National Grasslands

[PrairieGhost]

Phone double post. My screw up.

 

[gst]

Yes, and you have to ask some questions. What are these taxes for? They are for schools, roads, etc. So who lives on this land that needs schooling? Nobody. Who lives on this land that needs roads? Again nobody. States and counties like federal gov can't get enough money so they go after the Fed gov as if those tax dollars are magic and don't cost anyone. I think they get something like 75%. 25% would be more than fair. Ironicly people who say they are conservative will say they are owed it. No they are not.

People like to guess at what the founding fathers envisioned. What a joke to think they know. The founding fathers could not envision the land explored by Lewis and Clark so they had no foundation to have an opinion. They couldn't imagine people trying to farm some land so poor, then losing it. They could not envision farmers on the gov tit and whining for more. In their wildest dreams they could not imagine land posting and asking a neighbor for money to hunt. Be very careful the questions you ask if the founding fathers could not imagine you face in the trough.

Plains you leave out just a little bit of information that is a bit pertinent.

"Nobody" lives on these lands because the Federal govt will not allow it.

When the Federal govt begins to not allow the long held multiple usage agreements these communities that are in these Federally controlled states feel the impact directly. And as such the govt pays these fees to offset loss of income when industries such as the timber and ranching and mining are shut down.

Some "conservatives" will say well thats okay, but in reality the Federal govt is making more and more people dependent on their hand outs rather than an industry.

We can certainly "envision" the Founders ideologies plainsman, many were prolific writers whose thoughts and ideals are forever in print. Perhaps you should do a bit of reading.

Still not answering a simple question eh?

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Plainsman said,

People like to guess at what the founding fathers envisioned. What a joke to think they know. The founding fathers could not envision the land explored by Lewis and Clark so they had no foundation to have an opinion. Thomas Jefferson was a farmer and part of the Corps of Discoveries mission was to collect flora and fauna. I believe Jefferson had an agrarian vision for settling the Great Plains. We live here because our founding fathers had the foresight to make the Louisianan Purchase from Napoleon Bonaparte of France who gained it through war with Spain. They couldn't imagine people trying to farm some land so poor, then losing it. They probably envisioned a land where a man could raise his family and own some land. Hunting is important but I believe they put their families/livelyhoods first. They could not envision farmers on the gov tit and whining for more. Plains, everyone is on to you making these wild claims to push someone's buttons. In their wildest dreams they could not imagine land posting and asking a neighbor for money to hunt. Be very careful the questions you ask if the founding fathers could not imagine you face in the trough.

Bruce, that buffalo robe you have, was it your grandfather or great grandfather who shot one of the last wild buffalo and made a robe out of him?

 

[gst]

Here is the end result of our current management plans of the federal govt on these lands. Anyone that uses the reasoning states can;t afford to manage lands wishes you to ignore the increased cost of managing these lands the feds have because of MISMANAGEMENT.


https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/nfn.htm

 

[Kurtr]

i dont know if i dont think states can afford it they just wont do any better than the feds. The land management boards in the western states make some bad rules and are pretty poor them selves. They are all appointed so no one has any recourse once they make bad rules like the no camping on colorado state lands. Also seems that state politicians are just as influenced by money as the feds are and dont let people manage the land with sound science vs political driven agendas.

 

[PrairieGhost]

And as such the govt pays these fees to offset loss of income when industries such as the timber and ranching and mining are shut down.

No that isnt the reason. That's liberal thinking. It's not up to gov to prop up business. The portion the gov pays is to be used the same as your land tax. Do they use your land tax dollars to prop up local business? They use my income tax to prop you up.

[

Also seems that state politicians are just as influenced by money as the feds are and dont let people manage the land with sound science vs political driven agendas.

Absolutely, and the only difference is the smaller the politician the cheaper to buy.

 

[gst]

plainsman you might wantto read a bit before you make our claims.

http://www.opb.org/news/article/no-federal-timber-payments-mean-leaner-times-ahead/


Federal timber payments to counties in the Pacific Northwest may be a thing of the past, after funding failed to make it into a Congressional spending bill this week.
The program has been in place for nearly 15 years. It’s been a lifeline for many counties, especially in Oregon.
For the past century, when timber was logged on federal land, the county where that land was located would get a cut of the profits. The reason: counties couldn’t collect property taxes on federal lands, yet still had to provide services there.
“The program’s been around for a very, very, very long time and the taxing system in Oregon grew up around that program being available,” says Douglas County Commissioner Susan Morgan.
But counties in Southwest Oregon, like Morgan’s, were hit especially hard financially in the 1990s, when endangered species protections for spotted owls required that the birds’ old-growth habitat be made off-limits to chainsaws

