National Grasslands

[Fritz the Cat]

gst said,

That's the idea behind a decoy is it not, make them seem as real as you can while hiding what they actually are?

Even smart old birds fall prey to the real good decoy spreads................

Mark Twain said, "It is easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled."

Every once in awhile conservatives wake up to the dangers of giving the wildlife industry dedicated funding in the Billions. In 2000 American Farm Bureau led the charge to defeat (CARA) Conservation and Reinvestment Act where-by they would have had about $40 Billion, much of it to buy private land. In 2015 the young House Republicans defunded the Land Water and Conservation Fund.

Why do these highly intelligent wildlife professionals (their words not mine) hate/malign politicians and Farm Bureau? Follow the money.

 

[PrairieGhost]

Originally Posted by Fly Carpin It's funny how if someone takes a stance for something they believe in, your green decoy sources call it a "guise" if it doesn't align with their ideals. Can you prove, with sources that have a bit more credibility than green decoy, which is essentially the mirror opposite of the Center for Biological Diversity, that BHA is using hunting and fishing on public lands as a "guise" for their "anti-development agenda"? Please, if you can, provide a source that isn't so clearly biased one way or another. Maybe BHA is a bunch of public land users who feel their piece of the oft mentioned multiple use agreement is taking it in the shorts in some areas, and they fear the same incrimentalism that you do, just from the opposite side of the table? For what it's worth these questions are merely rhetorical food for thought.

Kurtr Wrote:

I know what you are saying but alot of the regular people who are members are good and just want to save or protect public land. That Land Tawney is not trust worthy. I actually have a membership just from buying my cimaron from seek outside the magazine has alot of good stuff in it. If they would stick to protection of lands and lay off the complete exclusion stuff. The water act in Montana where they are trying to ban jet boat from rivers that have been navigated for years is where as a org they could stand up for multiple use and public lands but went the other direction. It really is tough to find an org that lines up with a guys ideals kinda like picking the lesser of two evils.

I agree with both of you. I think your both on the same page with only a slightly different view. Personally I don't trust either side.

they fear the same incrimentalism that you do, just from the opposite side of the table?

This statement really hit home for me. I have watched for 50 years the ranchers trying to get the land under one scheme or another. So today I don't trust them. The more they talk the less I trust them. The Oregon thing and the Bundy's confirm my distrust.

If they would stick to protection of lands and lay off the complete exclusion stuff.

That also is true and I can understand why that builds mistrust with ranchers. The same is true for both sides. Both sides have some good people, but when a few from each group wants to exclude the others we all mistrust each other. For many years the west has been overgrazed. When the order comes down to better manage the land federal agencies reduce the grazing rate. That's the responsible thing to do, but then some ranchers will say they are not allowing them to graze. I know that isn't true so there goes trust. Reduction in grazing capacity isn't the same thing as not allowing them to graze.

We all see the liberals say that the conservatives are cutting the budget on X which is their pet thing, when in truth they are only cutting the increase. I always thought this was a liberal thing, but ranchers do the same when they say they are being kicked off the land. I will just throw some numbers out, not real so don't anyone jump on this. Lets say that a current grazing allotment is set at 30 acres per animal unit month (AUM). Random sampling of the pasture shows it's being over grazed so the agency sets the grazing capacity at 40 acres per AUM until it recovers. So the rancher can put 25% fewer cattle on his grazing allotment for an unknown duration of time. He goes to the public and says he is being pushed out incrementally when in fact that is not true.

I wish everyone had the attitude you two have on this perhaps we could get somewhere. I remember when the Sierra Club and ranchers both testified at the last meetings I attended on grazing plans for the grasslands. I kept thinking to myself leave things as they are because I didn't like either plan. If it isn't broke don't fix it. Like I have said many times individuals are ok, but organizations have no soul or conscience. They are one track minded. I dislike some of the restrictive things coming from those who would protect our public land, but I also dislike some of the get every penny you can from the land from some ranch organizations. Are there people hiding behind false fronts? Of course. For me it's those who measure all value by the dollar hiding behind organizations like the American Land Council. Ranchers will not believe a word that comes out of the mouth of Backwoods Hunters and Anglers and none of their members will believe a word that cones from American Land Council. I don't know what the solution is.

