

Right, I just mean that money can be generated from Public lands for whatever reason they come up with whether it's schools, the War, wildlife, whatever. I am sure AWOL would sell his own mother if she was worth anything. That is just his mentality and we all need to see through the smoke and mirrors. Selling public land to raise money for rural schools........yeah right.

  Top

Oakbuck
(0 posts)
Click to EMail Oakbuck Click to send private message to Oakbuck Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
07:05 PM (MST)
12. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Zigga,

Your a typical liberal, always trying to figure out another way to get into everybody's back pocket.

I wish the dems would take over the House in Nov and impeach Bush. Then we would have President Cheney AND get to watch all you liberals scream like mashed cats.

  Top

huntindude
(0 posts)
Click to EMail huntindude Click to send private message to huntindude Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
07:40 PM (MST)
13. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Cheney would be impeached faster than Bush, he's smarter for sure but he's got so many skeletons in his closet he can't get the door shut. I wonder if Haliburton will buy our public lands in no bid buy outs?

  Top

COSA
(824 posts)
Click to EMail COSA Click to send private message to COSA Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-19-06, 
07:41 PM (MST)
14. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Rural schools...That trillion in Iraq has nothing to do with our budget problems. And I generally vote republican, but Bush is a tard. I'm hoping that one of the parties can somehow get a canidate that is in the middle and somewhat competent.

  Top

BANNOCK1877
(0 posts)
Click to EMail BANNOCK1877 Click to send private message to BANNOCK1877 Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-20-06, 
01:38 AM (MST)
15. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Dumping small land-locked parcels is a good thing---provided the proceeds are put to work blocking up larger sections of public land for our use.

However, you're right, what rancher would want to PAY for land that he already controls and uses, and doesn't pay taxes on?

This sale is short-sighted...and for school funding of all things. I might be able to buy it if it was for defense spending in a war with China...

There has to be some consideration for NEPA, ect., when you talk about transferring public land that may have sensitive species, or critical habitat--- to private ownership.


Where are the MDF, RMEF, FNAWS on this issue?

  Top

BANNOCK1877
(0 posts)
Click to EMail BANNOCK1877 Click to send private message to BANNOCK1877 Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-20-06, 
03:00 AM (MST)
16. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Here's more info on the types of land that's being offered for sale...you may recognize some of these areas, we're talking prime real estate, not just landlocked and worthless pieces.

Lands proposed for sale include:


**River front property on the Hoback River south of Jackson, Wyoming-excellent habitat for Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout and Grizzly Bear;

**Land along Big Creek in Montana’s Paradise Valley that provides public fishing access;

**In Idaho, a parcel on the Caribou-Targhee National Forest provides the only public road access to the north end of the Elkhorn Mountains, a site that is popular with hunters and horseback riders.

Clearly, these lands aren’t useless.

You can visit the Forest Service’s website for a complete list of parcels of land for sale: http://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/spd.html.

The Forest Service lists parcels by state, forest and township, have your local Forest Service maps handy because navigating the list is difficult.


SRS_Land_Sales@fs.fed.us

  Top

tibbs
(0 posts)
Click to EMail tibbs Click to send private message to tibbs Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-20-06, 
08:35 AM (MST)
17. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

To my knowledge this has been going on for years and did not start with Bush. Utah has been selling this type of land that i know of before the 2000 election. So that tells me it points to another person. If the money stays were it is earmarked too I don’t have a problem with it. The funny thing is that they are selling the surface rights only. That means they still own all the minerals under the surface. So in In Utah’s case if you find oil on property you bought........you guessed it the government owns it even though it is on your property. Surprise they also keep the water rights.

Don’t steal
“The government hates competition”


  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-20-06, 
08:30 PM (MST)
18. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Oakbuck,

...........and your point is????????????

  Top

Oakbuck
(0 posts)
Click to EMail Oakbuck Click to send private message to Oakbuck Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-20-06, 
10:41 PM (MST)
21. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Point is simple. It's a stupid idea to charge people to go on lands WE own.

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-20-06, 
09:26 PM (MST)
20. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"


tibbs!!!

YOU SURELY AIN'T SUCKING IT IN THAT IT ALL GOES TO SCHOOLS???

OUR GOVERNMENT IS BROKE!!!

BUSH HASN'T HELPED THAT SITUATION!!!

THE ONLY bobcat WONDERING IF ALL YOU BUSH LOVERS ARE GOING TO BRAGG HIM UP WHEN HE SALES OFF YOUR FAVORITE HUNTING GROUNDS???
COWBOY-UP & ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!NO,IT'S NOT DIRECTED AT JUST YOU tibbs!!!

  Top

tibbs
(0 posts)
Click to EMail tibbs Click to send private message to tibbs Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-21-06, 
11:38 AM (MST)
22. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

>
>tibbs!!!
>
>YOU SURELY AIN'T SUCKING IT IN
>THAT IT ALL GOES TO
>SCHOOLS???
>
>OUR GOVERNMENT IS BROKE!!!
>
>BUSH HASN'T HELPED THAT SITUATION!!!
>
>THE ONLY bobcat WONDERING IF ALL
>YOU BUSH LOVERS ARE GOING
>TO BRAGG HIM UP WHEN
>HE SALES OFF YOUR FAVORITE
>HUNTING GROUNDS???
>COWBOY-UP & ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!NO,IT'S NOT
>DIRECTED AT JUST YOU tibbs!!!
>


no I dont believe it all goes to the shools I would be suprised if even 10% made it back to the schools. I do have to admit though if I had money to burn I wouldn't mind owning 640+ acres that I would be guarnteed to hunt on the rest of my life. The good part about the 640 acres is in utah that make you elegible for a land owners tage. think how nice it would be to get a land owners tag in southern UT every year for the rest of your life. That is until the fish and game scratches tht program.

If you have any money to burn, send it my way.
Tibbs

  Top

donedeal
(0 posts)
Click to EMail donedeal Click to send private message to donedeal Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-20-06, 
09:23 PM (MST)
19. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Bush ain't stupid, he wants you to think he is, Now I voted for the dude but I'm not sure where he's coming from nowa days.

he wants all public lands to be privatly owned by big business, keep an eye on who buys the land, his cronies of course!.

  Top

tibbs
(0 posts)
Click to EMail tibbs Click to send private message to tibbs Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-21-06, 
11:40 AM (MST)
23. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

is that why chaney shot his huntin "buddy". Maybe he was bidding up the purchase price.

  Top

daggertine
(0 posts)
Click to EMail daggertine Click to send private message to daggertine Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-21-06, 
12:41 PM (MST)
24. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Selling public land is nothing but a quick fix .That money only won't last forever for ,then what ? sell more public land uutil it is all gone.And when that money runs out where are they going to get their money ? Don't get me wrong rural schools need funding but this is not the way to do it.We need to call and write our senators and congressmen and voice our opinions.Just my opinion.

  Top

easymoney
(686 posts)
Click to EMail easymoney Click to send private message to easymoney Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-21-06, 
03:30 PM (MST)
25. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

"We need to call and write our senators and congressmen and voice our opinions."
You hit the nail right on it's pointy little head, daggertine.
We all who love and use the outdoors need to make our feelings known to those, who would do this.
There will always be those who "want" and those taxpayers who "pay" for these growing social programs. Selling off "surplus" land is not the answer. Cutting spending and dropping crazy social programs is...


Stop Global Whining

  Top

headbones
(145 posts)
Click to EMail headbones Click to send private message to headbones Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-21-06, 
04:51 PM (MST)
26. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Dudes, this is land that is not helping any of you out. Any products taken off this land are not being taxed and it is alot of land-locked land that you cant get on anyways. It is land that is next to existing private lands which the owners will actually do something with. This is worthless land as it now stands in the hands of the federal government. Let the resources be developed from these lands, not locked up in red-tape management. I am for it! sell it off! it will be in better hands than the National Forest Circus and NEPA controlled government agencies who dont have time to do what they are paid for. Let the minerals, wood, grazing, and recreation oopportunities on these lands be used and paid for. This land sell off is what the government needs more of. My two-cents!!

