Selling of your public lands.

Kurtr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
20,177
Likes
5,444
Points
1,008
Location
Mobridge,Sd
If you dont figure out how to get every one together to voice their concerns then the lands are as good as gone. That is the drum being banged it is time sportsmen quit with the eyes wide shut routine and get with it. We need to find a way to have a board or group with sportsman,ranchers,loggers,off roaders, snow mobilers, hikers, campers all organized. The petty in fighting amongst all of us is going to be our down fall. Not knowing is not an excuse any more with the info at your finger tips on the interweb i have done lots and lots of reading and contacting people even people who i dont agree with to get there point of view. If you know how your enemy will come at you a counter can already be planned. Its time as public land users we get ahead and fight with the lead for once and quit letting people dictate to us how the fight will be fought

- - - Updated - - -

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.


while i think Ted kicks ass he is missing the public access part. What he is saying though is not far from the truth.
 


jdinny

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Posts
2,242
Likes
138
Points
298
the Utah rep that sponsored the bill has pulled it from my understanding due to public backlash. saw something on facebook last night.

it was just a quick write up didn't go much into detail but that is what I gathered from it. someone who is more in tune with this bill could likely help chime in and add facts

- - - Updated - - -

did I mention I failed to read the previous page I see this was brought up:;:help
 

Account Deleted

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Posts
4,641
Likes
50
Points
246
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.
Easy for a guy that owns estates in three states where he and he alone gets to hunt to say.
 
Last edited:

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,789
Likes
1,549
Points
678
Location
Drifting the high plains
little deal of hunting
So now we know how much consideration we get from those who want the federal land.

Uncle Ted is fun to listen to, but the man is a fool. I kind of like him, but the way he goes about things doesn't do us any favors. How do we feel about a liberal that tells us he is an intellectual and we are all idiots? I'm afraid Ted is good for the other side if we are honest. He says what we think, but it doesn't convince people. Also a multi millionaire like Ted doesn't ever need public land. He has hundreds of animals behind his fence to shoot. When I was in Texas the YO Ranch invited me to come hunt with Ted. No thanks. I can't shell out $20K for a hunt.
 

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
Here is a VERY applicable video to this discussion shared by a friend just this morning. For some reason plainsman came to mind...............

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jK4KPJcHyo&feature=share

- - - Updated - - -

So why do some oppose trying to keep these public lands public?

Why do some not bother to try fixing a broken system?

Or worse yet make fools accusations against those that are?

Why do some make wild accusations aimed to distract and divert away from facts shared instead of working to find a solution?


- - - Updated - - -

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.


So plainsman I am confused, should we have not amended our state Constitution to have protected the right to hunt and fish? Was that a "far left" idea to do that?

Bruce you are apparently confused i your old age. the bill I am suggesting those concerned should support has NOTHING to do with the transfer of public lands, it is about returning accountability to where the monies go under the Equal Access to Justice Act those green decoys use to sue the govt with YOUR tax dollars.

It appears you do not even know what I am talking about despite your copying and pasting of portions of the text.

Do you even bother reading what is posted before you jump to your keyboard to make stupid accusations?

- - - Updated - - -

That is why we can not have nice things around here.

- - - Updated - - -

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

So you have made 8 calls to oppose a bill transferring lands to state control/

And yet you will not make one call to work towards fixing the system....................and people wonder why it is broken

Once again THIS is the bill that needs our support plainsman.

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.”


- - - Updated - - -

little deal of hunting
So now we know how much consideration we get from those who want the federal land.

Plainsman grazing is a "liitle deal" along with mining, logging, recreation ect...when viewed alone out of the big picture. You forgot to include one word in your quote. "their little deal"

I don't "want the Federal land" nor do I want grazing protected at the expense of hunting on these lands, or grazing at the expense of logging or any other portion of the multiple use agreements these lands were originally returned to the Federal govt by the states under.

If the Federal govt is not honoring the promises they made to the states when the state agreed to turn these lands back tp the Federal govt is it not the state obligation to change their Constitutions to hold the Federal govt accountable?

That was kind of the ideal of those fellas that founded this nation.

