Selling of your public lands.

[Longshot]

I have shared before links to studies that show states have and can manage public lands far more fiscally responsibly than the Feds. so this is not necessarily the case. In those studies the states show a return per acre MANY times over what the fed does. /

The feds need to take some notes from the states then. There is no reason the Feds cannot manage these lands better. Hopefully with a new administration things will change for the better.

 

[Fly Carpin]

GOP lawmaker withdraws bill to sell federal land

BY TIMOTHY CAMA - 02/02/17 09:56 AM EST 89

7,803
7.9K





​

© Greg Nash

A Republican lawmaker is rescinding his bill to sell off millions of acres of federally owned land.
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) announced late Wednesday night on Instagram that he would pull the legislation after backlash from conservation and sportsmen’s groups.
“I’m a proud gun owner, hunter and love our public lands,” Chaffetz wrote alongside a photograph of him in hunting camouflage, holding a dog.
“The bill would have disposed of small parcels of lands Pres. Clinton identified as serving no public purpose but groups I support and care about fear it sends the wrong message,” he wrote, adding that the legislation “dies tomorrow.”

Full story: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/317514-gop-rep-pulls-bill-to-sell-federal-land

 

[espringers]

Yay!

 

[Walleye_Chaser]

Hell yes

 

[Blitzkrieg]

You mean he rescinded his bill due to backlash from conservative and sportsman groups
without us violently protesting, blocking roads, harassing the men in blue, or dressing up like a vagina?

 

[espringers]

You mean he rescinded his vote due to backlash from conservative and sportsman groups
without us violently protesting, blocking roads, harassing the men in blue, or dressing up like a vagina?

you mean i can finally take off this damn outfit?!

 

[Allen]

You mean he rescinded his vote due to backlash from conservative and sportsman groups
without us violently protesting, blocking roads, harassing the men in blue, or dressing up like a vagina?

Sounds like he got a lot of negative attention on social media. Whatever it takes!

 

[gst]

This is a huge step to "fix" the system. Skibbys Bottom in a different thread alluded to the problems these environ groups cause managing these Federal lands thru their lawsuits. So who will put any effort into contacting their Congress persons to support this "fix"?

So who on here has contacted our Representatives to support this bill?

Perhaps that is indicative of how many people actually want to "fix" the system or how many just want their little deal of hunting to be left alone.

Go figure.

 

[BBQBluesMan]

Well gst this is a hunting and fishing website. Perhaps hunting and fishing and outdoor recreation is a bit more than a "little deal" to most on here. You are a real piece of work. Please explain why your a member of this site, is it because you enjoy talking about hunting and fishing? Or is it to keep tabs on sportsmen to make sure they don't get out of line with your thinking? Just answer it honestly. But we all know you won't.

 

[Uncle Jimbo]

So who on here has contacted our Representatives to support this bill?

Perhaps that is indicative of how many people actually want to "fix" the system or how many just want their little deal of hunting to be left alone.

Go figure.

I would say it's more indicative of the number of people on this site who choose to ignore you.

 

[gst]

People claimed to want to "fix" the system. Skibbys bottom spelled out very clearly how groups use the Equal Justice Act to sue to force these Federal aganecies to use policies that restrict many things and many uses.

Yet who here has taken the time to send an email?

What it is indicative of is that people make claims they are not willing to back up with a little effort.

Go figure.

- - - Updated - - -

Well gst this is a hunting and fishing website. Perhaps hunting and fishing and outdoor recreation is a bit more than a "little deal" to most on here. You are a real piece of work. Please explain why your a member of this site, is it because you enjoy talking about hunting and fishing? Or is it to keep tabs on sportsmen to make sure they don't get out of line with your thinking? Just answer it honestly. But we all know you won't.

Why make this personal?

People claimed to want to "fix" the system this bill is a good first step. Did you bother to send an email ? Do you want to fix a broken system or as long as you got what you wanted with the transfer being withdrawn now you don;t give a rip?

As to why I am on this site? a combination of things. there are entertaining people on here that like sarcasm and wit that are fun to banter with. I also like bringing a few facts and the links where they come from on this site to provide some information to offset what is sometimes simply false accusations and claims on here regarding a variety of things.

I have actual real life friends I "talk hunting and fishing with" so I don't feel the need to banter with people I do not know about it for the most part. Especially those that are as judgmental as many on here are when it comes to hunting and fishing.