  Top

MNHunter
(944 posts)
Click to EMail MNHunter Click to send private message to MNHunter Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-21-06, 
04:58 PM (MST)
27. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I have a question:

If this is all landlocked land, then the landowners surrounding the land are the only one who can access it unless someone pays them a trespass fee. Why would the landowner buy the landlocked land? He doesn't pay taxes on it yet by default gets sole access to use it. No one else will buy it because they can't get to it.

Any thoughts?

  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-21-06, 
05:33 PM (MST)
28. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-21-06 AT 06:14 PM (MST)

Oakbuck,

"Point is simple. It's a stupid idea to charge people to go on lands WE own."

But it's a stupider idea to let AWOL sell the "lands WE own". Isn't it?

Chances are some trillionaires are going to end up buying these public land parcels and basically ruin it by strip mining it, logging it, or turning it into a resort. It won't look the same after these people are done with it and it won't be accessible to you and me whatever they do. Although I'm not totally against logging under the right circumstances. Whoever the land ends up with won't leave it as is I would assume. It won't end here, they will just keep selling. These areas might be wintering or breeding or calving grounds for your favorite critters if not your favorite hunting grounds.

Remember back in 2000 when we had that pesky "Surplus" that AWOL gave back to all the rich folk and you and I got a few hundred dollars? It would be nice to get that back. Those were the days.

  Top

Oakbuck
(0 posts)
Click to EMail Oakbuck Click to send private message to Oakbuck Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-21-06, 
09:03 PM (MST)
29. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-21-06 AT 09:05 PM (MST)

>Remember back in 2000 when we
>had that pesky "Surplus" that
>AWOL gave back to all
>the rich folk and you
>and I got a few
>hundred dollars? It would
>be nice to get that
>back. Those were the
>days.

I hope you take this in the respectful way it's meant.

You have all the markings of a liberal 'I hate bush no matter what' kinda guy. Most liberals use name calling (AWOL), talk in half truths, and figure if they tell a lie over and over and over again it somehow becomes the truth. I'm not buying it.

There was never a surplus. It was a projected surplus to happen in 2010 or later. Never was an actual surplus. Then along came two events of the war and a recession, (inherited from the end of Clinton years BTW). I'm as mad as the next guy that the gov spends money like a drunken sailor but Dems won't consider cutting the growth in socialist spending and the Republicans won't raise taxes. So here we are.

Bush tax cuts are not for the rich. Because I pay taxes, I got a tax cut from Bush and I'm certainly not rich. Everybody that pays taxes got a cut. I know people that didn't get a tax cut because they don't make enough money to pay fed taxes in the first place so how could they get a cut?

As for the land sale, I believe it is a good thing to have a little more public land in private hands because most times private owners take better care of it. Some posts on this thread are making it sound like every last acre is being sold off, but 800,000 acres is a drop in the bucket compared to the total fed lands here in the west. It won't affect most hunters' access one bit and as someone correctly pointed out, it's been going on for a long time. The BLM has regular land sales here in Nevada and most of the money goes for local needs.

You came across as a garden variety liberal Bush hater, looking for another issue to go off about and thats fine with me, they can impeach him as far as I care. But the minute someone talks about charging me to go onto federal lands to hunt, thats when I call BS.

Clinton pulled that trick with the national parks and it really irked me, but I don't go to national parks anyway because I hate to deal with the people that run them, mostly liberal environmentalists. If the dems ran the show again, I wouldn't put it past them to charge for access on all public lands.


Having said all this, can we get back to talking about why we all come to MM.

Good hunting and best to ya,
Oakbuck

  Top

BANNOCK1877
(0 posts)
Click to EMail BANNOCK1877 Click to send private message to BANNOCK1877 Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-21-06, 
11:16 PM (MST)
30. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Good and valid points, all. There's validity in liquidation and in conservation--- but you can't apply a single solution to what's being proposed.

First, you need to know WHAT land is being considered for sale, WHERE it's at, what 2nd, 3rd, 4th order effects will come of it's release from federal management. (as has been said prev., winter range, transition areas, development, habitat fragmentation, etc.)

Second, consider that the dollars gained by THIS proposal DO NOT go back into the BLM's land fund. Not to a fund for buying private land to increase the size of accesable public lands, or to buy access across private land, or to develop access to present public parcels...NADA.

This money goes to off-set rural schools in California, Oregon, Washington who have been impacted by low timber sales. This is to offset an existing subsidy--education,a totally non-natural resource management related project at that. It doesn't go back to the state where the land was sold (unless yer one of the above).

So yeah, maybe we should liquidate some of the excess--- but once you sell it, there goes the bargaining chip for future public land acquisitions, and the cash source for public lands projects that benefit your access to YOUR land. The land projects money has to come from somewhere and the funds are drying up.

...THis is only one aspect, there are more impacts issues i.e.; mineral rights, grazing rights, PILT funds and county taxes, etc.


If you are a public land hunter, I would highly reccomend you get your hands on the list for your state and check the locations on the auction block, yours might be safe, or you might be sorry...

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-22-06, 
05:12 AM (MST)
31. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"


BANNOCK!!!

THE MONEY WILL NOT BE GOING TO SCHOOLS!!!

'LITTLE GEORGE' SURE CAN SUCKER ALOT OF PEOPLE INTO:WELL IF ITS GOING TO SCHOOLS I GUESS IT'S ALRIGHT'!!!

WAKE UP!!!

OUR GOVERNMENT IS BROKE,IF YOU CAN'T SEE THIS YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT THE DEFICIT NUMBERS JUST SINCE 'LITTLE GEORGE' TOOK OVER!!!

THIS LITTLE MICKEY MOUSE CHICKEN $HIT WAR IS A REAL SLAP IN THE FACE,FIGHTING IT LIKE WE'VE BEEN FIGHTING IT WE WILL BE THERE FOR ETERNITY!!!

NOW ALOT OF THE IRAQI'S WE'VE TRAINED AS POLICE ARE TURNING ON US!!!

DOES THIS TELL YOU WHAT TYPE OF PEOPLE THEY ARE???

IF THESE PEOPLE HAD ANY GUTS AT ALL THEY WOULD OF OVER THROWED SADAMN INSANE YEARS AGO!!!

WE CAN'T AFFORD TO LET OUR GOVERNMENT START SELLING PUBLIC GROUND,NO MATTER WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING ITS A VERY SHORT QUICK FIX FOR ANYTHING,I'LL BET THE MONEY IS ALREADY SPENT!!!

THE ONLY bobcat SUGGESTING AMERICANS BETTER WAKE THE HELL UP,COWBOY-UP IF YOU HAVE TOO,WHERES THIS COUNTRY HEADED???

  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-22-06, 
08:54 AM (MST)
32. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Oakbuck,

I respect your points but I wholeheartedly disagree that Clinton had anything to do with 911 and all the other stuff. Bush, as you call him, was in office for 9 months before that happened. 9 MONTHS-Give him some credit. I am just saying that if we held on to that so-called "Surplus" (I didn't name it that) then we would be financially more secure and we wouldn't be talking about selling public lands right now. I know this country was still in debt but we were pulling out of it. NOW LOOK AT US!!!
If I ran my finances like Bush runs ours, I would be out on the street.

SAVE OUR PUBLIC LANDS!!!!!!!!!

  Top

Bob D.
(1250 posts)
Click to EMail Bob%20D. Click to send private message to Bob%20D. Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-22-06, 
09:52 AM (MST)
33. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Bobcatbess and Zigga, I'd vote either of you in as president. We could use a president with a little commons sense and a little less greed. Bush is a joke.

