Prairie legacy wilderness

Do you support having Wilderness areas in ND?

  • Yes

    Votes: 56 69.1%
  • No

    Votes: 25 30.9%

  • Total voters
    81

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
As far as I am concerned at this point the only people this is affecting is the ranchers that graze the land or live near these areas, and the oil companies that want to build roads and destroy a last remaining piece of what used to be.
If you truly are interested and passionate about this, here is a suggestion. Contact each of the people in this link that are the board of this org and ask what their stance is on continued grazing of these lands under multiple usage agreements.

Remember grazing is the closet thing we have to the herds of bison that used ot naturally impact these lands, so I am using that and not oil as a standard to measure these folks ideals.

http://www.badlandsconservationalliance.org/board-staff/

Lets see what these folks think.

I am familiar with how Connie Triplett thinks.................;:;badidea
 


Apres

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
May 18, 2015
Posts
222
Likes
2
Points
115
Location
Bismarck, ND
I started a new thread for you guys to discuss logging and wildfires. Unless it directly relates to our ND Badlands please move that conversation over there. Thank you!
 

Duckslayer100

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2015
Posts
4,611
Likes
189
Points
293
Location
ND's Flatter Half
I started a new thread for you guys to discuss logging and wildfires. Unless it directly relates to our ND Badlands please move that conversation over there. Thank you!

I enjoy your enthusiasm, but good luck. You're kind of new here. You'll figure out how these shenanigans roll...
 

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
If we decide as resident's of ND to support this and turn it into a wilderness area. We have to accept the designation and what comes with it (federal regulations).

And therein lies my opposition. And that is why we can not disconnect from what we have seen happen in other states becasue of those behind developing the guidelines and restrictions of these designations and the process (tax payer funded lawsuits) they use to accomplish them.

we can either learn by what has happened in other states or allow it to happen here. To bury our head in the sand and beleive these orgs will not implement that which "prohibited and severely restricted" things that do work in conjunction with these lands and keeping them intact is foolish.

Anyways I do enjoy these types discussions so thanks.

- - - Updated - - -

let us know how those on this board respond to your questions.
 

Obi-Wan

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
7,725
Likes
3,003
Points
798
Location
Bismarck
As far as changing the rules goes I could be mistaken but I believe the rules were changed in the last minutes of the Clinton Administration. You are mistaken I can still do it and I probably have more miles on my boots in ND badlands from over 30 years of hunting out West than most guys on this site. I have seen what happens to the older guys that can no longer put miles on in a day and that is what my opinion is based on.

Shouting down someone with a different opinion sounds like something Antifa or BLM would do.

I wasn't derailin anything. It's the same argument you make time and time again. You can't do it so let's change the rules. Sounds like something a millennial would say.
 


gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308


I am late to this party. Whose ox is getting gored?

Ranchers of course, who else owns oxen?

we have discovered Smokey Bear and his campaign about not playing with matches in the forest was a "real bad idea" though.........

#Smokeybearhastogo

#burnthisbitchdown
 
Last edited:

Apres

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
May 18, 2015
Posts
222
Likes
2
Points
115
Location
Bismarck, ND
Outside of this proposal is not up for debate here is the exact wording from the proposal. I don't care about these people outside of this issue. I think we can agree that grazing is a great way to manage natural grasslands historically it was done by a different animal but cows are fine by me and also the praire legacy wilderness.
Grazing

Medora Grazing Association 4 allotments partially or fully within the area 4 permittees Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation.
Medora Grazing Association 8 allotments partially or fully within the area 9 permittees Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation.
McKenzie Grazing Association
3 allotments partially or fully within the area
6 permittees
Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation
Medora Grazing Association
6 allotments partially or fully within the area
7 permittees
Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation.
Sheyenne Valley Grazing Association 5 allotments 12
permits / permittee number varies Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation.
 