So if you wish to get into a dick measuring contest about who wants to protect hunting more or who hunts more or any other foolishly childish argument you likely aren;t going to win, but it is a distraction from the bigger picture of holding the Federal govt accountable.
 
Last edited:


PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,789
Likes
1,549
Points
678
Location
Drifting the high plains
So why do some oppose trying to keep these public lands public?
We don't. We want to keep it public. We just don't trust groups like the American Land Council. We see the posted signs in the Badlands, and we know about the legislator that compares hunters to the pipeline protestors so we don't trust.
GST some of the people you defend makes me distrust anything you say.

I don't "want the Federal land" nor do I want grazing protected at the expense of hunting on these lands, or grazing at the expense of logging or any other portion of the multiple use agreements these lands were originally returned to the Federal govt by the states under.
You will never understand how much I want to believe that.

So if you wish to get into a dick measuring contest about who wants to protect hunting more or who hunts more or any other foolishly childish argument you likely aren;t going to win, but it is a distraction from the bigger picture of holding the Federal govt accountable.
And you would be a lot more believable about all of this if you didn't beat that drum in defense of ranchers who don't pay their rent and think they are Rambo. Has it ever crossed your mind that what you say divides people? Old Ted tells the truth often, but he divides people. On this site we can give each other crap, but I hope all of us are smart enough not to do it when trying to convince people who's minds are not already made up.
 
Last edited:

gst

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

- - - Updated - - -

Old Ted tells the truth often, but he divides people. On this site we can give each other crap, but I hope all of us are smart enough not to do it when trying to convince people who's minds are not already made up.

You are the last person on here that should lecture others on posting crap to divide people.

I do not care if you "distrust" anything I say or do not believe what I post, I do not post here for your approval.

I post factual information and the links from which it comes because I believe people here are smart enough to makeup their own minds when presented with the truth.

I do not try to distract from the discussion because the truth needs no distraction.

Once again plainsman you have taken a thread meant to provide a good discussion and possibly even talk about how to "fix" the system many know is broken and turned it into what you typically do a means to divide as others have pointed out.

.

This administration seems willing to "fix" many things that are broken at the Federal level. Why would you distract from supporting a bill aimed at bringing more accountability to how are tax dollars are used by these green decoy orgs you like to quote in these threads if you want to change anything plainsman?

- - - Updated - - -

Perhaps we should "distrust" what you say about the "bunny huggers" you like to quote if you will not support a bill to hold their actions accountable and return fiscal responsibility to the accounting of funds they use to sue
 

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,789
Likes
1,549
Points
678
Location
Drifting the high plains
You are the last person on here that should lecture others on posting crap to divide people.
When you have two different opinion division is natural. I understand that not everyone is going to agree. That means we are divided. I think your unaware that your as guilty as I am. I also think your unaware that your not going to get everyone to agree with you all the time. Your not the silver tongue you think you are. Most people in this nation don't want the public land going to the states. I think the guy in Utah got that through his head.

when the state agreed to turn these lands back tp the Federal govt
There you go creating distrust with your false narrative again. The land never belonged to the states. All western lands belonged to the fed. When areas wanted to become a state they had to include in their constitution that the land did not belong to them. If the ranchers are loosing a battle with environmentalists they are only hastening the end with armed protests and foolish actions. Time to get smart. Auto posting also tells us about the anti hunter attitude. Especially the guy comparing us to the pipeline protestors. Trust dies a little at a time. Your above statement was one more nail in the coffin, and you have been corrected multiple times. Truth pffffffft.
 
Last edited:

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
When you have two different opinion division is natural. I understand that not everyone is going to agree. That means we are divided. I think your unaware that your as guilty as I am. I also think your unaware that your not going to get everyone to agree with you all the time. Your not the silver tongue you think you are. Most people in this nation don't want the public land going to the states. I think the guy in Utah got that through his head.

.


Plains the difference lies here

One person provides fact based information with the links to back it up as fact so that people can read for themselves learn a bit if they wish about a subject they may not have know much about. This is done with the belief if people learn the truth, most often they do the right thing.

the other person makes wild accusations and claims many times shown to be not true while actually saying people are not smart enough to think for themselves by calling them idiots and other derogatory names simply becasue they do not agree with him.

