Public land, good news!

I've read all the proposals for selling off public land. They mention 10 States, but never California. I guess they figure California is a lost cause? Or maybe they just forgot?

Anyway, since California is our last hope for public land hunting, I thought I would give you a head start. Here's a link to CDFW to get you up to speed.

https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/

A friend of mine actually saw a buck last year, so it's possible to even get one.

>I've read all the proposals for
>selling off public land. They
>mention 10 States, but never
>California. I guess they figure
>California is a lost cause?
>Or maybe they just forgot?
>
>
>Anyway, since California is our last
>hope for public land hunting,
>I thought I would give
>you a head start. Here's
>a link to CDFW to
>get you up to speed.
>
>
>https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/
>
>A friend of mine actually saw
>a buck last year, so
>it's possible to even get
>one.
>
>


Damnit eel. If you keep it up I'm going to go toe to toe with you in the octagon. Ok not really but I figured I'd get the first Internet machismo chest pounding out of the way since that is where these threads end up as of late. Besides, everyone knows sawmill guys fight dirty.

http://www.themeateater.com/2017/calling-all-meateaters-we-need-you-now/


Not good news....

They don't want to shut down the Pot Fields in Kali!
Sheeesh!

>They don't want to shut down
>the Pot Fields in Kali!
>
>Sheeesh!

Or the Mexican drug cartels growing on Forest Service land.

RE: Public land, good news! days

Yes California might be an exception to the upcoming fire sale, as i i think most Californians would be unhappy giving up their public land, So thank god for your liberal legislature, otherwise you could lose half of your great state .
That's what us westerners are facing. As far as public land goes, the rural bumper sticker says, "not a thing by two thousand eighteen"

RE: Public land, good news! days

Piper in CA. the liberal Democrats do not mention selling off public land. Instead they just raise taxes and fees to fund their welfare programs.
In rural areas they charge every home $135.00 to $150.00 per year for fire suppression. This is on top of fees we pay the county for local fire protection. All the liberals living in the cities do not have to pay this fee.

Our Liberal Gov. now wants to raise yearly vehicle registration fees another $65.00 per year on top of our already high fees. This will also cover hybrid cars that have been getting a break for clean air reasons on their fees. Boy that will piss those liberals off that bought expensive clean air cars.

He also is wanting to raise gasoline taxes another 42% per gallon to where we will be paying over 80 cents in taxes per gallon. Highest in the nation.
They will also charge all battery manufacturer $1.00 per battery they make, then turn around and charge any business that sells batteries $1.00 per battery for selling it. Last but least, the customer that buys the battery will be charged $1.00 for every battery he buys. That is a total of $3.00 worth of fees on every battery and you know the manufacturer and dealers will pass their fees on to the customer. But! THEY ARE NOT RAISING TAXES YET, THOSE ARE ONLY FEES AND NOT A TAX ACCORDING TO THEM.
So you can kiss my behind when you make comments about "thank God for your liberal legislature".
Oh, did I mention the fee of $50.00 for a license for every person that wants to buy ammunition in the state of CA. beginning next year. Also the ammunition dealer will be paying a fee every year in order to sell that ammunition.
Like I said, you can kiss my butt for your liberal Democrat beliefs. Give it time, it will come to your state also if morons like you keep voting those liberal Democrats into office.

RELH

And in California, the liberals don't really want the land. They just don't want anybody else to use or have it. They certainly don't want it for hunting.

LAST EDITED ON Feb-05-17 AT 04:00AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Feb-05-17 AT 03:58?AM (MST)

OK, but at least they aren't trying to sell our public land to the billionaires. I would rather pay a few hundred dollars in higher taxes than face No trespassing signs everywhere. And there is nothing bad about clean air and water.

LAST EDITED ON Feb-05-17 AT 04:13AM (MST)[p]No Eel, I must be a liberal because I don't want anybody else to have public land either, except the public, all of us. I want every generation to have that freedom. Not every square foot of land needs to be used for private profit either.

As far as being paranoid about not being able to hunt, I.believe more as another long time California resident on this site believes, they will be hunting and fishing in California long after you and I are dead.

Like Dude enjoys saying, "you want to place a wager on that?". Piper did you see your shadow on February 2nd when you crawled out from under your rock?

You can tell how much the liberals value the land for hunting by the number of non-residents flocking in to our great State every year.

Yes people do go to your state, I have fished and hiked in California quite a few times over the years.
In fact if many conservatives obtain their dreams of privatization.
Many more people will be heading for California to enjoy the freedom of public land.

Piper if you love CA. so much with it's liberal law makers, why not move here to live so you do not have to deal with those conservative Wyoming law makers you hate.
Is it because you know you could not afford to live here due to the high prices, high taxes, high fees, that those liberal politicians have stuck us with?
You are a tool and a moron on top of it and one day you will come to the conclusion that those liberal Democrat politicians stuck a sharp stick up your behind. Then again you might not care if they will just allow you on the gravy train and take care of you while the rest pay for it.

RELH

RELH, WTF is wrong with you? A guy expresses his view on an issue that should matter to all of us and you got nothing more in your holster than to call him a tool and a moron? I hope that you behave this way only behind the veil of internet anonymity.

idubya, some of the Monster Muley members have been conversing with each other, via the forum, for many years and know each other's views extremely well, as a result of those many years of association. Both RELH and piper are well known, beyond their internet participation. Many on this forum know each other well beyond their MM exchanges. Between these two gentlemen there is no anonymity.