 

[Fly Carpin]

Screaming into the void. Vollmer for President!

 

[DirtyMike]

Screaming into the void. Vollmer for President!

haha!

 

[Kurtr]

Screaming into the void. Vollmer for President!

That really is to bad because a bunch of the links and information provided is good and eye opening. Reading information that does not support how a person feels can be uncomfortable but it is also needed to see other points of view.

- - - Updated - - -

i would say this is also why we as a society are where we are at as when you see some thing you dont like you just ignore it instead of solve it. I know nothing will get solved on here i am just speaking in generalities

 

[DirtyMike]

That really is to bad because a bunch of the links and information provided is good and eye opening. Reading information that does not support how a person feels can be uncomfortable but it is also needed to see other points of view.

- - - Updated - - -

i would say this is also why we as a society are where we are at as when you see some thing you dont like you just ignore it instead of solve it. I know nothing will get solved on here i am just speaking in generalities

Kurt, I'm in no disagreement regarding his ability to find truthful information and presents it to the masses. But, given the amount of hyperlinks he posts to prove his own point, regardless if he's right, is what drives me to ignore him. Much the same that I would ignore the guy on the street corner preaching the message of God. Not that I don't dislike what the person is saying, I'm choosing to either gather my own information on the topic, or listen to someone I actually respect.

 

[gst]

Exactly right kurt. People may not like what fritz and I share but there is a reason we include the links so people can see for themselves what is happening and make up their own minds. Not veryone has to agree, but at least be informed by facts when you make your decision.

fly......so you come here insinuating something is not fact or true questioning the credibility then when asked to show where what you claim is not credible is not you choose to ignore instead.........

- - - Updated - - -

I don't know what the solution is.

Try sharing some facts and truth for once and see.

- - - Updated - - -

Kurt, I'm in no disagreement regarding his ability to find truthful information and presents it to the masses. But, given the amount of hyperlinks he posts to prove his own point, regardless if he's right, is what drives me to ignore him. Much the same that I would ignore the guy on the street corner preaching the message of God. Not that I don't dislike what the person is saying, I'm choosing to either gather my own information on the topic, or listen to someone I actually respect.

that is certainly your choice to ignore fact and truth when it is presented simply because you do not like the person presenting it.

- - - Updated - - -

I do find it a bit funny how people that dislike someone and post things to that end disrupting good discussions with personal crap seem to think that person is going to be bothered by those people ignoring them. If not trying ot get that persons goat, why post that you are ignoring them......just simply ignore them.

high school girl stuff...........

I do get a kick out of how people think.

- - - Updated - - -

I dislike some of the restrictive things coming from those who would protect our public land, but I also dislike some of the get every penny you can from the land from some ranch organizations. .

plains I actually have posted links ot various orgs showing specific agendas they pursue spending countless dollars to acheive as they "protect" our public lands that include not lowering grazing allotment numbers but removing grazing completely.

Can you provide links to these "ranch organizations" you mention with that agenda that goes beyond your claim of leaving things the way they are regarding generational multiple use promises?

Your own words actually belie your own claims plains.

 

[Fly Carpin]

I didn't insinuate anything. I asked a rhetorical question. And as for Green Decoy, I refuse to give any group the time of day that can't distinguish conservationist from environmentalist. Just like I wouldn't expect you to give the time of day to groups that are vehemently opposed to ag. But my rhetorical question apparently triggered you. I'm sorry.

And Kurt, you're right. I'll read the links. It's important to read things that don't align with my own views for perspective. Good point.

I do find it a bit funny how people that dislike someone and post things to that end disrupting good discussions with personal crap seem to think that person is going to be bothered by those people ignoring them. If not trying ot get that persons goat, why post that you are ignoring them......just simply ignore them.

high school girl stuff...........