  Top

easymoney
(686 posts)
Click to EMail easymoney Click to send private message to easymoney Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-22-06, 
10:31 AM (MST)
34. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I agree with you on this point, mnhunter...
This whole issue is being done to pay for the ever increasing social programs. It is a one time fix and is not the first time it has been done. What will be done once the "public land" is all sold? Eminent domain?
Control spending and you have control over the economy...


Stop Global Whining

  Top

MNHunter
(944 posts)
Click to EMail MNHunter Click to send private message to MNHunter Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-22-06, 
11:09 AM (MST)
35. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

"Control spending and you have control over the economy..."

You got that right.

  Top

paid2hunt
(0 posts)
Click to EMail paid2hunt Click to send private message to paid2hunt Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-22-06, 
11:29 AM (MST)
36. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

For those that are interested in prices.
the land they are selling in utah ranges from an acre near bear lake, 640+ acres in the middle of the deseret, or 120 acres near a cedar city school which is currenlty on the auction block for a minimum of 5.4mil. Past sales on thes properties rang from $233.00 an acre to $188,000.00 and acre.

http://www.utahtrustlands.com/surface/landSales.asp

paid2hunt

  Top

org
(0 posts)
Click to EMail org Click to send private message to org Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-23-06, 
12:33 PM (MST)
37. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I think that's state land, not NF or BLM. Different deal.

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
08:54 AM (MST)
38. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I have no problem at all with this land sale. In fact I think it a good idea, the less land the feds own, the better. Private ownership is a good thing. Goverment agencies that own land are joke to say the least, the ways in wich they are used, abused and maintained. I would like the opportunity to purchase 640 acres or more right smack in the middle of the Manti-Lasal. I could fence it off and herd the elk and deer onto it just like the Utes do out in the Basin. Then I could sale off said animals or charge Bobcat an outrageous price to harvest one of my hand fed lunkers. But, in case you have'nt noticed the land picked for sale is nowhere near the Manti.
There is allready a lot of private land where I hunt and the land is in better shape than the adjacent "public" land. Private ownership does not always mean better stewardship of the land than the way the "GOV" maintains it, but 9 times out of 10, it is better quality land because the private landowners want the same thing as you and me, good forage for wildlife and a secluded place to get away from all the "ethical" hunters.
Tell me how the government manages the land better than private individuals. Damn near all the BLM and NF lands have been scarred almost beyond repair from 4 wheelers and campers and outdoor recreationists.Look at most private land and you won't see this stuff happening.
Hell ya, let the rich get richer. This is a "free" country, all you winers wining about the rich getting richer, if you want to be rich, get off your lazy asses and come up with a way to make good, big money and you can be one of them too. Otherwise, stay at your piddly jobs making $10 to $30 bucks an hour and keep on wining.
Every one of you that is pissed at President Bush can vote against all Republican candidates this fall. With a majority Democratic Congress and Senate you may think things will be better but only time will tell.
Zigga, I don't recall a surplus at all durring the 2000 campaign, Clinton damn near had the deficit deleted, then Bush was elected and now you know the rest of the story. Elect Hillary in 2008, maybe she can delete the deficit again and maybe we will still be allowed to keep firearms, but then again maybe not.
Personally, I plan on doing a lot of home work and when the sale happens, hopefully, I will be able to aquire the best investment of my life!!!!!!! Depending on the quality of the land when it is purchased, it will be 10 times better after a few long years of hard work,then I will not have to compete with all the high altitude tune-up opportunities.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
09:10 AM (MST)
40. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

You have to be kidding me. . . Buttshot, you make a few points, but overall if we were to follow your ideals, we'd be looking for america all over again, and we now know that that we found all were going to find. It's hard for me to invision this country devolving into england, did'nt people leave england and britten for a reason? I know there are a lot of guys out there who think the way you do. I'd likely buy you a beer in a local bar if I met you, but I'll fight you all day and night over the sale of our public lands culture.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
09:03 AM (MST)
39. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Wow, this is not about land access, it's about speculation, and land develpment! Minerals, homes, oil, etc. Much of the land, if sold, will not be accessable anyway as it will be mined or drilled. The buyers, not you and me and the little local rancher, are buying on speculation and plans to develop. So, while it might be locked up now, at least it's not a new house, or a mine site. . .

  Top

easymoney
(686 posts)
Click to EMail easymoney Click to send private message to easymoney Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
10:09 AM (MST)
41. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-25-06 AT 10:10 AM (MST)

Tfinal,
Very good point...
If anyone has been to Europe, where there is little to NO public land or access(it is all private except for parks), making hunting, fishing and other sports requiring the use of vast tracts of land, a purely pay as you go affair. It is required to use guides, to know someone who owns the land and gives you permission, and have a large expendable cash flow in order to even think about hunting or fishing. That's why only the wealthy and well connected are able to...
We are very lucky in this country , so far...

Stop Global Whining

  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
10:29 AM (MST)
42. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Good idea Buttshot. If we sell off all our public land, then less people will be able to hunt and then we won't have any need for firearms.

Give Me A Friggin Break!

  Top

JohnnyLegend
(0 posts)
Click to EMail JohnnyLegend Click to send private message to JohnnyLegend Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
11:29 AM (MST)
43. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I have emailed and written my US Congreesman. Will continue to contact my governemnt officials on my opposition to this. Here in Virginia, we have tremendous public land and the opposition here is strong, very strong. Our local government is against it and they are making alot of noise. I hope all you write letters expressing your position. We all pay federal taxes and most of us state taxes, so by gosh we should be heard loud and clear! I believe we can and will stop the sale, at least I am going to do everything I can to try and hope you will too!

I am not against the concept, I live in a rural area and want our schools to be supported, but the $1 billion is nothing in the federal budget and the Bush administration has a hundred other ways it can fund the school inititative without selling our public land.

Please write you government officials!

JL

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
01:00 PM (MST)
46. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I also agree with you about finding the funding for the rural schools elsewhere. It is absolutely needed and can be accomplished if the Imperial Bush Regime would be willing to have open dialogue with different groups and orginizations.
Don't get me wrong on the land sale thing , I will try to buy some but think it is the wrong way to fund schools.

  Top

Oakbuck
(0 posts)
Click to EMail Oakbuck Click to send private message to Oakbuck Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
11:33 AM (MST)
44. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Almost all of the land east of colorado is in private ownership isn't it? How is this bad?

Bannock, didn't you say they are NOT selling the mineral rights?

Too much chicken little going on here!

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
12:54 PM (MST)
45. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Tfinallshot, you are right about leaving England, only you have the wrong reason. We fought the American Revolution because England was applying unfair taxation and the wrong political views for the people. Our forefathers petitoned the British Government many times explaining the views of the settlers, the Brit's refused to even hear there pleadings. The English settlers(the new American colonists)had been under English rule from the time the first white man left England to colonize America and had no problem for many years. They fought the Revolution to escape the English Crown's tyrrany, unfair taxation and many other reasons but I don't recall anything about no more land. Maybe you should read the Constitution, it clearly states why the "rebels" denounced and withdrew from the Brits.
Ya Zigga, I agree with you no more public land means there would no longer be a reason to own a gun. You can do better than that, even the anti-gun crowds adolscent children can do better than that. With your mentality, why not just ask everyone that has less than 10 acres of private land to turn in their guns now.
Yes Oakbuck, the majority of the land east of the rocky's is private land, I do think that there are enough deer and fish in the eastern U.S. to keep them all happy. The Whitetail is slowly taking over all of the states anyway.

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
01:01 PM (MST)
47. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

A lot of chicken little going on here!!!!

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
01:39 PM (MST)
48. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Oh, that must be why they wrote Article I Section 8.

Are you sure youre reading the U.S. Constitution?

“English Crown's tyrrany, unfair taxation and many other reasons but I don't recall anything about no more land.