Which divides and which seeks to fix what is broken?

- - - Updated - - -

There you go creating distrust with your false narrative again. The land never belonged to the states. All western lands belonged to the fed. When areas wanted to become a state they had to include in their constitution that the land did not belong to them. If the ranchers are loosing a battle with environmentalists they are only hastening the end with armed protests and foolish actions. Time to get smart. Auto posting also tells us about the anti hunter attitude. Especially the guy comparing us to the pipeline protestors. Trust dies a little at a time. Your above statement was one more nail in the coffin, and you have been corrected multiple times. Truth pffffffft.


If the land never belonged to the state plains...............how could they sell off the lands as you REPEATEDLY claim on here?????

Stop and think about that for a moment
.
YOU referenced States honoring their Constitutions plains. Exactly what were you referencing there?
 
Last edited:

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
So the thread started out to get people to call about a bill. They did it worked. After that some talked baout how the system is broke and we should try to fix it. So a bill that is a step in that direction was provided asking for support of it.

Suddenly we find ourselves rehashing age old conversations where plainsman has been shown multiple times prior the actual history, Acts and court rulings of the day to substantiate what is being share along with the links to all that information.

Is it just that interesting to rehash all this or is there some other reason these threads end up there all the time? Why distract from the intent of trying to change how the Federal govt manages these lands?

Why try to derail that conversation?

Anyways lets get back to discussing actual ways to "fix" the system maybe plainsman will allow this one to continue. so once again.........here is the bill that is a start to do this. how many phone calls emails will be sent in support?

8 seems to be the site record...........

I'll make it easy.

https://www.heitkamp.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/email-heidi

https://www.hoeven.senate.gov/contact/email-the-senator

https://cramer.house.gov/contact/email-me

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.”



- - - Updated - - -

Here is a video of one of these groups that are using YOUR tax dollars to break the system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iil1Z8-A1GA&sns=tw

- - - Updated - - -

The Seirra Club likes the EAJA......

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/220894-big-green-groups-have-self-serving-bargain-with

"[FONT=&quot]The multimillion-dollar Sierra Club Foundation is one of many organizations using the EAJA loophole. In the 55 trials linked between the Sierra Club and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), $2.4 million was given to cover lawyer fees and court costs. From 2000 to 2009, the Sierra Club requested fees in 194 cases and was awarded more than $19 million. No one knows the exact amount because in two of the cases, the reimbursement amount remains totally unreported.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]EAJA is also hurting average Americans. Tim Lequerica is a full-time rancher living on his 320-acre ranch in Malheur County, Ore. His company holds a permit to graze 444 cattle on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land and uses water from the protected Owyhee River. In 1998, two environmental groups found a BLM paperwork error and sued the BLM to review the grazing practices on Lequerica's allotment. They also sued the BLM for "fail[ing] to protect streams, fish, sage grouse, and other Owyhee resources" by allowing ranchers to use the river to water their cattle. The groups ultimately won their case, and Lequerica had to stop watering his cattle at the Owyhee, where his family had grazed and watered their cattle for nearly a century.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In the end, Lequerica paid over $42,000 of his own money in legal fees fighting to protect his business. Those environmental groups, however, had their legal fees, totaling $128,000, voluntarily paid for by the government under EAJA.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Lequerica said, "My tax money paid for every part of the litigation. I paid my personal attorneys to represent me. My tax dollars paid the federal government who failed to do all the paperwork correctly; and my tax dollars paid [the environmental groups] to sue the federal government." EAJA has become antithetical to its own name. It does not promote equal access to justice; rather, it promotes self-serving organizations' access to easy government money."[/FONT]

- - - Updated - - -

Note the county in the above article. Wonder why people push back against these Federal agencies and the actions they take as a result of these law suits?

Who is willing to help fix this broken system?
 