Just like you ignoring every unsigned bad rep you receive? High school girl stuff indeed.

Again. Rhetorical musings. Don't need a response. Now if you need me, I'll be out working on tree plantings on public land, so Lung has somewhere to shoot giant trophy bucks over a mountain of bait before the rifle crowd has a chance. Byeeee!

 

[Fritz the Cat]

PG says, "Personally I don't trust either side." but then goes right back to his favorite topics ranchers, grazing, American Lands Council.

Bruce, tell us what you don't trust about the other side. This isn't the first time you have made this statement. But never elaborate.


- - - Updated - - -

We don't have a Backcountry Hunters and Anglers org in North Dakota mostly because the Measure 5 Crowd failed to get the dedicated funding source from the oil revenue rip off. BHA is where the money is. BHA CEO Land Tawney used to be regional director with National Wildlife Federation. His position went to Dave Detloff who is the very person who introduced the oil revenue rip off to our highly educated wildlife professionals. You know the ones.......they spearheaded M5. Lost 80 to 20.

Minnesota has a sales tax to fund these highly intelligent wildlife professionals' schemes. As a result Backcountry Hunters and Anglers started a chapter in Minnesota. Here is the story:

http://watchdog.org/203523/sportsmen-group-targeted-green-decoy-environmentalists-fires-back/

The video is hilarious.

 

[PrairieGhost]

Bruce, tell us what you don't trust about the other side. This isn't the first time you have made this statement. But never elaborate.

I never elaborate for the same reason you don't tell me things that are wrong with the North Dakota Farm Bureau. If I trusted you as far as I can throw my car I would have elaborated for you.

 

[gst]

Just like you ignoring every unsigned bad rep you receive? High school girl stuff indeed.

!

Do I post on here I am "ignoring" them and then go on and on and on and on about them? I simply point out that unsigned bad rep really doesn;t do much to make people stop and think. There actually are some people on here that if they gave me bad rep and signed it that would make me think twice about what I was posting. Unsigned bad rep.....not so much.

So fly are you ignoring me and fritz and plainsman or not?

- - - Updated - - -

And as for Green Decoy, I refuse to give any group the time of day that can't distinguish conservationist from environmentalist.

conservationists that wish to end promised multiple usage of these public lands are no different in the end result than environmentalists that wish to end promised multiple usage of public lands.

I wouldn;t think that is so hard to understand.

So is the information presented in the Green Decoy link fact or not?

- - - Updated - - -

I never elaborate for the same reason you don't tell me things that are wrong with the North Dakota Farm Bureau. If I trusted you as far as I can throw my car I would have elaborated for you.

Funny, I tend to trust people that post links to the information they share and not so much those that repeatedly post untruths..........

But what this is is simply another dodge at actually posting facts to back up his claims. He's getting almost as good as old Hillary.

- - - Updated - - -

I didn't insinuate anything. I asked a rhetorical question.

The formating of a "rhetorical question" can indeed insinuate plenty. But if you choose to ask any kind of a question on an internet talk forum and not expect someone to answer..........

 

[Fly Carpin]

Checked the user list. Who's Plainsman?

 

[Ericb]

GST, are there any Ag first groups that are currently trying to protect sportsman's multiple use rights and providing more opertunities for them?

 

[gst]

Is that a rhetorical question you don;t want answered or..........

 

[Ericb]

His archnemesis!

 

[gst]

GST, are there any Ag first groups that are currently trying to protect sportsman's multiple use rights and providing more opertunities for them?

There were ranching groups that came together with sportsmen in working to create habitat improvements for sage grouse.

There are Ag groups that work directly with the NDG&F to provide environmental stewardship recognitions that benefit sportsmen.

There are Ag groups that support the NDG&F pairing hunters with and owners program.

Most all ag groups respect and value sportsmen in helping manage wild game populations as they also work to maintain private property rights. They are not exclusive and despite fools calims by some on here these groups and sportsmens groups are able to work together many times.

