Prairie legacy wilderness

[Fritz the Cat]

Standard Oil/ARAMCO or Rockefeller oil got its oil from Saudi Arabia and would just as soon the oil in the United States stayed off the market or locked up in a wilderness.

Another one is Pew Charities or Pew Family owners of Sunoco Oil. They got their oil from Venezuela until it nationalized and now the bulk comes from Nigeria. Some of the best sweet crude in the world comes from Nigeria. Sunoco oil fuels NASCAR.

Pew Charitable Trusts: Pew president Rebecca Rimel has transformed a reliable backer of traditional U.S. charities into an enthusiastic supporter of a cacophony of leftist causes. The Philadelphia-based organization has about $4 billion in assets, and Pew’s environmental program, directed by Joshua S. Reichert, has donated an average of $30 million annually over the past two decades to an array of environmental causes. Once described by the Boston Globe as the “man in charge of doling out the single largest block of money earmarked for environmental causes,” Reichert told the Globe: “We are very product oriented. We need to demonstrate a return on these investments...that is measurable.” Reichert likes to tell grant recipients what he wants done and “encourages” them to form coalitions to get maximum use out of Pew’s money. He once told environmental writer Mark Dowie: “I don’t want someone who knows the facts, or can articulate them persuasively; I want someone who wants to win and knows how.”
Here are a few of the environmental groups receiving Pew grants in recent years:
* Ducks Unlimited, 2000-2004, $25,300,000 * National Environmental Trust, 2000-2004, $20,500,000 * Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, 2000-2004, $20,476,000 * Wilderness Society, 1998-2004, $2,596,400 * Trout Unlimited, 2000-2004, $2,312,000 * National Parks & Conservation Association, 2000-2004, $2,300,000 * Save Our Wild Salmon, 2000-2004, $2,250,000 * Sierra Club, Sierra Club Foundation, 1998-2004, $1,689,000 * Union of Concerned Scientists, 2000-2004, $1,100,000 * Conservation Law Fund, 2000-2004, $906,000 * Friends of the Earth, 1998-2004, 852,335
Pew also contributed $23,119,000 to the Tides Foundation and Tides Center between 2000 and 2004. Tides’ method of operation makes it all but impossible to determine where this money goes, which is how Tides and its donors want it.

PrairieGhost, you worked for the US Geological Survey and you should have seen the numbers. Alaska has more oil then Saudi Arabia and has enough natural gas to fuel the US for several centuries. Why let Big oil through their surrogates lock up the assets in wilderness? Why import? The people of Nigeria benefit little by selling this commodity instead of making "use" of it.

I have to reprint this one. Apres said,

-what I was trying to say is if it would be put to a public vote I think this passes with flying colors most uneducated(politically) sheeple would feel really good about saving a small piece of scenic land from the big bad oil companies.

 

[PrairieGhost]

PrairieGhost, you worked for the US Geological Survey and you should have seen the numbers. Alaska has more oil then Saudi Arabia and has enough natural gas to fuel the US for several centuries.

Again I have to deal with your ignorance. I have no idea about the oil numbers. I worked for the biological division, not the water division, not the minerals division, not the ----------. When our office went from the U S Fish and Wildlife to U S Geological Survey most of the work I did was for the Dept of Agriculture.

 

[gst]

Again I have to deal with your ignorance. I have no idea about the oil numbers. I worked for the biological division, not the water division, not the minerals division, not the ----------. When our office went from the U S Fish and Wildlife to U S Geological Survey most of the work I did was for the Dept of Agriculture.

'
That's not very nice.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

PG, most of the work you did at USGS was for USDA.? Well that certainly is a new one.

Real environmentalists study nature and look for things that not only tree huggers want to know about, but common every day people like yourself Fritz want to know about.

That reminds me. Page 5 post 98 I said remember that name. Edward Henry Harriman...a railroad baron. In 1899 he purchased a steamship and organized a philanthropic-scientific survey of coastal Alaska and Russia. Luminaries included John Muir, John Burrows and George Bird Grinnell. Just think, a robber baron gave these conservationists their start.