If you can tolerate the environment long enough you will learn who will participate without hiding behind a forum login name and who will own their comments in front of the world. These two aren't hiding their identity, which gives them both much more respect, even though they may dislike each other's position on issues.

If these styles of communication are uncomfortable for you, you may not find a home here. Personally I've had to take a number of lengthy self imposed "leaves of absence" over the 6 or 7 years, that I've been hanging around here.

There are many good things that take place here, some more controversial. Like the real world, some good some not so much.

DC

I love Pipers idea of public land. "Hey look honey, there is 2 million acres of our public land. Lets park in this designated parking lot and go in the gift shop and grab a postcard of the aerial photos of it. Then, lets get on the bus and travel the only road that crosses it. Now, when the bus stops at the designated viewing location, stay inside the fenced off look out, touching the dirt could harm both a the turtles and the wolves. After the allotted 5 min look, we can get back on the bus, return to the the gift shop, and maybe buy a vile of that precious, public land dirt to take home and tell all our friends about the outdoor experience we have had"

I am 100% for public land, lets be clear. BUT, like I have said in other posts with Piper, the way things sit right now, do you want Elizabeth Warren to have the ability to "save" more land in Utah in 2020? How about Cory Booker?

This subject becomes like the current president. Trump was not my first, second, or third choice. However, compared to Clinton he is an angel from heaven. But I find myself pushed into a corner of defending vigorously, Trump, because those on the other side are so over the top ridiculous I have no choice.

I am 100% for public land. However, I have family and friends who run livestock. I have had and do have family and friends who due to age or physical limitations, rely on roads to access public land. I see the continual beat down BLM and FS do to both of these groups. I see the current version of land management as the "museum" style of look but don't touch. SO, hear I sit, pro public land, totally disgusted with the federal management of that land, watching as politician do political payback blocking off huge chunks of my state. I am not dumb enough to think Herbert wouldn't sell it all before his term ends either.



"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"

+1 for Lumpy

Anyone know where I can find information about state lands in Utah that have been sold off in recent years..??

"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24

On the other hand piper might fit in real well in California. You can put flowers in your hair but you can't pick any on public land.

>I love Pipers idea of public
>land. "Hey look honey, there
>is 2 million acres of
>our public land. Lets
>park in this designated parking
>lot and go in the
>gift shop and grab a
>postcard of the aerial photos
>of it. Then, lets
>get on the bus and
>travel the only road that
>crosses it. Now, when
>the bus stops at the
>designated viewing location, stay inside
>the fenced off look out,
>touching the dirt could harm
>both a the turtles and
>the wolves. After the
>allotted 5 min look, we
>can get back on the
>bus, return to the the
>gift shop, and maybe buy
>a vile of that precious,
>public land dirt to take
>home and tell all our
>friends about the outdoor experience
>we have had"
>
>I am 100% for public land,
>lets be clear. BUT,
>like I have said in
>other posts with Piper, the
>way things sit right now,
>do you want Elizabeth Warren
>to have the ability to
>"save" more land in Utah
>in 2020? How about
>Cory Booker?
>
>This subject becomes like the current
>president. Trump was not my
>first, second, or third choice.
> However, compared to Clinton
>he is an angel from
>heaven. But I find
>myself pushed into a corner
>of defending vigorously, Trump, because
>those on the other side
>are so over the top
>ridiculous I have no choice.
>
>
>I am 100% for public land.
> However, I have family
>and friends who run livestock.
> I have had and
>do have family and friends
>who due to age or
>physical limitations, rely on roads
>to access public land.
>I see the continual beat
>down BLM and FS do
>to both of these groups.
> I see the current
>version of land management as
>the "museum" style of look
>but don't touch. SO,
>hear I sit, pro public
>land, totally disgusted with the
>federal management of that land,
>watching as politician do political
>payback blocking off huge chunks
>of my state. I
>am not dumb enough to
>think Herbert wouldn't sell it
>all before his term ends
>either.
>
>
>
>"The only thing that stops a
>bad guy with a gun
>is a good guy with
>a gun"

Hossblur

So what would you be willing to accept? If your stated position is that no roads should be blocked and everyone should have equal ability to access public lands I don't believe there is a solution you would be willing to accept.

I hear it all the time here but things have changed a lot since it was 1960 and Multiple Use became the actually law. Multiple use doesn't mean equal access.

We had the Upper Missouri River National monument put in place here at the end of Clinton's term. I opposed it, now it is a gem that allows for unbelievable moments of solitude, abundant game, the surrounding ranches have had their property values sky rocket as the game herds have increased. Many of what people thought would be negative impacts haven't really happened.

The county I live in has 2 million acres of Federal Public lands. None of them are used as a Museum like you are saying. We recreate, hunt, fish, graze, etc etc on these lands all the time.

Nemont

>Anyone know where I can find
>information about state lands in
>Utah that have been sold
>off in recent years..??
>
>"Therefore, wo be unto him that
>is at ease in Zion!"
>2 Ne. 28: 24

Per ColoradoOak on thread "Sold State Lands Info":

https://trustlands.utah.gov/business-groups/surface/land-sales-2/