Last edited:

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
Outside of this proposal is not up for debate here is the exact wording from the proposal. I don't care about these people outside of this issue. I think we can agree that grazing is a great way to manage natural grasslands historically it was done by a different animal but cows are fine by me and also the praire legacy wilderness.
Grazing

Medora Grazing Association 4 allotments partially or fully within the area 4 permittees Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation.
Medora Grazing Association 8 allotments partially or fully within the area 9 permittees Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation.
McKenzie Grazing Association
3 allotments partially or fully within the area
6 permittees
Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation
Medora Grazing Association
6 allotments partially or fully within the area
7 permittees
Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation.
Sheyenne Valley Grazing Association 5 allotments 12
permits / permittee number varies Grazing will continue after Wilderness designation.

wait a minute........I thought this was only about 5% of the LMNG.........please define "partially" or "varies".......
...how does an elephant get in your tent? How do you eat an elephant?

grazing allotments have been "partially" reduced all over western states becasue of the ideologies behind the orgs that have imoplemented changes to Federal management and these designations...........but lets not discuss that as it has no impact here right?

Now please show where this group controls or even impacts federal designations or prevents litigation that you and I end up paying for to change them.

this will not happen within a vacuum.

- - - Updated - - -

If you wish to impact this so it is a positive to the people of ND....start by getting the people of ND the ability to determine the managment of these lands.
 

Obi-Wan

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
7,725
Likes
3,003
Points
798
Location
Bismarck
I took this of Scott Bachmeiers facebook page
"I guess they updated the rules, sure wish they would let the folks with allotments know this. Thanks Jeb Williams for sending this update. "
grass lands.jpg
 


Allen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,537
Likes
1,557
Points
638
Location
Lincoln, kinda...
Ah come on allen, really?? who managed the wild game before the white dude came on the scene. Why do we need to now?

you are starting to sound a bit like these folks allen.


http://nwri.org/the-wildlands-project/

- - - Updated - - -

https://wildlandsnetwork.org/wildways/

- - - Updated - - -

https://wildlandsnetwork.org/our-vision/

hell maybe if we just closed these schools like someone mentioned here in another thread and packed these folks off to Billings and Portland we could just let those fires burn......like they did 500 years ago.

"What concerns me about their attitude is that they don't really consider the people who have lived there the last 100 years. They are not interested in helping these rural communities, they are interested in replacing them."


Not quite. My point is simply that the forests were here before us, and they will probably be here (come back???) after us. Why do we always have to try to manipulate things to fit into our own myopic view of how they should be?

I have never understood the mentality of "My God this place is beautiful, now if we could only just _______ to it, it would be even better". Sometimes things are pretty nice as we found them.
 

Apres

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
May 18, 2015
Posts
222
Likes
2
Points
115
Location
Bismarck, ND
I think we are debating different things, I am asking whether this would be good for ND on a local level. You (gst) are saying you can not support it because nationally the designation has hurt some/most communities and is poorly managed. I can respect that. I agree with your opinion that the feds often don't manage things well. I don't believe that the designation in ND would hurt us more than it would benefit us. Thus I support it and accept the outcome.

I agree we won't have local management of this land if we turn it into wilderness. But if we wait for that to get fixed before we preserve this land we most likely will see it roaded and resources extracted. which means we didn't choose to preserve this land. It is a choice of the lesser of two evils. Poor management or wilderness lost.

Am I wrong? I took the partially grazing to mean part of the grazing lease is on and off the designated area but still inside of the LMNG. Meaning the area the cattle are free to roam spans onto and off of it. As in they are free to come and go from the wilderness area as they (the cattle) see fit.

- - - Updated - - -

I just copied and pasted some relevant info that's being debated from the proposal

http://www.badlandsconservationalliance.org/prairie-legacy

[h=3]IF THE FOREST SERVICE IS ALREADY MANAGING THESE AREAS AS “SUITABLE FOR WILDERNESS”, WHY IS OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL WILDERNESS DESIGNATION NECESSARY?

Two reasons:

“Suitable for wilderness” is an administrative/management decision. It is a temporary protection with no permanence, is open to withdrawal, and is subject to national administration changes and political climate.