- - - Updated - - -

http://boisestatepublicradio.org/po...le-federal-timber-rules-slow-harvest#stream/0

Government money, the national forest, and counties
It wasn’t just jobs that were lost as the national forest logging heyday began its downward slide. Some of the money that communities got from the federal government was affected as well.
For years, the federal government has compensated counties for some of the money they can’t make off of the federal lands within their borders. There are two main funds.
Payments in Lieu of Taxes or PILT are federal payments to rural communities that contain federal land, including national forests and Bureau of Land Management land. The goal of PILT is to help offset losses in property taxes because counties can’t tax federal lands within their boundaries. The government has handed over more than $6.3 billion in PILT payments to states since the program started in 1977. PILT money is distributed based on a complicated formula, including county populations and how much federal land is within the county. Counties then spend the money on law enforcement, schools, roads, and search and rescue operations.

CREDIT DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR



The other fund stems from an act passed by the U.S. Congress in 1908. It directed the U.S. Treasury to make a yearly payment to states based on national forest receipts. That adds up to 25 percent of the money the government receives each year. The cash is supposed to go to public schools and road maintenance. That money continued to rise until the mid-90s when it started falling off. That act was amended in 2000 by the Secure Rural Schools Act which made it into a more uniform payment. It was designed to act as a bridge for counties, that were suffering from the a loss of timber money. The act has since expired, but has managed to hang on with renewals by Congress. Jay O’Laughlin says the law's future is very uncertain.
Chart not adjusted for inflation
CREDIT U.S. FOREST SERVICE



Not everyone is happy with the program. "We are a very proud people, we don’t want a government hand out, we don’t want Secure Rural Schools,” says Mark Mahon. “The people of Adams County just want to go to work, and we want to maintain and take care of ourselves, we don’t want the government to send us a check so that we can maintain our roads and put our kids through school. We have this renewable resource all around us and we can’t use it. It’s tied up.”

- - - Updated - - -

Yep real liberal thinking there............:;:huh

- - - Updated - - -

i dont know if i dont think states can afford it they just wont do any better than the feds. The land management boards in the western states make some bad rules and are pretty poor them selves. They are all appointed so no one has any recourse once they make bad rules like the no camping on colorado state lands. Also seems that state politicians are just as influenced by money as the feds are and dont let people manage the land with sound science vs political driven agendas.

Take a look at this info kurt.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865657267/Report-States-manage-public-lands-for-recreation-better-than-feds.html

Here is the group that did the study..........radical greedy republicans just wanting to steal the publics land according to plainsman.


http://sutherlandinstitute.org/issue-core-principles/

[FONT=&quot]CORE

[h=1]PRINCIPLES[/h][/FONT]
Inspiring ideas, transformational thoughts and powerful principles led our country from the Boston Tea Party to the Constitutional Convention, and became the foundation for the United States of America. Ideas like a free market economy, federalism, religious freedom and community-driven solutions inspire citizens to act, generate practical policy solutions and are the source for A New Birth of Freedom.


- - - Updated - - -

They use my income tax to prop you up.
.

Plains....we have been thru this before right down to showing you exactly where your income tax dollars actually go and the return on investment you get back in food costs thru this nations food security programs.

Do you have to be shown again how much the pennies the govt takes for food security programs are returned to you one hundred fold?

Actually my income tax dollars and everyone elses paid your entire salary for years if you want to start comparing where our tax dollars go...........

So how about you drop the foolish claims once and for all plains.

 

[PrairieGhost]

Actually my income tax

You paid income tax? Since a salary is something you get paid for working for someone else what do you call it when you get paid for doing nothing?

I agree with the people that say many states do a poorer job of management than the feds. You can find articles from radical groups that says otherwise, but then you can perhaps find articles that says the moon is made of green cheese too.

 

[Kurtr]

plainsman you might wantto read a bit before you make our claims.

http://www.opb.org/news/article/no-federal-timber-payments-mean-leaner-times-ahead/


Federal timber payments to counties in the Pacific Northwest may be a thing of the past, after funding failed to make it into a Congressional spending bill this week.
The program has been in place for nearly 15 years. It’s been a lifeline for many counties, especially in Oregon.
For the past century, when timber was logged on federal land, the county where that land was located would get a cut of the profits. The reason: counties couldn’t collect property taxes on federal lands, yet still had to provide services there.
“The program’s been around for a very, very, very long time and the taxing system in Oregon grew up around that program being available,” says Douglas County Commissioner Susan Morgan.
But counties in Southwest Oregon, like Morgan’s, were hit especially hard financially in the 1990s, when endangered species protections for spotted owls required that the birds’ old-growth habitat be made off-limits to chainsaws