What do you think taking American land away from Americans and selling it to your friends amounts too? That's what Pombo and Bush are up too. Land is wealth and power.

Wow, I'm always enlighted by the range of values in this country.

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-25-06, 
03:01 PM (MST)
49. "WAIT JUST A FRICKEN MINUTE buttshot!!!"


buttshot!!!

JUDAS FRICKEN PRIEST!!!

YOU'RE GOING TO CHARGE A FRIEND (ME)BIG $$$ TO HUNT BIG STINKY LAND LOCKED ELK ON YOUR GROUND???

THE ONLY bobcat THINKING:WITH FRIENDS LIKE THAT I HOPE I DON'T HAVE ANY ENEMIES AROUND THIS JOINT!!!


  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
11:25 AM (MST)
50. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

TFinalshot, I stand corrected, there is nothing in the U.S. Constition about leaving England because they ran out of land. Article 1, Section 8 talks of taxation and other things but nothing to do with land sales. Unless you want to argue unfair taxes imposed by our government, wich I would not argue, then I see not what Article 1 Section 8 has to do with this discussion.
I should have said , to read the Declaration of Independence, it explains all the reasons that we left England, none of wich say anything of land sales or no more land available.
In fact, reading the declaration of Independence, one can only understand that when they left England to colonize America, they still were willingly subjected to English rule. It wasn't until the British Crown treated the colonists like slaves that the "Rebel Citizens" decided to declare their independence.
Still no mention of no more land in England as to why we left England.
I am not sure, but I don't believe you can even own land in England, it is either leased or rented from land barons.
Why should we go down the same path as England? I think private ownership is ten times better than government ownership.
Bobcat, speeking in a way to get your dander roughed, and it worked. I would'nt let anyone hunt my property,and when it is private property,there is nothing wrong with it.
The amount of land in the hands of the federal gov, total acreage, and the amount proposed for sale, is less than 1/10th of 1% of the total land held by the feds. A tiny bit and mostly of no use to the feds, why not let it be auctioned off?
Everyone here acts as if it were all the public land in the states, I really can't see the Bush Regime's selling everything in 2 years before he is ejected from office. Remeber too, that I agreed previously, I don't think this is the right way to fund rural schools. The amount of money expected to be raised from the "proposed" sale is a drop in the bucket and can be aquired easily if the pork in D.C. were trimmed even a small amount.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
01:33 PM (MST)
51. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-06 AT 01:57 PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-06 AT 01:37 PM (MST)

You said,

"I am not sure, but I don't believe you can even own land in England, it is either leased or rented from land barons.
Why should we go down the same path as England? I think private ownership is ten times better than government ownership."

Ahhhhh, does anyone smell the irony in this. . .? I'm either missing your point, or your statement is illogical, or maybe both. . . . So which way is better, all private, or all public? If it's private, aren’t we right back to the "land barons" scenario that you describe? I'm confused by your logic. . .

Forget the constitution and I will forgive you for confusing it with other old documents. . . LOL

I think if youre unable to make the conection between wildlife, like deer and elk, public land, and the commons, than obviously nothing I have said or will say will make any differenc to you. Where are you from anyway?

Look, the point is that we in the west don’t like to be controlled by our neighbors, no matter who they are. Moreover, most of us dont like the thought of a selling off what we feel is our lifestyle - open access to our public resources. The western land heritage makes this country unique and special among most all other nations in the world. Most people that are for the sale of everything already own a bunch of it, or wont ever get a chance to buy it, or see it, or be on it, so they don’t really care what happens to it.

As a matter of history, shortly after settling in America our founding fathers recognized the dangers and inequities of the European wildlife management model. In the old country wildlife was considered the property of the landowner and only the privileged could hunt “the kings deer”. From our very beginning we recognized that part of the freedoms in America must include the premise that wildlife is a public resource, available to all Americans regardless of income or social status.

1683 – William Penn’ Charter for the Commonwealth included the right of the average man to hunt and fish on all lands not enclosed for livestock

1842 – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the New Jersey oystermen in an argument by the landowner that he owned the oysters stuck in the mud of his property. Part of that decision was the granting of sovereignty of the waterways, the soil, and the wildlife in them to the people of each state

1905 – President Teddy Roosevelt writes: Public rights comes first and private interests second

Roosevelt outlaws commercial hunting, initiates the concept of “public Lands” and promotes the basic practices of sustainable wildlife management

Subsequent court rulings and laws have refined the unique American wildlife management system: Wildlife is held in trust by the state, managed by state wildlife agencies, for the benefit of the public, who collectively own it


Wildlife is a Public Trust Resource - With a history going back to Roman law the simple concept of Public Trust is that certain resources are so important for a society that they must be held in trust and managed for the benefit of all citizens. Putting up a fence that blocks movement of wildlife violates public trust doctrine by stealing a public resource and recreating the elitism of old Europe.

You can read more at:

http://www.real-hunters.com/history-of-NAWCM.cfm

  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
04:25 PM (MST)
52. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

What a history lesson guys! Thanks!

I know how difficult it is in my state to hunt whitetail bucks, pheasants, antelope, big muley bucks, ducks, geese, turkeys etc. because these animals, for the most part, are only on private land. If more land is privatized then hunting will become available only for people willing to pay trespass fees. How about it Buttshot, how much are you going to charge Bobcat to hunt your property? Chances are you won't want anyone on your land unless they bring cash. Hunting numbers will drop no matter what you may think. People just won't be willing to pay up. Chances are this public land will go to the highest bidder and nobody reading this thread will be the highest bidder. It's quite simple and if you don't understand the problems to arise by selling off public lands then hunting and the outdoors isn't a very big part of your way of life. So to some of you, selling off private land really is no big deal.

  Top

JFWRC
(1154 posts)
Click to EMail JFWRC Click to send private message to JFWRC Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
04:38 PM (MST)
53. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I looked a the legal descriptions on the Cibola Lands in NM. They are landlocked at this point. I can't get to them if I wanted to. The trade idea makes sense but if I were the landowner what motive would I have to trade if I already had the use of the land. I personally see this as means to generate money to take care of the deficit now. I haven't looked at all parcels but IMHO these make sense.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
06:23 PM (MST)
54. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I'm not against the meaningful trade, swap, or sale of small and scattard tracks of public land. I think that if the land deal benifits the resouces, and would be the least-cost, long-term solution to a local property issues than small land trades should be allowd. However, I'm against the wholesale disposal of our public lands, of any size, especially when it's all done behind closed doors.

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
08:56 PM (MST)
68. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

TFinalshot, it is not wholesale disposal behind closed doors. This being dispursed to all through the media, hardly behind closed doors.

  Top

Oakbuck
(0 posts)
Click to EMail Oakbuck Click to send private message to Oakbuck Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
06:24 PM (MST)
55. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-06 AT 06:44 PM (MST)

Zigga, TFinalshot, BANNOCK and all you other chicken littles:

REALITY CHECK #1
The land to be sold, 309,421 acres, is less than 1/1000th of 1% (.000440%) of federally owned lands (703,355,900 acres)! You make it sound like if the sale happens we'll all be hunting in Sherwood Forest!

REALITY CHECK #2
Almost all of the parcels being sold are surrounded by privately owned lands and SHOULD be put in private hands. They are landlocked parcels which are good to no one as they are.

REALITY CHECK #3
Zigga said: "It's quite simple and if you don't understand the problems to arise by selling off public lands then hunting and the outdoors isn't a very big part of your way of life."

What a load of crap to say that those of us who approach this issue with common sense and reason, are somehow less outdoorsman than those who are absolutely positive the sky is falling!

REALITY CHECK #4

buttshot said: "I am not sure, but I don't believe you can even own land in England, it is either leased or rented from land barons. Why should we go down the same path as England? I think private ownership is ten times better than government ownership."