Edward Henry Harriman had a son, Averill who became one of the richest industrialists ever. He started a bank (Brown Brothers Harriman) and his partners were Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker. Bush had a son and named him "George Herbert Walker" Bush.

Yesterdays old robber barons are todays new Robin Hoods.

 

[gst]

Interesting link that pulls back the curtain a bit.

https://allianceforthewildrockies.org/nrepa/


[COLOR=#FFFFFF !important]What Lands Will NREPA protect?

NREPA-protected lands will stretch across almost 20 million acres of public domain in Idaho, Montana, Washington, Oregon, and Wyoming. Within this bioregion lie five diverse ecosystems, important both culturally and ecologically, that people come to experience from around the world.

[/COLOR]

​

​

- - - Updated - - -

https://allianceforthewildrockies.org/news/

 

[gst]

For those that do not think these orgs like the Center for Biological Diversity and HSUS are gaining traction in impacting hunting thru these Federal agencies and policies.

http://freerangereport.com/index.ph...reaching-obama-era-wildlife-management-rules/

 

[Allen]

Fritz,

Just curious here, but where did you read that Alaska has more oil than Saudi Arabia? Most articles I've read on the topic suggest only Venezuela has more oil than the Saudis. The U.S., including Alaska, has about 40 billion barrels of oil that is technically recoverable. Saudi Arabia and Venezuela are both up over 250 billion by most estimates.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Allen said,

The U.S., including Alaska, has about 40 billion barrels of oil that is technically recoverable.

Your source???????????

Former Representative Helen Chenoweth from Idaho was killed in a car accident Oct. 2006. I used to visit with her 11 or 12 years ago and she told me the Saudis didn't want ANWAR oil on the market so they funded enviro orgs to myth the caribou calving grounds. Her story.

Alaska's north slope may have more oil then we are being told. Venezuela may have a bunch but what they need is food. Look 'em up. Many grocery store shelves are bare. Some reporters are calling the crisis "hell on earth". Maybe a little extreme.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/22/venezuela-economic-crisis-guardian-briefing

 

[Allen]

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_pres_a_EPC0_R01_mmbbl_a.htm This only lists the "proved reserves", which is currently closer to 32 billion barrels. Add in a few more billion for unproven.

I've also heard/read that about the Saudis and ANWAR. I suppose it makes good business sense from their perspective.

And yeah, ain't socialism grand!

 

[gst]

Holy unsigned as usual.

Thread: Prairie legacy wilderness
Man up you pussy

 

[gst]

Interesting opinion.

http://billingsgazette.com/opinion/...cle_9467ec11-bb05-5f4d-9364-ee8ea4c1e7ba.html

Cha-ching! That’s the sound celebrated at Sen. Jon Tester’s Last Best Outdoors Fest held in Columbia Falls last week. The theme was that Montana’s booming outdoor economy depends on our federal lands that provide hiking trails, climbing rocks, ski slopes, and scenery. According to Business for Montana Outdoors, 86,000 new service jobs were created in Montana between 2000 and 2015, but those jobs included the health care and real estate sectors, which also are booming.

Indeed, public lands provide a loud “cha-ching,” but that sound is louder in boardrooms of “the rock climbing industrial complex” than on Main Street Montana. In 2015, for example, North Face reported sales of $12.4 billion, REI sales of $2.4 billion, and Patagonia $750 million.

According to the national Outdoor Industry Association, the clothing and equipment sector boasts annual consumer spending of $7.1 billion in Montana, a small fraction of the $120 billion nationwide. Those sales, however, are not driven by Montana hunters looking to fill their freezers or the family hiking to a nearby waterfall. They are driven by the tourists who visit Yellowstone and Glacier, never venturing farther than a few hundred yards from pavement, and by millennials who don a down parka when the temperature falls below 60 degrees in Silicon Valley.