Last edited:


camoman

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 7, 2015
Posts
698
Likes
5
Points
143
The state school lands were supposed to be used to find schools either through the taxes or selling it. That is why almost all has been sold east of the Mississippi. There are a lot of caveat's to this whole system. There is no blanket answer . There would have to be it is transferred back to the feds with no possibility of selling it as I do believe some states would sell it off in short order and others would be good. Utah is one I would not trust. Just look at their hunting tag system

What don't you like about their system, Kurtr?
 

Kurtr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
20,177
Likes
5,444
Points
1,008
Location
Mobridge,Sd
The fact it is over regulated and makes no money with renewable resources fed land in general. Utah is a horribly state to draw in. They have more auction tags it is why residents hunt more in other states than there home one. It is really slanted to favor outfitters and not so much diy guys. It is a once in a lifetime hunt for a non resident that can't afford an auction tag.
 

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,789
Likes
1,549
Points
678
Location
Drifting the high plains
The fact it is over regulated and makes no money with renewable resources fed land in general. Utah is a horribly state to draw in. They have more auction tags it is why residents hunt more in other states than there home one. It is really slanted to favor outfitters and not so much diy guys. It is a once in a lifetime hunt for a non resident that can't afford an auction tag.

Kurtr that's a failure of the state, not the Feds.

If the land never belonged to the state plains...............how could they sell off the lands as you REPEATEDLY claim on here?????

More than once and by more than one person this has been explained to you. Sites with the information, sites with the Nevada constitution, and videos explaining it. Much land was given to individuals in states, land was given to states to sell to support schools, and much was retained by the feds and in the state constitutions it was stated it would remain federal. Now they go back on their word. Your upset that the gov isn't following the rules while at the same time you advocate not following the constitution. If it's open to states then it's also open for people who don't like grazing to call for and end of it. I don't think it's smart to open this can of worms. I don't want grazing to end, but this could turn into a free for all that ranchers loose. If they do they have only themselves to blame.
 

Kurtr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
20,177
Likes
5,444
Points
1,008
Location
Mobridge,Sd
Kurtr that's a failure of the state, not the Feds.



More than once and by more than one person this has been explained to you. Sites with the information, sites with the Nevada constitution, and videos explaining it. Much land was given to individuals in states, land was given to states to sell to support schools, and much was retained by the feds and in the state constitutions it was stated it would remain federal. Now they go back on their word. Your upset that the gov isn't following the rules while at the same time you advocate not following the constitution. If it's open to states then it's also open for people who don't like grazing to call for and end of it. I don't think it's smart to open this can of worms. I don't want grazing to end, but this could turn into a free for all that ranchers loose. If they do they have only themselves to blame.

Read the first sentence slowly.

- - - Updated - - -

And the then the proceeding post where I say Utah makes it hard to believe a state transferr would work.
 

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
More than once and by more than one person this has been explained to you. Sites with the information, sites with the Nevada constitution, and videos explaining it. Much land was given to individuals in states, land was given to states to sell to support schools, and much was retained by the feds and in the state constitutions it was stated it would remain federal. Now they go back on their word. Your upset that the gov isn't following the rules while at the same time you advocate not following the constitution. If it's open to states then it's also open for people who don't like grazing to call for and end of it. I don't think it's smart to open this can of worms. I don't want grazing to end, but this could turn into a free for all that ranchers loose. If they do they have only themselves to blame.


Ha good one Plains

here is one of those "please show mes" again.

Please show me by copying and pasting the links to where the black emboldened statement you made above occurred. You may be a bit confused on who provided whom that information.

You mention Nevada. Nevada is unique in a couple of ways. It remains the state with the most Federal land at 85% of it's total acres remaining under Federal ownership and control.

It also was a bit different than other states under how it came to be a state. At the time slavery was being abolished, the territory of Nevada was seeking to become a state. The idea of Federal land ownership at the time was not completely settled as this nation expanded westward and the intent of the Equal Footing doctrine was being interpreted thru the courts and legislatures of the time.

The politicians that were seeking to pass the 13th amendment thought they may need the three votes Nevada would bring to the table so there was a rush to enter Nevada into the union as a state.