To which TFinalshot said:
"Ahhhhh, does anyone smell the irony in this. . .? I'm either missing your point, or your statement is illogical, or maybe both. . . . So which way is better, all private, or all public? If it's private, aren’t we right back to the "land barons" scenario that you describe? I'm confused by your logic. . . "

Yup, you missed the point.

REALITY CHECK #5

TFinalshot said:
"Moreover, most of us dont like the thought of a selling off what we feel is our lifestyle - open access to our public resources. The western land heritage makes this country unique and special among most all other nations in the world."

Agreed! But that is NOT what is happening here. (See #1)


I could go on but it just takes too much wasted energy to keep arguing with liberals.

  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
06:30 PM (MST)
56. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Oakbuck,

..................and your point is??????????????

  Top

Oakbuck
(0 posts)
Click to EMail Oakbuck Click to send private message to Oakbuck Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
06:45 PM (MST)
57. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Dude, GET REAL!

  Top

Oakbuck
(0 posts)
Click to EMail Oakbuck Click to send private message to Oakbuck Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
06:48 PM (MST)
58. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Yup Zigga, thats what I thought you'd say.

  Top

Bob D.
(1250 posts)
Click to EMail Bob%20D. Click to send private message to Bob%20D. Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
07:56 PM (MST)
60. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-06 AT 07:57 PM (MST)

>REALITY CHECK #2
>Almost all of the parcels being
>sold are surrounded by privately
>owned lands and SHOULD be
>put in private hands. They
>are landlocked parcels which are
>good to no one as
>they are.

I don't agree with this. Just because these parcels may not be accessible to the public, does not mean they are not valuable for wildlife. What if the private land is developed and turned into houses, schools, golf courses, etc.??? That chunk of public land may be all the wildlife have left.
Besides, the landlocked parcels can still be hunted by hunters with chute planes and helicopters, so they ARE good to some people as they are.

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:02 PM (MST)
69. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Bob D. , if you did a little research you would find that these parcels, (understand this) UNDER CONSIDERATION are not located anywhere good for development,schools or golf courses.

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
08:17 PM (MST)
62. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

So, your basic argument is that you don't want to endanger wildlife or loose hunting privelidges, understandable, I agree here.
With the land baron thing, the only way that will happen is if all, 100%, everything public, was sold to private individuals or corporations. You know as well as anyone else here that, that will never happen. Too many national parks and monuments,refuge's and wilderness area's, and these will never be sold either. All of the national forest area's that can be used for recreation and sustaining wildlife will never be sold as well, too many environmentalist orginizations to allow that. In fact, some of these orginizations help to keep wild area's wild. Point in fact, SUWA has just helped in the new Cedar Breaks monument here in Utah,(now you know where I'm from, born and raised) as well as the Sierra group fighting anything and everything remotely detrimental to wildlife.
Everyone here who is against these land sales, are being very paranoid. You should do some research into the matter and you will find that the miniscule amount of land being sold and their locations are not doing the feds, the public, you, or I any good at all. In fact because of the remote and inaccesable locations of these small amounts of real estate the public and the feds cannot use them now. So, why not sell them to the highest bidder and use the money for the social programs that everybody cannot deny, can use the revenue?

  Top

eelgrass
(21259 posts)
Click to EMail eelgrass Click to send private message to eelgrass Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
07:53 PM (MST)
59. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I think the point Oakbush was trying to make is that the facts aren't important to a liberal.

My guess is that a lot more land is made public every year on average than is made private.

How many hundreds of thousands of acres has been taken out of private hands for Monuments and Parks and Wilderness in the past 10 years alone? I know of at least 10,000 just in my County alone. The Government paid $65,000 an acre for 7,500 acres of private timber land in Northern California. That's right almost $490 million. Not only did we use taxpayer money to buy it, that land is now off the tax roles and will never bring in another dime.

My point is the sky is not falling over this land deal. We're not running out of public land. It's not a vast right wing conspiracy. It's just another opportunity for Republican bashers to twist the truth in their never ending effort to gain control. If a Democrat president had made the same proposal you would be fine with it.

  Top

Bob D.
(1250 posts)
Click to EMail Bob%20D. Click to send private message to Bob%20D. Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
08:02 PM (MST)
61. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

eelgrass, I don't think it makes any difference to anybody whether something like this is proposed by a Republican or a Democrat.
You say "How many hundreds of thousands of acres has been taken out of private hands for Monuments and Parks and Wilderness in the past 10 years alone?" Well, couldn't the same be said about the number of acres of private land that has been developed and taken away from wildlife? This is why we need our public lands. Everything else has the potential to be converted into pavement and homes.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
08:33 PM (MST)
63. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

"How many hundreds of thousands of acres has been taken out of private hands for Monuments and Parks and Wilderness in the past 10 years alone?"

Exactly ZERO!

Willing sellers sell to the government. Based on the "conservative" logic that some of you say is what you stand for, the owner of that land has to right to sell. When a monument is established, private land is not included.

So, tell me how a monument designation takes private land?

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
08:42 PM (MST)
64. "LISTEN UP!!! YOU LISTENING???"


YOU BOYS STILL DON'T GET IT NOR WILL YOU ACCEPT THE FACTS!!!

OUR GOVERNMENT IS BROKE,ARE YOU LISTENING???

NOW THEY ARE TRYING TO GET THEIR FOOT IN THE DOOR,YOU GUESSED IT,SELLING PUBLIC GROUND!!!

THEY COULD SELL EVERY PIECE & OUR ASSES WOULD STILL BE IN A BIND!!!

Buttshot,SOME FRIEND YOU ARE,YOU'RE GOING TO CHARGE ME TO HUNT YOUR GROUND???

THE ONLY bobcat NOT AGREEING WITH YOUR BUDDY 'LITTLE GEORGE',YOU MAY NOT LIKE IT & I DON'T CARE & NO,I'M NOT A DEMOCRAT EITHER!!!

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
08:50 PM (MST)
66. "RE: LISTEN UP!!! YOU LISTENING???"

Bobcat, had I known the point you were trying to make, our goverment is broke and has not a clue how to pay the debt, I never would have responded to this post.
I agree with you there!!!
Read one of my other comments, NO, I would not charge you or anyone else to hunt my stinking land, it just would not be hunted at all, to include myself. The big game animals in Utah need refuge durring the hunts and they would be able to at least sleep peacefully on my spread.

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:10 PM (MST)
73. "RE: LISTEN UP!!! YOU LISTENING???"


buttshot!!!

I AGREE!!!

BIG GAME GETS CONTINUOUS & OVERLAPPED HUNTING FOR 6 MONTHS!!!

GIVE THEM A FRICKEN BREAK!!!

THE ONLY bobcat HOPEING WHOEVER BUYS THE GROUND WILL PUT IT TO GOOD SENSIBLE USE!!!

  Top

D13er
(0 posts)
Click to EMail D13er Click to send private message to D13er Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
08:53 PM (MST)
67. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Not true Tfinalshot. Santa Rosa Island off the California Coast was a 52,000 acre Island owned by a cattle company called Vail & Vickers. It was taken by act of congress and is now a national park.They were paid for it but weren't willing sellers. The Mojave National preserve took 456,000 acres from the Catelas company by forcing them to sale by restricting all their choices of land use. They did get paid more than it was worth ($125 an acre)but they weren't looking to sell. Sale of public ground isn't new to the bush Administration. I know of 3200 acres of BLM on the central coast that was bought by the neighboring land owner for $32 an acre. It was land locked.