For those who do venture beyond parking lots, recreation, like the fest, is “absolutely free and open to everyone.” That free lunch comes at great cost to U.S. taxpayers. Every year the federal government takes in about 20 cents for every dollar it spends according to a study by the Property and Environment Research Center. That means the outdoor industry and its customers are heavily subsidized. In contrast, the same study showed that our federal lands take in almost $20 for every dollar spent on mineral land management.


So why is a practical Eastern Montana farmer and senator hosting an outdoor fest that drains the U.S. Treasury? The answer is that, like robbing a bank because that is where the money is, public lands are where the votes are. According to a Colorado College poll, 63 percent of Montanans call themselves conservationists, and most of these are millennials moving to the state believing that federal lands are not for logging, grazing, mining and oil drilling.

This also explains the $1.4 million ad campaign by Backcountry Hunters and Anglers attacking Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s national monument review. Yes, he will likely propose reducing the size of monuments such as Bears Ears at 1.35 million acres, but it won’t result in roughshod development on federal lands. Only a fraction of Bears Ears contains antiquities, while the rest may contain large oil and gas reserves. By attacking Zinke, such groups are really trying to garner more votes for Tester in the 2018 contest.


Our public lands are not going to go to the highest dollar bidder, but they do go to the highest vote bidder. The problem is that the political market place is neither fiscally nor environmentally prudent, and public land love fests will not change this.

Federal lands could be better managed and could be an asset for the U.S. Treasury. By insisting that they are free, we simply pad the pockets of big business. Real change will only come if those of us who use those lands pay for taking care of them. The same poll showing a plurality of Montanans are conservationists showed that 94 percent support improving and repairing infrastructure in national parks and outdoor destinations. If we actually paid realistic recreation fees, we could be the pipers calling the tune.

 

[PrairieGhost]

I will be headed to some of that Montana high country (9800ft) in a few days to shoot a wolf. We will be a mile or two from Wilderness, but hope that's close enough. I will have to tell locals I'm hunting something else. They don't want their wolves shot. I have to side with ranchers because I would rather shoot elk, but the locals even in some small towns want the wolves so one has to think. I guess they make a lot more money off a wolf than they do a cow. Tourists don't drive a thousand miles to see a cow. A fellow running a rock shop and on the volunteer rescue team said the economy in the mountains is better with Wilderness and wolves. I guess just different people get the money. It was ranchers, now it's small local businesses that sell food, beer, rent snowmobiles etc. Oh well hope I kill a wolf.

 

[gst]

Soooooo.......just kinda ignoring?

 

[PrairieGhost]

I don't want to mess up this thread so I'll post up some picks on a new thread when I get back. I am not expecting to actually get a wolf, but I'll try.
I like the turn this poll is taking.

 

[gst]

Didn;t think so.

- - - Updated - - -

http://freerangereport.com/index.ph...t-of-lands-and-resources-is-bad-for-the-west/

This is not news to people in the West, whose communities are surrounded by federal lands, and whose natural resources are under the control of distant federal agencies that do not bear the consequences. In fact, it has been a sore subject for decades.​