- - - Updated - - -

http://boisestatepublicradio.org/po...le-federal-timber-rules-slow-harvest#stream/0

Government money, the national forest, and counties
It wasn’t just jobs that were lost as the national forest logging heyday began its downward slide. Some of the money that communities got from the federal government was affected as well.
For years, the federal government has compensated counties for some of the money they can’t make off of the federal lands within their borders. There are two main funds.
Payments in Lieu of Taxes or PILT are federal payments to rural communities that contain federal land, including national forests and Bureau of Land Management land. The goal of PILT is to help offset losses in property taxes because counties can’t tax federal lands within their boundaries. The government has handed over more than $6.3 billion in PILT payments to states since the program started in 1977. PILT money is distributed based on a complicated formula, including county populations and how much federal land is within the county. Counties then spend the money on law enforcement, schools, roads, and search and rescue operations.

CREDIT DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR



The other fund stems from an act passed by the U.S. Congress in 1908. It directed the U.S. Treasury to make a yearly payment to states based on national forest receipts. That adds up to 25 percent of the money the government receives each year. The cash is supposed to go to public schools and road maintenance. That money continued to rise until the mid-90s when it started falling off. That act was amended in 2000 by the Secure Rural Schools Act which made it into a more uniform payment. It was designed to act as a bridge for counties, that were suffering from the a loss of timber money. The act has since expired, but has managed to hang on with renewals by Congress. Jay O’Laughlin says the law's future is very uncertain.
Chart not adjusted for inflation
CREDIT U.S. FOREST SERVICE



Not everyone is happy with the program. "We are a very proud people, we don’t want a government hand out, we don’t want Secure Rural Schools,” says Mark Mahon. “The people of Adams County just want to go to work, and we want to maintain and take care of ourselves, we don’t want the government to send us a check so that we can maintain our roads and put our kids through school. We have this renewable resource all around us and we can’t use it. It’s tied up.”

- - - Updated - - -

Yep real liberal thinking there............:;:huh

- - - Updated - - -



Take a look at this info kurt.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...ic-lands-for-recreation-better-than-feds.html

Here is the group that did the study..........radical greedy republicans just wanting to steal the publics land according to plainsman.


http://sutherlandinstitute.org/issue-core-principles/

[FONT=&quot]CORE

[h=1]PRINCIPLES[/h][/FONT]
Inspiring ideas, transformational thoughts and powerful principles led our country from the Boston Tea Party to the Constitutional Convention, and became the foundation for the United States of America. Ideas like a free market economy, federalism, religious freedom and community-driven solutions inspire citizens to act, generate practical policy solutions and are the source for A New Birth of Freedom.


- - - Updated - - -



Plains....we have been thru this before right down to showing you exactly where your income tax dollars actually go and the return on investment you get back in food costs thru this nations food security programs.

Do you have to be shown again how much the pennies the govt takes for food security programs are returned to you one hundred fold?

Actually my income tax dollars and everyone elses paid your entire salary for years if you want to start comparing where our tax dollars go...........

So how about you drop the foolish claims once and for all plains.

Problem is those groups have just as much say as we do none. It's the land boards who are appointed by politicians. Maybe make the people on the land boards an elected position on a 2 year basis with 4 years max term you could make sure there is less corruption.

 

[PrairieGhost]

The reason: counties couldn’t collect property taxes on federal lands, yet still had to provide services there.

That was my previous point along with pointing out they really don't provide services. It's a scam.

Lets look at Chase Lake in Stutsman County. No roads, no people living there, Fish and Wildlife provides the fire protection, Fish and Wildlife provides the management, why do they need the fed to offset taxes? No roads to maintain, no kids in school, no fire protection needed, many of the Fish and Wildlife have law enforcement authority, there are no services provided.

I guess I have to change my mind about some political things. I am conservative not republican. Even though I have in the past thought of democrats as socialists and republicans as conservatives I have been wrong. There are democrat socialists and republican socialists. I live in the country, but recognize that the feds paying to replace taxes on federal land is simply another wealth redistribution scheme where they take money from the cities to pay the rural taxes. I guess both parties buy their votes one way or another. Democrats with outright welfare, and republicans with hidden welfare.

I just came back from vacation. With Trump in office the logging trucks are running full steam. There were logging trucks on many roads in the Selway in Idaho, and in Montana the Bitterroot, the Tobacco Root, the Madison range, and all around Kalispell. So does anyone think they will be giving back federal money? Ya right.