A most recent example was NDFB and Delta Waterfowl. The CRP opening stimulated another go at talking about creating a workable CRP program to benefit both groups.

- - - Updated - - -

His archnemesis!

Naw just some fella that lies alot. ;:;banghead

 

[Ericb]

Links please!

 

[dank]

gst,

What your linksand you attmpt to assert is that by linking together the pasts of donors that it implies deceitful motives by the orginizations they have donated too. What your links ignore are the other sources of funding, in BHA's case some of the giants of the outdoor sporting industry (Kimber, Leupold, Vortex, Sitka, Sage, Weatherby). Are Leupold and Kimber "green decoys" because they support groups that ultimately align with their vision?

Is it any surprise that BHA lobbied for continuation of LCWF funding, is supporting a bill in Nevada that would allow corner crossing from one piece of public land to another via a shared corner, and opposing the sale of a state forest in Oregon to the private sector. The ALC says it supports retaining public ownership (of state lands) and wants to improve access, where were they on these issues?

Also, should we be leery of any group whose donors have political motives? Or just those who we don't agree with?

 

[gst]

Links please!

http://www.environmentalstewardship.org/regionvii-hovderanch.aspx||

Know these guys pretty well this is a program the NDSA approached the NDG&F to partner in.

This is part of a national program initiated by the NCBA

http://www.beefusa.org/environmentalstewardshipaward.aspx

I beleive the NDSA is now also involved in the Aldo Leuopold awards program as well.

http://www.ndstockmen.org/newsroom/leopold-award-finalists-announced/

I can share some more later.

- - - Updated - - -

Even the TRCP hilights partnerships.

http://www.trcp.org/2017/06/22/conservation-private-ranches-helps-give-sage-grouse-home-range/

- - - Updated - - -

gst,

What your linksand you attmpt to assert is that by linking together the pasts of donors that it implies deceitful motives by the orginizations they have donated too. What your links ignore are the other sources of funding, in BHA's case some of the giants of the outdoor sporting industry (Kimber, Leupold, Vortex, Sitka, Sage, Weatherby). Are Leupold and Kimber "green decoys" because they support groups that ultimately align with their vision?

Is it any surprise that BHA lobbied for continuation of LCWF funding, is supporting a bill in Nevada that would allow corner crossing from one piece of public land to another via a shared corner, and opposing the sale of a state forest in Oregon to the private sector. The ALC says it supports retaining public ownership (of state lands) and wants to improve access, where were they on these issues?

Also, should we be leery of any group whose donors have political motives? Or just those who we don't agree with?

I attempt to "assert" nothing. I share links to facts and allow people to read to learn and make up their own minds. If after reading these links you actually believe someone like Land Tawney and BCH&A represents sportsmen interests as well as supporting promised multiple usage of these lands that is certainly your choice to make.

But the facts of the matter is what these national monument designations actually do impacts in a negative way those promised multiple uses. Land Tawney and those driving the agedas of those orgs are not stupid people. They know it would be difficult under our Constitutional rule of law to remove these muliple uses form the publics lands. So they find back door ways to do it thru removing access on these lands under national monument designations. I have shared the links to those facts more than a few times over the years.

Kind of lard to graze and log andf mine when the roads to access these VAST chunks of lands are removed or closed to usage. Hell they are finding out it ti hard to even right fires and as such these lands are burning.

Combine things like the Equal Justice Act and lawsuits are now the method of choice to negatively impact promised multiple usage of these lands.

But hey if you wish to deny the facts of these articles please do one thing. Show where the information in them is false or inaccurate. Start there and we can have a discussion after that.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Checked the user list. Who's Plainsman?

Funny story,

A witty guy used to post on nodakouthouse but got tired of Plainsman so he moved to fishingbuddy. Plainsman followed and so when NDA launched the witty fellow signed in here using the pseudo-name Plainsman. Now you know why Plainsman had to go with PrairieGhost.

The witty fellow never used the user name "plainsman" for mischief. If it isn't in the user list now, he must have deleted it.