Greg Walcher
Daily Sentinel

My decision may change your life​

A quick search on the internet easily finds hundreds of famous quotes about how the everyday decisions we make can change our lives.
Motivational speaker Anthony Robbins says, “Your life changes the moment you make a new, congruent, and committed decision.”
“Seven Habits” author Steven Covey asserts, “I am not a product of my circumstances; I am a product of my decisions.”
“Life is a matter of choices, and every choice you make makes you,” says noted leadership skills writer John C. Maxwell. Actress Keri Russell has even found that “sometimes it’s the smallest decisions that can change your life forever.”
It goes almost without adding, that some decisions affect not only our own lives, but the lives of others, as well. But what about decisions that do not affect us at all — only other people? That is the case with hundreds of government officials, who get paid the same and achieve the same career goals, almost regardless of decisions they make as part of their daily routine.
Sometimes the decisions of federal officials in Washington, for example, can alter the economy and future prospects of far distant people and communities. Thomas Hardy famously disdained such arms-length decision makers in government: “The offhand decision of some commonplace mind high in office at a critical moment influences the course of events for a hundred years.”
This is not news to people in the West, whose communities are surrounded by federal lands, and whose natural resources are under the control of distant federal agencies that do not bear the consequences. In fact, it has been a sore subject for decades.
When I first became president of Club 20 in the late 1980s, one of the board’s first resolutions at my first meeting was on this subject. The concern was that decisions made by the EPA, BLM, Forest Service, Park Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service were made in Washington, D.C. by people who did not have to live with the consequences. A decision about grazing permits was the immediate cause of that year’s local outrage, but over the years it has been the same distress over wilderness management, endangered species, road closures, gas leases, timber sales, power plants, pipelines, and a hundred others.
Perhaps surprisingly, even the Club 20 board of 1989 did not quarrel with the federal government’s right to own and manage public lands. Nor did the organization demand immediate reversal of all such decisions. Rather, a much more novel approach was suggested. Namely, federal agents with such power to alter the lives and futures of western communities ought to live in those communities. I remember one member saying, “anyone who makes decisions like that ought to have to walk down Main Street the next day.”
Sometimes in politics, what’s old is new. Club 20’s 1989 resolution called for moving the BLM to the West, making its officials live in the communities whose resources they manage. Legislation to do just that was introduced last month by Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner and Congressman Scott Tipton, proving that the issue is as important as ever, and can only be resolved when Congress finally addresses it. There is bipartisan support, Sen. Michael Bennet having cosponsored the bill. At the same time, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is openly discussing a plan to move not only the BLM, but also the Bureau of Reclamation and the Fish and Wildlife Service, out West. The idea is not just symbolic; it is important.
There was a time when officials had to be in the same building to communicate efficiently. Surely in 2017 that is no longer the case, when our lives are so seamless and virtual that I can write this column from anywhere on the planet. People calling you on the phone have no idea where you might be, and we can see each other while we converse from afar. Meetings and conferences are now routinely held in cyberspace, saving a fortune in travel costs. Government always lags behind the rest of the world in modernization, of course, but isn’t it time?
Kentucky’s famous farmer/poet/novelist Wendell Berry, widely admired as one of conservation’s most prolific and gifted writers, explained it best:
“To put the bounty and the health of our land, our only commonwealth, into the hands of people who do not live on it and share its fate will always be an error. For whatever determines the fortune of the land determines also the fortunes of the people. If history teaches anything, it teaches that.”

- - - Updated - - -

An interesting study regarding state vs federal land management. A bit different than what some claim.

https://www.perc.org/articles/divided-lands-state-vs-federal-management-west

 

[Fritz the Cat]

PG said,

I like the turn this poll is taking.

Are you calling it early again? You know what happens every time you do that.

I will have to tell locals I'm hunting something else. They don't want their wolves shot. I guess they make a lot more money off a wolf than they do a cow.

You crack me up with your bullshit.

 

[PrairieGhost]

Think about it with an open mind Fritz. If you owned a business in Gardner, Montana and tourism was 90% of your income would a wolf or a cow be more important to you. An elk is more important to me so I'll side with the rancher. However locals are pushing for a reduced or even ending the wolf hunt. I seen a T shirt I liked that had a picture of a wolf. At the top it said wolf. Under the picture it said smoke a pack a day.

 

[Narcs]

GST- calling somebody a pussy? Really? I thought you were above that, the "Teflon Don" of NDA. Nobody or nothing phases you. Somebody getting under your skin- priceless.

 

[Davey Crockett]

;:;popcorn

 

[gst]

GST- calling somebody a pussy? Really? I thought you were above that, the "Teflon Don" of NDA. Nobody or nothing phases you. Somebody getting under your skin- priceless.

Ummmmmm if you are refering to this post......

- - - Updated - - -

Holy unsigned as usual.

Thread: Prairie legacy wilderness
Man up you pussy

That is a copy and paste of an unsigned negative rep someone left me. ;:;banghead

But hey thanks for the little personal whine there.