The Territorial govt of Nevada understanding this chip they held, had decided not to cede lands back to the Federal and thru the politics that existed at the time, a deal was struck by those in power in both cases to allow Nevada into the union and they would cede those lands back to the Federal govt under promises of considerations for business ventures held by those in power in Nevada and a promise of the Federal govt to sell those lands they held in Nevada back to those private individuals within the state and use those funds to pay war debts incurred during the Civil war.

Ironically Nevada was not needed to pass the thirteenth Amendment and the promises to dispose of those lands were never kept.

So your example of Nevada is actually an example of how the Federal govt broke promises to the states thru out history.

As to your claim emboldened in red, how long did you deny that tobethe case until the " Sites with the information, sites with the Nevada constitution, and videos explaining it" to you were provided beyond dispute?

As to your statement emboldened in blue, you have the cart before the horse. It is the Federal govt that is not honoring their promises tothe states and as such the states have the obligation to change their Constitutions if the Feds will not honor what was promised to the states. You do understand the Founders agreed upon states rights importance right?

But thank you for showing your willingess to once again distract and divert from aa discussion to try and fix the broken Federal system under which these lands are managed and promises are being broken.

I think most on here now know why,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is much like those green decoys in the video I shared you always quote on here.

- - - Updated - - -

. If it's open to states then it's also open for people who don't like grazing to call for and end of it. I don't think it's smart to open this can of worms. I don't want grazing to end, but this could turn into a free for all that ranchers loose. If they do they have only themselves to blame.

There it is folks in black and white.

Plainsman does not want to "open this can of worms" to return grazing and logging and mining and the promised multiple uses to the table becasue he knows what I have been telling him is true. That these green decoys he quotes all the time will target hunting next.

So instead of opening this can of worms to fix the system he wants the status quo to remain.

It is not grazing he is concerned about, that is already ending by a slow death, it is HIS usage of these Federal lands he only cares about.

What he is foolish enough to believe in his ow mind is that hunting will not follow the other multiple uses once those that seek to end them are successful.

As kurt said above we either all stand together or we will each hang seperately.

So why does plainsman try to distract from the truth of these facts and the information shared?

Why does he try to distract from supporting actions that not only would bea step in fixing the broken system such as the bill I shared would do but also embrace ideals of the conservative to bring fiscal responsibility and accountability back to govt?

Why does he try to divide with his hateful and foolish rhetoric?

plainsman will you contact your legislators to support the bill I shared in that link?

- - - Updated - - -

Here is an interesting article.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/do-the-feds-really-own-the-land-in-nevada-nope/

While historically correct, the changing of the Court thru political appointments tied to ideologies has changed what was once accepted law of the time concerning these Federal lands in how the Court has more recently ruled.

Butitgives some insight into how the Federal govt promised things that have now been broken. The Acts that Congress passed back in those times that gave these states and individuals thigs like water rights and mining and logging a and grazing rights have now all been dismantled by the green decoy orgs plainsman likes to share information from.

He does not want to "open this can of worms" to fix those broken promises. And just like those green decoys in the video he will obstruct any attempt to do so.

Luckily most find his rhetoric tiring.That is why after a few years of it on both Nodak Outdoors and FBO people simply quit posting on those sites.

It is why we can not have nice things here,

Plainsman lets get back to discussing fixing the broken system. Lets be part of Trumps solution to Make America Great again. Leave the fools bullshit out of these discussions and bring something positive for once.
 
Last edited:


PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,789
Likes
1,549
Points
678
Location
Drifting the high plains
Please show me by copying and pasting the links to where the black emboldened statement you made above occurred. You may be a bit confused on who provided whom that information.

You like to give home work because you know I will not bother. I don't need to bother. Everyone has been around and they all remember. I posted the videos I found of Randy Newburg. Someone posted a picture of the portion of Nevada's constitution that explained it would remain federal. I'm not going to jump through your silly hoops when people here remember even if you don't.

plainsman will you contact your legislators to support the bill I shared in that link?
Are you out of your mind? No need to answer I already know the answer. You think fixing it is putting it in control of the state. I think fixing it is demanding the federal agencies do better. I really want to fix it, while your just looking for ways to get your hands on it.