Secondly, fewer and fewer acres
in the Grasslands are being protected from development. In the 1970’s, half of the Little Missouri National Grassland (500,000 acres) qualified for Wilderness designation. Today, less than 40,000 acres in four non-contiguous parcels are managed as “suitable for wilderness”. Only Wilderness designation will stop continual loss. [/h]
WHAT HUMAN ACTIVITIES OR PURSUITS ARE ALLOWED IN WILDERNESS?

Livestock grazing, hunting, non-commercial rock collecting, permitted guide services, hiking, camping, horseback riding, canoeing and kayaking, scientific study, mineral claims established prior to designation, bird watching, cross-country skiing, and snow shoeing are all permitted in Wilderness.

The Wilderness Act
prohibitsuse of motorized/mechanical equipment and general access by motor vehicles and mechanical transport such as mountain bikes. However, the law makes exceptions for situations such as search and rescue operations, fire fighting to protect adjacent private lands, and insect and disease control. Grazing permittees are allowed to use motorized vehicles to rescue livestock; and the occasional use of motorized equipment, as necessary, is allowed to fix fences and maintain springs and livestock dams.

HOW IS COMMERCIAL LIVESTOCK GRAZING IMPACTED BY WILDERNESS?

Commercial livestock grazing, where established prior to Wilderness designation, shall be permitted in Wilderness. Maintenance of fences, livestock dams and springs is allowed, along with the occasional use of motorized equipment when necessary, in accordance with the 1980 Congressional Grazing Guidelines.

Congressional Grazing Guidelines

FROM HOUSE REPORT 96-617 OF THE 96TH CONGRESS, 1980

1. There shall be no curtailments of grazing in wilderness areas simply because an area is, or has been designated as wilderness, nor should wilderness designations be used as an excuse by administrators to slowly "phase out" grazing. Any adjustments in the numbers of livestock permitted to graze in wilderness areas should be made as a result of revisions in the normal grazing and land management planning and policy setting process, giving consideration to legal mandates, range condition, and the protection of the range resource from deterioration.


- - - Updated - - -

Duckslayer100 I've been here since May 15' and am a founding member. Just because I don't open my mouth as often as some doesn't mean I am ignorant of the way things "work" around here.
 

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,380
Likes
793
Points
483
Location
Drifting the high plains
Call me a romantic but some of these areas are just plain neato and I would love to be able for my grandkid's grandkids to be able to visit them someday on foot away from the sound of vehicles or oil wells and be able to imagine what the area was like before settlement. To have these areas preserved in a natural state not dug up and polluted with chemicals or logged off every twenty some years.
When I first started college and majored in wildlife my goal was to help keep game populations high for hunters. With age that changed. I know I will catch guff for this, but I believe that creation attests to the creator and would like future generations to be inspired as I am when I stand on a mountain top, bow or rifle in hand, and look off across miles of God's creation. We however will always be opposed by the money people who believe if you can't get a dollar out of it there is no value in it.

I am always amazed that these polls come out one way early, then as time goes on change. Do people call friends to vote or what the heck happens? Maybe people change because I am swaying back to supporting this wilderness designation again.
 
Last edited:

DirtyMike

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Posts
12,068
Likes
378
Points
428
Location
Bismarck, ND
As far as changing the rules goes I could be mistaken but I believe the rules were changed in the last minutes of the Clinton Administration. You are mistaken I can still do it and I probably have more miles on my boots in ND badlands from over 30 years of hunting out West than most guys on this site. I have seen what happens to the older guys that can no longer put miles on in a day and that is what my opinion is based on.

Shouting down someone with a different opinion sounds like something Antifa or BLM would do.

now you're reaching, obi. I'm happy that your thought process is in the minority. Question, did you bring a bow with you in those 30 years?
 

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
Not quite. My point is simply that the forests were here before us, and they will probably be here (come back???) after us. Why do we always have to try to manipulate things to fit into our own myopic view of how they should be?

I have never understood the mentality of "My God this place is beautiful, now if we could only just _______ to it, it would be even better". Sometimes things are pretty nice as we found them.

Hey, that's all fine and good until man stuck his finger in the pot and stirred it up. So should we simply ignore the risk to these rural communities withing these areas from fires due to mismangement?

