>
>
>
>
>
>This is a more complicated subject
>than it appears.
>
>First off, there are public lands
>that might as well be
>sold. they're of no
>value to he public because
> they have no access
>through private land, or
>the location is in
>an urban area .
>I favor those sales.
>
>
>Beyond that the republican dream of
>selling off all the public
>land to forward a have
>and have not society will
>never happen. and if it
>did, it's time to move
>to Canada anyway.
>
>Piper isn't wrong to think the
>republicans would sell us out.
> but I believe it
>will never happen so he
>shouldn't worry so much about
>it. our public lands
>don't matter to everyone but
>it's a very small minority
>who'd be willing to part
>with them. very small.
>
>
>
>
>What I want to know is
>this, why can't we have
>more leaders like Teddy Roosevelt?
> a republican who screwed
>his party over 100 years
>ago by giving us our
>public land and protecting the
>wildlife it holds. you notice
>I didn't say more republicans
>like TR, because he'd be
>a screaming liberal by todays
>standard. so why can't we
>have more democrats like TR
>?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
I cannot disagree with much of that. You do say it is a small percentage of people that would agree to sell public lands.
My point was that as long as we keep printing money and keep going along on our merry way, no problem. I think the majority of people would not sell public lands until it came down to their checks cashing, then most could care less.
As you like to remind us, most likely not in our lifetimes, but, I think though the Tetons are safe, there is lots of BLM, State and some Federal land that may be at risk down the road.
The enemies of hunting are mostly consolidated on the left. Pipers team.