Edit: It would perhaps be honest and fair to reimburse counties at 10% for unforeseen services needed, and that's actually generous.

Edit: We often hear the question "how much is enough". I went back and read the original article and guess what?

Ninety-five percent of the grasslands are open to roads and 5 percent is designated as roadless.

I guess I might ask "how much is enough".

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Plains said,

You paid income tax? Since a salary is something you get paid for working for someone else what do you call it when you get paid for doing nothing?

Bruce, you worked for the US Geological Survey. An agency created by the people to perform a service. Tax dollars from working folks paid your wages. If you paid a tax on wages earned than you were simply a dollar recycler. Zero sum game.

So where do "new" tax dollars come from? Perhaps agriculture and mining?

 

[PrairieGhost]

Dollars circle like flies. The taxes a hardware store owner pays goes to police, teachers, country road departments, farm subsidies, and yes U S Geological Survey. In return they all pay taxes that go to the same things. Everyone on a salary is in the same boat. Store owners, farmers, and other business owners at least have tax shelters. No matter how you earn your money it hurts the same paying taxes. The gain comes in many forms. The teacher who educates your children produce an educated person who will earn more and pay more taxes. A person who owns a factory will with labor turn raw materials into something of more value. In U S G S they will acquire information that will reduce exploration for mining and oil drilling. Some will provide research for wildlife and agriculture resulting in game for hunters, and agriculture programs for farmers. I think U S G S does a lot of things that benefits farming that 99% of farmers are not aware of.
I really admire hunters. They (we) asked for the 11% excise tax on firearms and hunting equipment. No other people in this nation put their money where there mouth is like hunters do. Many times I have heard people say I don't like my tax dollars going for X. The truth is their tax dollars don't go for X the hunters pay for X. When complaining about your tax dollars and how the Fish and Wildlife use those tax dollars you need to make sure it's actually your tax dollars. Of course some people who pay no taxes bitch about how "their tax dollars" are being used.

 

[gst]

plains at this point I don;t think most view what you post as anything more than personal accusations that have little credibility so what I am telling youi is a bit of advice.

you need to read and learn a bit more before you post silly accusations. Did you even read the links I shared?

- - - Updated - - -

Problem is those groups have just as much say as we do none. It's the land boards who are appointed by politicians. Maybe make the people on the land boards an elected position on a 2 year basis with 4 years max term you could make sure there is less corruption.

Hey I agree that there needs to be accountability. Plains like to say the smaller the politician the less the monies it takes ot buy them.

Maybe if he would ever participate in the governing process he would realize that you do not have to buy politicians. Simply bring ideas to them that are good for the people they represent and most times they support what you bring to them.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course some people who pay no taxes bitch about how "their tax dollars" are being used.

Of course some people that do not involve themselves in the governing process bitch about the governing process..........

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Plains said,

[QUOTEDollars circle like flies. The taxes a hardware store owner pays goes to police, teachers, country road departments, farm subsidies, and yes U S Geological Survey.][/QUOTE]

And where does the hardware store get Paint? It can be made from flax seed, poppy seed or soybean oil. What about shovels made from aluminum and hardwood handles? Or anything plastic? Perhaps agriculture and mining.

It takes a healthy economy to afford to maintain a healthy National Grassland. From the article posted about the National Grasslands in the Bismarck Tribune:

Conservationists, including Wayde Schafer with the Dacotah Chapter of the Sierra Club, consider the ruling a victory that protects the Little Missouri National Grasslands from having roads constructed on every mile.

Wayde Schafer used to write letters to the editor that the smoke from the coal fired plants was dropping into the Missouri River Basin and when it got to Bismarck it was making everyone sick. UGH. Wayde Schafer wants the Little Missouri National Grasslands protected. Management costs money. Unemployed coal miners who are sportsmen too can't help. That is why third world countries have such a poor environmental record. No decent jobs.

 

[PrairieGhost]

Ninety-five percent of the grasslands are open to roads and 5 percent is designated as roadless.

How much is enough? Do they really need the last five percent or is the effort just an exercise in hatred of conservation?

So where do "new" tax dollars come from? Perhaps agriculture and mining?

New tax dollars are a political concept. There is no difference in tax dollars. A dollar is a dollar. Raw materials and labor both produce the same thing. You can dig an ounce of gold out of the ground or work for a month and pay your tax dollar. Both tax dollars have the same value, and there is nothing new about that dollar. The gold will perhaps become jewelry and cost twice as much. The business will pay taxes again on that chunk of gold. It's worth more because of the labor. That's as new as any other dollar. Some look to hard for ways to pat themselves on the back. The money from every tax payer on this site is as good as those who dig gold or raise corn. Ask them if they feel less valuable than you.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Plains said,

How much is enough? Do they really need the last five percent or is the effort just an exercise in hatred of conservation?