In previous threads, one I believe in which you were involved I shared the facts of the changes that were pushed thru back in the 70's and 80;s by those with the ideologies they would save the spotted owl from logging.

I would suggest anyone that beleives this has not had a bearing on the increase of the fire danger these communities face should probably go talk with them.

- - - Updated - - -



FROM HOUSE REPORT 96-617 OF THE 96TH CONGRESS, 1980

1. There shall be no curtailments of grazing in wilderness areas simply because an area is, or has been designated as wilderness, nor should wilderness designations be used as an excuse by administrators to slowly "phase out" grazing. Any adjustments in the numbers of livestock permitted to graze in wilderness areas should be made as a result of revisions in the normal grazing and land management planning and policy setting process, giving consideration to legal mandates, range condition, and the protection of the range resource from deterioration.


.


Apres, THIS is why it is absolutely necessary to look at what has happened in other states with these designations. Things have changed dramatically since 1980 and I believe those on the Badlands Conservation Alliance know that.

the original wilderness designation was suppose ot be 10 million acres..............there are now over 120 million designated as wilderness.

the same orgs pushing those limits have also pushed ot have 620 million acres declared national monuments.

the orgs that are often mentioned in here have figured out how to use the courts and their interpretations to accomplish their agendas and there have in fact been "partial" cuts to grazing allotments which when dealing in reality often force producers out of business. Given the producer has ot develop water and in many cases fence, these "partial" cuts to grazing allotments make it not economical to run cattle there so the lease expires.

In a recent thread I shared a link to the proposals being considered for the management of the LMNG which included ones that had NO grazing. Those people behind that are the ones behind using these designations to implement their agendas. If not thru proper process, the courts.

Contact each of these folks and let us know what they tell you.........hopefully it is something a little better than a 1980s copy and paste.

- - - Updated - - -

When I first started college and majored in wildlife my goal was to help keep game populations high for hunters. With age that changed. I know I will catch guff for this, but I believe that creation attests to the creator and would like future generations to be inspired as I am when I stand on a mountain top, bow or rifle in hand, and look off across miles of God's creation. We however will always be opposed by the money people who believe if you can't get a dollar out of it there is no value in it.

I am always amazed that these polls come out one way early, then as time goes on change. Do people call friends to vote or what the heck happens? Maybe people change because I am swaying back to supporting this wilderness designation again.


Just leave Smokey Bear the hell out of it.
 


Obi-Wan

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
7,725
Likes
3,003
Points
798
Location
Bismarck
Last time I checked this thread was not about bow hunting why do you keep trying to inject it into it?

now you're reaching, obi. I'm happy that your thought process is in the minority. Question, did you bring a bow with you in those 30 years?

Is going back to the pre-Clinton executive order issued as he was packing the white house china promoting change or is it going back to the way of life we enjoyed for many years?
 

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,380
Likes
793
Points
483
Location
Drifting the high plains
Apes I think I could agree to leave it if there were not people supporting transferring federal land to the states. I also can not help but think the reason that some don't support the wilderness is because they can't get their hands on it then. In a perfect world I would say leave it as is, but this world isn't perfect and greed will destroy it given a chance. So even though I am getting to old to walk out to those places I say make it wilderness so future generations can enjoy it. If we don't once gone to private hands it's gone forever. It's hard enough cutting grazing intensity when the land needs it. So many try make range management look like denying multiple use. I guess they need to see tooth marks on the rocks before they back off the grazing.
 
Last edited:

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
Apes I think I could agree to leave it if there were not people supporting transferring federal land to the states..

Here we are having a nice conversation and you gotta go start with the name calling. This is why we can;t have nice things.
 

Duckslayer100

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2015
Posts
4,611
Likes
189
Points
293
Location
ND's Flatter Half
I'm not sure what about my tongue-in-cheek comment fluffed some snowflake's feathers so bad as to leave me negative rep, but whatever. ;:;boohoo
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 39
  • This month: 29
  • This month: 26
  • This month: 21
  • This month: 21
  • This month: 16
  • This month: 16
  • This month: 14
  • This month: 14
  • This month: 12
Top Bottom