I thought perhaps this thread could be used to discuss fixing the system so we can return to actual multiple use and end these environs agendas but I guess that is not of importance. Guess not.

Carry on whining about why someone may post on here instead.

 

[PrairieGhost]

Or is it to keep tabs on sportsmen to make sure they don't get out of line with your thinking?

I have often called it riding herd on sportsmen. They are among us. The sportsman's organizations they hate are no more single minded than the organizations they belong to. It's the nature of the beast to represent it's members. Back Country Hunters and Angler and Farm Bureau are just two sides of the same coin. One represents sportsmen as far as I know, and the other represents farmers. Some paint the sportsman's groups like Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation as all members are demon possesed and Farm Bureau are saints. There are hunters that support Farm Bureau and farmers that support the REEF. A few think you must be in lockstep with them.

 

[gst]

Well so much for trying something different to actually "fix" anything.

why try to distract from that?

 

[Kurtr]

Well gst this is a hunting and fishing website. Perhaps hunting and fishing and outdoor recreation is a bit more than a "little deal" to most on here. You are a real piece of work. Please explain why your a member of this site, is it because you enjoy talking about hunting and fishing? Or is it to keep tabs on sportsmen to make sure they don't get out of line with your thinking? Just answer it honestly. But we all know you won't.

I would say it's more indicative of the number of people on this site who choose to ignore you.

I have often called it riding herd on sportsmen. They are among us. The sportsman's organizations they hate are no more single minded than the organizations they belong to. It's the nature of the beast to represent it's members. Back Country Hunters and Angler and Farm Bureau are just two sides of the same coin. One represents sportsmen as far as I know, and the other represents farmers. Some paint the sportsman's groups like Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation as all members are demon possesed and Farm Bureau are saints. There are hunters that support Farm Bureau and farmers that support the REEF. A few think you must be in lockstep with them.

You guys are dumbasdes if you really cared about public lands this would also be a huge aid in fighting environmental groups who have made managing wolves and grizzly impossible. They are the ones who made fed lands un economical so the push for states to have it is part of their doing. All big talk pull your heads out of your ass and find the big picture. Non profits are killing the system.

- - - Updated - - -

In end the people like you all are going to be the reason they are lost always casing a divide amongst federal public land users

 

[Account Deleted]

Cramer was on "What's on your mind" a few weeks back touting a bill that would transfer management of federal lands to the states while the Feds maintained ownership and providing funding. I think it had a 10 year expiration date. This would be a compromise for everyone and prove whether or not states actually could do it more efficiently. And if so, we could look at full transfer then. But now I can't find the damned bill. I'll call his office later.

 

[PrairieGhost]

I think the bunny huggers would simply sue the states rather than the feds when it comes to wolves etc. They will always be a thorn in the side for us. Narrow minds of the radical extremes from both sides create those good ideas gone bad. Currently foolish ideas balance each other.
For those who toute the constitution, do you not respect the state constitutions that spell out these lands are to remainot federal? Are we not good for our word even when it's in black and white?

I have often said the EPA is a good idea gone bad. Many good ideas carried to extreme become a hindrance rather than a benefit. Give public land to California and it will become a disaster for sportsmen with over protection. Give public land to North Dakota and it will become a disaster for sportsmen because of no protection. Perhaps paper has to have a presidents picture on it before we respect it.

 

[gst]

I think the bunny huggers would simply sue the states rather than the feds when it comes to wolves etc. They will always be a thorn in the side for us. Narrow minds of the radical extremes from both sides create those good ideas gone bad. Currently foolish ideas balance each other.
For those who toute the constitution, do you not respect the state constitutions that spell out these lands are to remainot federal? Are we not good for our word even when it's in black and white?

I have often said the EPA is a good idea gone bad. Many good ideas carried to extreme become a hindrance rather than a benefit. Give public land to California and it will become a disaster for sportsmen with over protection. Give public land to North Dakota and it will become a disaster for sportsmen because of no protection. Perhaps paper has to have a presidents picture on it before we respect it.

Just like a dog to vomit. You can not help yourself plainsman.

Instead of repeating and regurgitating what you "have often said" why not put a little effort into "fixing" the system plainsman?