The article was written by Lauren Donavan and that wording is clever. You took the bait. North Dakota is surveyed in squares and where there is no road there is probably a section line. The dispute is about those section lines. "NOT" about the 5% designated road less. Not sure why Lauren felt the need to insert road less areas into the discussion. But she got you.

Lauren lives in Hazen and is way far left. She doesn't approve of hunting. East of Hazen along the river was a scenic area where people recreated, hunted, hiked and the kids from town drove along the railroad tracks with their motorcycles to do a little off road. Lauren built the first house there and now it is a development. You betcha, Lauren is all about setting aside wild scenic places.

You can dig an ounce of gold out of the ground or work for a month and pay your tax dollar

Digging for gold is "mining."

The money from every tax payer on this site is as good as those who dig gold or raise corn. Ask them if they feel less valuable than you.

If I give you a haircut for twenty bucks and you do my laundry for twenty bucks.....how much new wealth did we create?

 

[LBrandt]

Plains said,



The article was written by Lauren Donavan and that wording is clever. You took the bait. North Dakota is surveyed in squares and where there is no road there is probably a section line. The dispute is about those section lines. "NOT" about the 5% designated road less. Not sure why Lauren felt the need to insert road less areas into the discussion. But she got you.

Lauren lives in Hazen and is way far left. She doesn't approve of hunting. East of Hazen along the river was a scenic area where people recreated, hunted, hiked and the kids from town drove along the railroad tracks with their motorcycles to do a little off road. Lauren built the first house there and now it is a development. You betcha, Lauren is all about setting aside wild scenic places.



Digging for gold is "mining."



If I give you a haircut for twenty bucks and you do my laundry for twenty bucks.....how much new wealth did we create?

10 dollars for the polititians to spend.

 

[PrairieGhost]

Digging for gold is "mining."

No kidding. That was my point one is mining and the other is labor.

If I give you a haircut for twenty bucks and you do my laundry for twenty bucks.....how much new wealth did we create?

10 dollars for the polititians to spend.

That's so correct it's best to leave it there. Would that be new dollars or old dollars? ;:;popcorn

 

[Fritz the Cat]

That's so correct it's best to leave it there. Would that be new dollars or old dollars? ;:;popcorn

I believe LBrandt was making a joke.

Again Bruce you are incorrect. The dollar (relatively new) is not wealth. Wealth is stuff we want: food, clothes, houses, cars, gadgets, travel to interesting places, and so on. You can have wealth without having money. But if you make expensive violins, how do you trade with someone who grows potato's and you only need a few? It's a two step process, trade the violin for silver and then pieces of silver for potato's. The dollar has replaced gold and silver as a medium of exchange.

People are resourceful and figure out new ways everyday creating new wealth. Not dollars. Sometimes that means earth moving equipment widening a section line in the Grasslands.

 

[gst]

Plains said,
The article was written by Lauren Donavan and that wording is clever. You took the bait.?

The question here is did he actually "take the bait"...or did he know it all along and simply taking another play from the only book he seems to be reading lately....the liberal playbook.

Fake news catches the eye.

The truth usually is not as sexy.

- - - Updated - - -

The article was written by Lauren Donavan and that wording is clever. You took the bait. North Dakota is surveyed in squares and where there is no road there is probably a section line. The dispute is about those section lines. "NOT" about the 5% designated road less. Not sure why Lauren felt the need to insert road less areas into the discussion. But she got you.

Lauren lives in Hazen and is way far left. She doesn't approve of hunting. East of Hazen along the river was a scenic area where people recreated, hunted, hiked and the kids from town drove along the railroad tracks with their motorcycles to do a little off road. Lauren built the first house there and now it is a development. You betcha, Lauren is all about setting aside wild scenic places.

Yep she is as liberal as they come here in ND. She also is not overly concerned with getting her stories factually straight. I have had to provide corrections for her in the past.

- - - Updated - - -

Plains goes back and posts the 95% comment to protray roads every mile checkerboarding the grasslands when in fact the truth is much different.


"[FONT=&quot]The delegation requested Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue and Attorney General Jeff Sessions work with North Dakota and the affected counties to find a “mutually acceptable settlement.”

Apparently working out "mutually acceptable settlements" is not what plains thinks is the way to manage these Federal lands and their promised multi use agreements.


[/FONT]