JB

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
--Benjamin Franklin 1759

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
08:42 PM (MST)
65. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Zigga, I checked your profile and you have everything disabled, what state are you from that has whitetail, antelope, mule deer, ducks, geese, turkey's etc,,,any state with that much wildlife has either got a lot of public land or some very good land stewards, who you should be proud of for keeping your states wildlife abundent.
I also tried to send you an e-mail but to no avail, everything in your personal information has been disabled so that nobody can try to have intelligent dialogue with you.
To say that the outdoors and hunting must not be a part of my life or important to me, leaves me with the impression that you are very childish and afraid of dialogue.
I suppose I should tell you that I have fished all of my life here in UTAH and have hunted since I was 16. I am now 42,and minus the two years that I was unable to hunt because of deployment with the National Guard, Desert Storm/Shield 1991, and 14 months before during and after the Iraq invasion, you figure the math and tell me how much these things mean to me.
Next time you want insult my intelligence or assume that you know me, do it at least a way as to be respectful.
I have hunted in Utah, Colorado, and Idaho, never needing to access private land because of the many places to hunt.However, if the area and my aspirations to take a 400 plus bull ever are as high as yours, I would pay as much as any other hunter to do so.
I have allready answered your question as to how much I would charge Bobcat.
You are correct to assume that the land will be sold to the highest bidder, and if you wanted a peice of your own property as much as I do, then your priorities would be very different.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:03 PM (MST)
70. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

So, it sounds like you're saying that those lands were taken without just compensation? That's against the constitution. I wounder why legal action was not taken.

Do you know it the government took the land without just compenstation?

  Top

D13er
(0 posts)
Click to EMail D13er Click to send private message to D13er Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:08 PM (MST)
71. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-06 AT 09:11 PM (MST)

It's pointless to argue just compensation. Neither were willing sellers. Yes they got paid. That doesn't mean they wanted the money instead of the land.

This discussion was about the US losing public acres and that just isn't supported by the facts.

JB

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
--Benjamin Franklin 1759

  Top

BuzzH
(2899 posts)
Click to EMail BuzzH Click to send private message to BuzzH Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:09 PM (MST)
72. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-06 AT 09:13 PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-06 AT 09:10 PM (MST)

Selling off public lands is not a good idea...in 99% of the cases. The only way I would ever agree to sell public lands is if the money generated was used to buy other public lands or in a land swap.

Landlocked pieces of federal lands can and do generate revenue via grazing leases, timber, etc. Also, many of the small public lands can hold key access to other bigger sections of federal lands. Another thing is that those land-locked federal lands provide wildlife habitat.

I also agree that this sets a bad precedence. I don't want the Government to get the idea that every time they decide to run up the national debt all they have to do is sell off MY public lands. How about the freaking CONSERVATIVE republicans start acting conservative and exercise some fiscal responsibility instead of spending like a bunch of drunken sailors.

If people want to buy land, theres plenty of private land for sale out there...buy that and leave MY public lands alone.

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:15 PM (MST)
74. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Bob D. I agree, who cares , democrat or republican, in the last 10 years a lot of habitat has been lost due to encroachment, wich is required because birth control is not widely used. But. this is another issue not addressed.
Again , do some research and find out these area's and if they are usefull to you or anyone else, then ask your self if the social programs that need this money could use it.

I must disagree with you that everything else has the potential of pavement and homes. Realistically, not all of the public land, and very little of it, by the way, is of developable use.

  Top

BuzzH
(2899 posts)
Click to EMail BuzzH Click to send private message to BuzzH Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:33 PM (MST)
75. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-26-06 AT 09:33 PM (MST)

So, what happens with the "social programs" that need the money from the sale of public lands are not funded next year?

Sell more public lands to cover it again next year...and the next...and the next?

What ever happened to FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY...you know one of the fundamental beliefs held by the Republicans?

Republicans are Conservatives???...yeah, right...what a joke.

  Top

D13er
(0 posts)
Click to EMail D13er Click to send private message to D13er Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:39 PM (MST)
76. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

isn't that the truth Buzz, natural disasters are just the newest spending frenzy that is gonna put us in the poor house.

bobcatbess is right about one thing.....we are dead broke and too stupid to see it.

JB

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
--Benjamin Franklin 1759

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:49 PM (MST)
77. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I don't honetly know who the last fiscally responsible republican is or was. Anyone care to guess? I would think it was Reagan???? probably wrong there, he spent oogles and gobs to break the Russian economy.

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
09:58 PM (MST)
78. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I guess you did not see the sarcasm in my point of view to social programs, however some are worthwhile.
NO, the answer is not to sell public land every time there is a shortage in the social system. But in the case of these CONSIDERED parcells, I think it a good cause.
Like one of my other comments above, trimming the fat from the pork in D.C., can fund many more of these programs, I agree the money can be found within the constraints of the budget. Getting the elected liars to do this would be like election campaign contribution reform.

  Top

BuzzH
(2899 posts)
Click to EMail BuzzH Click to send private message to BuzzH Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
10:11 PM (MST)
79. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Its dead in the water anyway, so all these replies matter not.

I read an article that Sen. Larry Craig is going to kill it in committee..which (if it happens) is the only good thing he's ever done for public lands.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-26-06, 
10:23 PM (MST)
80. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"


"I must disagree with you that everything else has the potential of pavement and homes. Realistically, not all of the public land, and very little of it, by the way, is of developable use."

Interesting observation. Did you know that the entire west was once "public land." In fact the disposal of public lands ended, by congressional action in 1976 with the passage of FLMPA.

More to the point, very much of the public domain now is developable. In fact, much of the land that the USFS sells every year is used for the purpose of development and private commercialization. Moreover, the purpose of the modern land grab proposals from the conservative party is meant to transfer valuable land to private corporations. Almost all of our energy resources are located on public land so how can you conclude that ". . . very little of , by the way, is of developable use?" I cant see how this could even remotely be true. I will concede that much of the land is not "developable" if you compare it to the total amount of land under public ownership. Nevertheless, try telling the deer in western Wyoming that the land is not developable, especially those that are now trying to make a living along the eastern slopes of the Wyoming range. . .

It's very interesting to observe what some people consider development. Do you consider the ANWR developable?

  Top

BANNOCK1877
(0 posts)
Click to EMail BANNOCK1877 Click to send private message to BANNOCK1877 Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-27-06, 
01:12 AM (MST)
81. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

BINGO.

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-27-06, 
06:03 AM (MST)
82. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"


BuzzH!!!

YOU MEAN 'LITTLE GEORGE' DOESN'T GET HIS WAY???

YOU MEAN WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE SENATOR THAT HAS HIS HEAD SCREWED ON STRAIGHT!!!

I'D LIKE TO SHAKE THAT GUY'S HAND & I DON'T CARE IF HE'S A REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT!!!

OUR GOVERNMENT IS BROKE & I DON'T GIVE A DAMN IF THEY HATE ME FOR STATING THE FACT!!!

I'M STILL WAITING FOR SOMEBODY TO POST THE NATIONAL DEFICIT RIGHT AS LITTLE GEORGE CAME IN & WHAT IT IS NOW,ANYBODY GOT ANY NUMBERS???

THE ONLY bobcat BETTING 'LITTLE GEORGE' HAS HAD MORE GREENBACK PRINTED UP THAN ANY OTHER PRESIDENT!!!