What he is foolish enough to believe in his ow mind is that hunting will not follow the other multiple uses once those that seek to end them are successful.
Oh I know there are groups after hunting. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and groups you and Fritz hate are not those groups. However the threat is real. What I believe is hunting will end faster with ranchers in charge than it will groups like the Sierra Club. Ranchers will kill it for the people who don't have enough money to give them to hunt, and with fewer hunters the anti hunters will win. Unfortunately those making money today off hunting don't care about the future only their personal wallet.
 
Last edited:

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
https://www.heitkamp.senate.gov/publ...fm/email-heidi

https://www.hoeven.senate.gov/contact/email-the-senator

https://cramer.house.gov/contact/email-me

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.”



- - - Updated - - -

You like to give home work because you know I will not bother. I don't need to bother. Everyone has been around and they all remember. I posted the videos I found of Randy Newburg. Someone posted a picture of the portion of Nevada's constitution that explained it would remain federal. I'm not going to jump through your silly hoops when people here remember even if you don't.

Are you out of your mind? No need to answer I already know the answer. You think fixing it is putting it in control of the state. I think fixing it is demanding the federal agencies do better. I really want to fix it, while your just looking for ways to get your hands on it.


Homework?? I simply asked you to provide a bit of information to show your claims to be true.....I think we know why you do not ever "bother" to do so..........



plains read the link and the bill I shared above and then tell us how that helps me get my hands on public lands and why as a conservative you would not support it.

I'm interested to hear your justification on that one.

- - - Updated - - -

You like to give home work because you know I will not bother. I don't need to bother. Everyone has been around and they all remember. I posted the videos I found of Randy Newburg. Someone posted a picture of the portion of Nevada's constitution that explained it would remain federal. I'm not going to jump through your silly hoops when people here remember even if you don't.

Are you out of your mind? No need to answer I already know the answer. You think fixing it is putting it in control of the state. I think fixing it is demanding the federal agencies do better. I really want to fix it, while your just looking for ways to get your hands on it.

Oh I know there are groups after hunting. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and groups you and Fritz hate are not those groups. However the threat is real. What I believe is hunting will end faster with ranchers in charge than it will groups like the Sierra Club. Ranchers will kill it for the people who don't have enough money to give them to hunt, and with fewer hunters the anti hunters will win. Unfortunately those making money today off hunting don't care about the future only their personal wallet.


plains in that thread on FBO where you posted those Randy Newburg videos, did you try and deny the intent of those Federal lands the states sold was to be "disposed of" and manged to fund schools?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh I know there are groups after hunting. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and groups you and Fritz hate are not those groups. However the threat is real. What I believe is hunting will end faster with ranchers in charge than it will groups like the Sierra Club. Ranchers will kill it for the people who don't have enough money to give them to hunt, and with fewer hunters the anti hunters will win. Unfortunately those making money today off hunting don't care about the future only their personal wallet.


Your friends partnered with HSUS here i our state. Yopu like to quote Seirra Club and BCHA leaders ad now you admit you think the Federal govt under these groups influence can better manage these lands than the states could.

Lie I said plainsman you are really no different than those green decoys in that video.

Keep doing the same thing..........don;t open tht can of worms........and support the status quo instead of fixing anything.
 
Last edited:

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
Don;t remember if it was in this thread fritz mentioned Aphis.

These Federal agencies have been over run by environs and animal rights people and other "snowflakes".

The video I shared of Tucker Carlson and the Sierra Club guy shows that these orgs (green decoys) are NOT about protecting the environment but rather about influencing political ideologies.

APHIS has long been accused of sharing what is to be private information they record on entities they regulate with the animal rights orgs. (Vilisaks sec of ag.. wife has ties to HSUS)

They denied it repeatedly, but now it seems it was true.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...-animal-welfare-information-from-its-website/

These Federal agencies are over run by these "green decoy" groups and now HSUS was working with our own state G&F on the coyote bill.

If people truly want to "fix" the system this administration likely is the best bet from what it appears. If not now, it may never happen.
 

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 368
  • This month: 131
  • This month: 82
  • This month: 68
  • This month: 67
  • This month: 63
  • This month: 62
  • This month: 49
  • This month: 46
  • This month: 38
Top Bottom