We changed our state Constitution to provide "protection" to those that hunt because of those with agendas to change what has been acceptable to us.

We changed our state Constitution to provide protection to those that farm because of those with agendas to change what has been acceptable to us.

Should we not change state Constitutions regarding the management/control/ownership of public lands to protect them from those that would change what has long been acceptable to us?

You see plainsman this bill that would be a step in fixing the system has NOTHING to do with turning lands over to the states.

It is about starting to stop the abuse of a Federal Act by those very "bunny huggers" you "claim" to hate yet often quote.

And yet you try to distract and deflect from supporting a bill that would in essence be like shining a light on a room full of rats.

As a conservative why would you not support a bill returning fiscal responsibility to find out where these monies are going under the Equal Justice Act??

Why would you not support a bill designed to fix a broken Federal program and help return true multiple uses to these public lands?

- - - Updated - - -


http://gosar.house.gov/press-release...ss-justice-act

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Congressman Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S. (AZ-04) released the following statement after joining five other original sponsors in introducing H.R. 3279, the Open Book on Equal Access to Justice Act, which aims to strengthen the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) by reinstating the tracking and reporting requirements for how much money is being paid out by the federal government under this law: “Given the rampant waste, fraud and abuse that has infected the federal government, increasing transparency of how taxpayer dollars are spent is more important than ever. The intent of the Equal Access to Justice Act was to help the average Joe fight back against an overreaching and oppressive federal government. Unfortunately, this well-intentioned law has been hijacked by environmentalists whose lawyers are billing taxpayers for rates as high as $750 an hour.” “Environmental groups have abused EAJA and used it as a money-making tool to advance their far left agenda. Our bipartisan bill will restore common sense to this law and crack down on these abuses.” Tell us plainsman why not support this bill?

 

[PrairieGhost]

Should we not change state Constitutions regarding the management/control/ownership of public lands to protect them from those that would change what has long been acceptable to us?

A living document. We have heard that before. From the far left and activist judges.

You see plainsman this bill that would be a step in fixing the system has NOTHING to do with turning lands over to the states.

Fix it for you maybe, but screw everyone else.

Tell us plainsman why not support this bill?

Will you support it by contacting our Representatives?

I have already made eight calls in opposition to this bill.

“Given the rampant waste, fraud and abuse that has infected the federal government, increasing transparency of how taxpayer dollars are spent is more important than ever.

Where has all out state money gone to? Pooof.

 

[snow]

Uncle Ted speaks~

3. What’s your view on the government attempting to sell off public land?

As long as we the public have oversight control of the transactions, I believe the government should own no land. All the best conservation is found on private land; the best hunting, fishing, water, habitat, timber, energy and quality air, soil and water is best at the hands of private ownership stewardship. Fedzilla never gets anything right.

 

[Fly Carpin]

So who on here has contacted our Representatives to support this bill?

Perhaps that is indicative of how many people actually want to "fix" the system or how many just want their little deal of hunting to be left alone.

Go figure.

Or maybe it's indicative of this thread being about the specific topic of selling Federal lands to the states. That's what we're discussing here. You posted, and I quote, "Skibbys Bottom IN A DIFFERENT THREAD alluded to..."

Also, "just want their little deal of hunting"? I'm afraid of what the repercussions of this may be, but I need to say it. As others have said to you time and time again, this is a hunting and fishing website. This thread in particular is a discussion among a group of like minded individuals concerning their worries about what the states would do to their federal lands which they use to hunt. Yes federal lands are multiple use. No one is debating that. One of those uses is recreation. That is how the majority of people on this site use federal lands. By banging your multiple use drum every time someone mentions federal land, what are you hoping to achieve? Has anyone ever said they disagree with multiple use on federal land? I'd guess no. What happens is you derail a thread with a somewhat related yet off-topic question, and then say "answer the question. It's a simple question" 900 times in a row. Here's my theory. No one responds to your question about fixing grazing allotments or logging on fed lands because they honestly don't know the answer. I know I don't. We're hunters. We're fisherman. We know what we know. And what most of us believe, including the people that spoke up on this bill, is that federal lands should stay federal. The people have spoken. The gentleman from Utah withdrew his bill.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to the B. Haugland room at the Capitol to voice my opinion as a non-landowning hunter in North Dakota. Have a good day and stay warm up there gst