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-27-06, 
09:14 PM (MST)
88. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

How many coal mines are in operation in Carbon and Emery county?
How much habitat has been destroyed, and how have the big game animals learned to live with the mines?
How many wells have been drilled in Uintah, Duchesne, Emery, and Carbon county and the big game animals have adapted and are doing just fine?
The type of development that I was referring to is what Bob D. had mentioned. Golf courses, housing, pavement. No, you won't find very much of the land that is being considered for sale to be developable.
Yes, I agree that the initial development of mines and wells do disturb the animals at first but after they learn that they are safer on that land than public land, they generally go back. Look at the phosphate mine north of Vernal, you can't hunt them there and where do you see many big boy's starring you down from the other side of the fence. The wells that have been drilled all over the state are the same way, not only here but in other states as well. I have hunted Colorado south of Rangely and how many wells and elk, deer, and antelope live there? I seen quite a damn many. Right in the middle of the area is some private land, yes, you must pay to hunt this guy's property, but the animals are very abundant there. his tells me that they have found a safe haven, not unlike the property that I want to aquire.
If you say the animals can't live within development, then you are wrong. There is a shooting range up Parley's canyon south of the Little Dell golf course, I have been there shooting my 300 mag and elk and deer just wander out onto the range while people are shooting targets. Koodo's to the range officers that stop the shooting until the animals leave the range. You know what? If big game can cohabitate with a gun range, coal mines and wells then what is the problem? Thye have learned to live there and have found that they are generally safer there than on public ground.
Is it right or wrong? Maybe not, but ,like us, the animals have learned to cohabitate with development as well as people.
You want to stop development, you better find a good birth control device and force people to use it, otherwise we will be like China and pass laws that say you can only have 1 offspring because of the population problem.

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-28-06, 
05:52 AM (MST)
90. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"


EASY buttshot!!!

I DON'T KNOW HOW FAMILIAR YOU ARE WITH SOUTH MYTON SOUTH TO ANTHRO/NINE MILE???

THIS COUNTRY IS IN THE PROCESS OF MAJOR DRILLING GOING ON RIGHT NOW!!!

AFTER THE FIRST GO AROUND WITH DRILLING THE DEER NEVER CAME BACK!!!

I BELIEVE THERE ARE MANY FACTORS INVOLVED!!!

OIL WELLS GALORE!!!

ROADED EVERYWHERE NOW!!!

ACCESS ON EVERY RIDGE & DRAW!!!

DEER HUNTING ALLOWED WHEN IT SHOULD OF BEEN MANAGED NOT DESTROYED!!!

IMO THE DEER HUNT OUGHT TO BE CLOSED IN THAT UNIT,SAD BUT TRUE!!!

ELK INTRODUCED SEVERAL YEARS AGO!!!

COW SLAUGHTERS THAT RUN TILL JANUARY,6 MONTHS WORTH OF HUNTING PRESSURE!!!

SECOND NATURE IN TROOPS AS BIG AS 100 THRASHING OUR PUBLIC GROUND!!!

EVEN THE ANTELOPE ARE NOT DOING AS WELL AS THEY USED TO!!!

ALOT OF THE GAME ANIMALS THAT LIVE OUT IN THAT COUNTRY HAVE MOVED TO LOWER PRIVATE GROUND,DO YOU BLAME THEM,THEN TO TOP EVERYTHING OFF THE DWR HAS A LATE DEPERDATION BULL HUNT,HELL THIS UNIT WAS ALREADY IN TROUBLE,WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY THINKING OF???

THE LIST GOES ON & ON!!!

JUST BUY YOUR BIG CHUNK OF GROUND,I WANT TO HUNT IT & I DON'T HAVE ANY CAMERA'S!!!

I WILL ONLY SHOOT TROPHY ANIMALS THAT WILL BE DIEING OF OLD AGE THE SAME YEAR SO I WON'T HURT YOUR HERDS!!!

YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT COLORADO,THEIR DEER ARE DOING WAY BETTER THAN UTAH'S!!!

THE ONLY bobcat WANTING TO HUNT buttshots BIG PIECE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY,THE SOONER THE BETTER,I PROMISE I WON'T SHOOT THEM WITH A CAMERA!!!

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-28-06, 
12:14 PM (MST)
91. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

CAMERAS ONLY

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-27-06, 
07:22 AM (MST)
83. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

The Outstanding Public Debt as of 27 Mar 2006 at 7:08 am Mountain Time was:

$8,365,365,645,148.53

The estimated population of the United States is 298,887,992
so each citizen's share of this debt is $27,987.96.

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$2.43 billion per day since September 30, 2005!

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-27-06, 
11:56 AM (MST)
84. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Buttshot (or Oakbuck),

I hunt in MT and the mountains have a tremendous amount of public land, (which is the way I want it to stay forever) and the lowlands have mostly all private. Very few land owners allow hunting to people that don't pay or to people that they don't know. This is what we need to stay away from. I don't want to have to get permission or pay everytime I want to go elk hunting or go hiking in the mountains. If they get away with selling public land now, do you think they will stop? I don't think so. I would rather have my guns taken away than my public lands. Neither will likely happen but try telling that to any Republican. We do need to fight for both. I didn't mean any disrespect but it would seem to me that those that don't oppose selling public land, don't use public lands. I could be wrong. Imagine your favorite fishing access or hunting area being sold and the new owner wanted cash or didn't allow you on at all. Wouldn't that be a problem for you???

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-27-06, 
08:53 PM (MST)
87. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

There would be 2 things that would upset me if my honey hole was sold to a private citizen, 1, I wasn't made aware of the sale and , 2, I wasn't able to buy the property first.
Zigga, you say you hunt Montana, Does that mean you live in Montana,, your e-mail is still disabled, what are you hiding from?

  Top

eelgrass
(21259 posts)
Click to EMail eelgrass Click to send private message to eelgrass Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-27-06, 
05:53 PM (MST)
85. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

TFinal,

My first thought was if we allowed 300 million more Mexicans over the border, then each individuals responsibility for the National Debt would be cut in half, but I guess that's flawed thinking.

I am confident that buttshot would allow a fellow NTHA officer to hunt on his newly aquired property????

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-27-06, 
07:58 PM (MST)
86. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"


eelgrass!!!

CONSIDER YOURSELF A RACIST FROM NOW ON!!!

REMEMBER WHEN I MENTIONED THE LICENSE PLATE???

ALOT OF THESE JOKERS CAN'T HANDLE THE 'M' WORD!!!

YOU'RE DAMN NEAR AS CORRUPTED AS ME,LOL!!!

THE ONLY bobcat THINKING:IF LITTLE GEORGE DE-VALUES OUR MONEY JUST A LITTLE MORE THEM BOYS WILL BE HEADED SOUTH INSTEAD OF NORTH!!!

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-27-06, 
09:30 PM (MST)
89. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Absolutely , you and 264 mag could come to my place and hunt the forest green spotted back tortoise. Only condition to the hunt, well 2 conditions, 1. the only thing that can be used for shooting is a Minolta or, my preference, a very cheap Kodack. I don't like loosing a $800 camera every time the bruin spotted backs charge, drop everything and run for your life!!
2. 264 has got to slow down on the Crown Royal, the foundations funds have nearly dried up.

  Top

Bob D.
(1250 posts)
Click to EMail Bob%20D. Click to send private message to Bob%20D. Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-28-06, 
12:26 PM (MST)
92. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-28-06 AT 12:29 PM (MST)

Buttshot,

Most people cannot afford to purchase a square mile, or 2 square miles, etc, of land just for recreational use. If you have that kind of money that's great. Why don't you hunt on land that is already private. We need all the public land we have now, and more would be even better. We sure don't need to see a decrease in our puclic lands. We're losing enough access to private lands as it is. Why would we want to make the problem worse by selling off public lands? How about if we need money for our country's social programs and schools we stop giving our money away to other countries every year?

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-28-06, 
04:31 PM (MST)
93. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Bob D. I think you would be surprised with my finances.
I think putting an end to foriegn aid is a vry good idea, our goverment has bigger problems at home to worry about than giving our tax dollars away.

  Top

bobcatbess
(0 posts)
Click to EMail bobcatbess Click to send private message to bobcatbess Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-28-06, 
04:53 PM (MST)
94. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"


buttshot!!!

MY CAMERA MAKES A LOUD BANG WHEN YOU SQUEEZE!!!

DON'T WORRY YOU'LL GET USED TO IT!!!

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO,TURN INTO A TREE HUGGER???

BY THE WAY,I HAVE A STIHL 066 MAGNUM THAT EATS TREES LIKE THEY ARE CANDY!!!

IF I'M GOING TO BE DOING A RANCH STYLE HUNT I'LL HAVE TO MAKE SOME CLEAR CUTS ON YOUR GROUND!!!

THE ONLY bobcat IN THE WORLD WITHOUT A CAMERA!!!

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-28-06, 
05:26 PM (MST)
95. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I will provide you with a cheap Kodack, NOOOOOO,, not a tree hugger

  Top

tracker12
(942 posts)
Click to EMail tracker12 Click to send private message to tracker12 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-30-06, 
07:11 AM (MST)
96. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

This has been a long and interesting post. Has anyone actually researched a particular piece property that is listed for sale. That would sure help clarify some of the comments either for or against. Before we make comments we shouyld be informed of all the details. I am sure if that was done we would agree to sale some property and advise against others. If we want to make this post woreth while maybe everyone shouyld take one parcel in there state research it and post on the site what they found out.

  Top

Zigga
(4760 posts)
Click to EMail Zigga Click to send private message to Zigga Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-30-06, 
08:47 AM (MST)
97. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Tracker,

I believe Bannock included some details on MT properties that would have been up for sale. The arguement against selling public lands now is that it more than likely won't be a one time thing. If it goes through during this administration they might want to sell more and more. Some of us want to keep what is public now and use that land to trade not sell for more accessible property in the future.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-30-06, 
11:15 AM (MST)
98. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Mar-30-06 AT 11:19 AM (MST)


Tracker,

I don’t think anyone objects to the wise trade and sell of public lands so long as it improves the system. Where this plan, and others like it in the past goes wrong, is when it's about raising revenue for a onetime shot in the economic arm of our rural areas - many of which rely on tourism, hunting, fishing, and sightseating on public lands, to support their local economys.

When it comes to raising revenues, the government turns into a marketing agent and with the way things work today, our elected officials are very much persuaded by corporate interests. Therefore, the goal becomes selling off the most valuable pieces in order to raise money, and improving our public lands heritage becomes secondary. Just like when “high-grading” timber was the forestry method of choice, this proposal is “high-grading” the public lands heritage.

Moreover, unless you are a wild lands real-estate speculator or trade in open space, and know the area and the land in question, I'm not sure you’re judgment of what's a good sale vs. a bad one is very important. There are many aspects of land value that make it more or less worth adding or subtracting from the national holdings. Each sale and or trade must be looked at individually, and collectively with all the information in front of qualified annalists. That said, our views still are important no matter how little we know about the actual real-estate business/market. I believe each sale should go through a public scoping process and the outcome should be based somewhat on the value of that land as public property, regardless of how much the property may bring on the open auction market.

Knock Your-self-out – this is a link to a map, when you get the website, you can go to the upper right corner and find the link to the specific parcels. Not a lot of descriptive info, but why would you expect there to be?
http://geocommstg.esri.com/NILS-PARCEL2/map.jsp?Map=USFS

Recent articles on the subject, and the website for forest service employees for the environment. .
http://www.dailyinterlake.com/articles/2006/03/30/news/news03.txt

http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2006/03/28/opinion/gazette/50-gazetteopinion.txt

http://www.fseee.org/index.html?page=http%3A//www.fseee.org/home.shtml


P.S., After you've done you’re analysis, would you be so kind to post, to this thread, your opinions.

  Top

BANNOCK1877
(0 posts)
Click to EMail BANNOCK1877 Click to send private message to BANNOCK1877 Click to check IP address of the poster
Mar-31-06, 
06:18 AM (MST)
99. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Thanks TF-- good info.

My main gripe with this is not with selling the acreage (esp. if the public can't make use of it, i.e.: tiny parcels, encircled by private, no easement possibilities)...as much as NOT PUTTING THE MONEY BACK INTO THE SYSTEM.

Righto--- each piece is a separate case.

  Top

buttshot
(1547 posts)
Click to EMail buttshot Click to send private message to buttshot Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Apr-02-06, 
08:16 PM (MST)
100. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I went on the website mentioned above, pretty amazing. One parcel listed in Salt Lake county is completely surrounded by private property, at the very foothills in Draper. Little bit below the entrance to Corner Canyon. Knowing that area a little, the parcel is completely surrounded by huge homes. If anybody gets that one, wooaa, the income potential there.
There are a bunch listed in Uintah county, not totally familiar but Bobcat should be.
Everything is listed by state and county, some of the listings have no description, I'm going to keep watch here in Utah and do some research, maybe get lucky enough to find something away from the big city....

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Apr-02-06, 
09:24 PM (MST)
101. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

in the long run that open space in the middle of houses will be worth much more to the comunity as a park or open space or a place to build a new school than it would be sold now to a private developer! Keep in mind public land is to be used for the benifit. Turn the piece into opens space for birds, wildlife, a park a etc.

  Top

mtmiller
(990 posts)
Click to EMail mtmiller Click to send private message to mtmiller Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Apr-03-06, 
06:57 AM (MST)
102. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I disagree Tony. That land is for the most part not much use to the sportsman or for wildlife habitat (if it is indeed a small parcel and completly surrounded by housing). I will guess because of the value of this land, there could be some very good trade opportunities out there to block up other public lands, provide access to other public lands or protect more valuable wildlife habitat.
I can't let you be right on every topic.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Apr-03-06, 
07:32 AM (MST)
103. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

LAST EDITED ON Apr-03-06 AT 07:34 AM (MST)

Hey Mt, guess what, Central Park in Manhattan once was available for development but now it's the prize park for cities all over the world. Open space is in some areas, the most valuable property. It also can not be replaced once it’s gone.

I don’t disagree however, that that property might not make good wildlife habitat in the western context. Moreover, this thread, and this discussion really is about selling the public land to generate revenues for Katrina, and that's my measuring stick. When did the focus of this thread change to trades etc, or even sales outright, as one poster has said, he would need to see the money from the sale go back into the public lands system and not to Katrina.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but remember the point was selling public land for Katrina and in that context, I’d prefer to keep the land that's completely overrun by houses, even it stays undeveloped. There is not option for trading it or selling it and the proceeds go for other public land sales or trades. . .

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Apr-03-06, 
09:03 AM (MST)
104. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"


I was a bit mistaken, this thread was about selling public land for public schools and not Katrina, however, the same principles apply to both – in any event, trade-offs or sale to generate moneys to help block up public land was not the subject

  Top

mtmiller
(990 posts)
Click to EMail mtmiller Click to send private message to mtmiller Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
Apr-03-06, 
03:29 PM (MST)
105. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

Sorry Tony, I would hate to get off subject (heavy sarcasm by the way). This is post #105 and I promise not all of them have been specific to the funding of rural schools. I brought up the land exchange very early in the thread and so did Bannock (whose opinion I respect). Lots of other non-specific comments as well, but I didn't want to read through all of this again.

Just sit back and say, "Gee Craig, a land exchange would be a be a better idea then selling the land." Sure beats your Central Park analogy. haha...

BTW, turkeys next weekend and when are you getting over here for some grouse shots. Needs to be during the week from here on out as turkeys and bears are on the menu in my free time.

  Top

TFinalshot
(0 posts)
Click to EMail TFinalshot Click to send private message to TFinalshot Click to check IP address of the poster
Apr-03-06, 
03:53 PM (MST)
106. "RE: PUBLIC LAND SELL-OFF"

I cant concede 100%, you know me mt. I will say that a land trade, if a good deal for the public land managers and the public's resources would, overall, be better than selling it off to the highest bidder.

  Top


Remove

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic


Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos



Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Home | Hunting Forums | Photo Gallery | Hunting Articles | Videos |
Hunts & Tags | Hunt Draw Odds | About Mule Deer | About Elk
Store | Classified Ads | Photo Tours | About this Site | Advertising |
Older Content | Email Us | Privacy Policy | Links | Podcasts