1.) Swamp Fox - 02/16/2017

I'd be interested to hear everyone's thoughts on this and what's going on in their own areas.


[B][I]Push To Transfer Federal Lands To States Has Sportsmen On Edge[/I][/B]


[QUOTE]"I see very little evidence that there's a groundswell of support for it in the state of Wyoming," says Greg Cawley, a political science professor at the University of Wyoming.

Cawley has studied anti-federal government movements in the West, dating back to the Sagebrush Rebellion in the 1970s.

"Every time the federal government does something that irritates Western ranchers, miners, what have you, this issue of transfer of the lands to the states is brought up again, dusted off and put forward," he says.

But there's one big thing that makes this time around a little different, according to Cawley: the unpredictable political mood in the country right now. For a lot of Westerners, that hit home a few days before the election when a jury acquitted militia leader Ammon Bundy and his followers who led an armed occupation of a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon.

The Bundys said they were protesting federal ownership of public land.
[/QUOTE]


[url]http://www.npr.org/2017/01/05/508018599/push-to-transfer-federal-lands-to-states-has-sportsmen-on-edge[/url]

2.) DParker - 02/16/2017

I'm guessing that those who are in the business of owning huuuuuuge tracts of land for commercial purposes (farmers, ranchers, etc) will be in favor of it (assuming that most of the states would be like TX, as in...prone to selling land to private parties), while those who enjoy the use of public lands for recreation purposes (like me) would be less enthusiastic about the prospect (hence the mention of sportsmen being on edge).

3.) Wild Bob - 02/16/2017

It's bullshit concept pure and simple. The agenda is to off load the land on to the backs of the State Governments that cannot afford to own or manage the resources so that will force liquidation. And all us lowly citizens will lose use of our national treasure (land). The Republican party (shit, I don't know why I bothered to capitalize that) has it written in to their agenda and by-laws to pursue off loading the public lands ...

(Don't believe me, spend a little time and effort and look it up yourself...it's there.) A couple well know hunters have been informing outdoorsmen about this, probably most notably Randy Newburg, but not enough are taking up the cause.

I actually got booted off of two other outdoor websites for attempting to inform people about this issue back in the fall. God forbid anyone say anything negative about the beloved party...Well, the American public better ****ing wake up and learn to pull their rose colored glasses down off their noses before the only place we'll have to hunt is in the virtual world. (Well, at least we'll be able to own all the guns we want; we'll just have to pay to play whether its target shooting or hunting, thus conveniently lining the pockets of those that govern us and set the agendas that we're all supposed to yell hurrah for and support, I'm not too sour about that am I??) And just because I don't believe in my heart of hearts that the agenda of the Republican party isn't the best interest of all MY INTERESTS, don't anyone dare try to brand me as a liberal...for Christ-sakes generally speaking, this country has gotten so divisive any more that you can't look at things with a critical eye without being labeled something or another.

As far as ranchers go here in Montana, generally this concept will be bad for them as well. Many smaller and even many larger operations count on Federal land leases to graze their cattle, liquidation of that land will only help the really big corporation owners get bigger. Not to mention that liquidation will benefit foreign interests... For crying out, the Chinese government already owns Smithfield Pork products, does anyone realize that? (old news, but does it bother anyone else that the Chinese now control approximately 25% of the pork production in America??) The Chinese have built rail loading facilities here in Montana so they now buy wheat, load it and send it off to China...Don't think for a moment that they wouldn't LOVE to own some huge chunks of prime American Wilderness!

It's all money and which side of the deal you're on...then you can spin it any way you want.

OK, I'll shut up now.

4.) bluecat - 02/17/2017

Wild Bob (a.k.a. Rip Van Winkle), where ya been?

5.) Swamp Fox - 02/17/2017

Hey, WB! :wave:

Does anybody know of any plans, concrete or in the works, where land is actually on the auction block or where people will lose access?

6.) Wild Bob - 02/17/2017

Hey Blue and Swampy.

I've been sleeping under a bridge with a Schlitz Blue Bull in my hand, drooling on myself...

There were a couple of big chunks of land on the block in Idaho and if I remember right, one in Utah I believe...the couple in Idaho were stopped, but I'm not sure what came about with the area in Utah, the last I read about that it was still up in the air.

7.) DParker - 02/17/2017

[QUOTE=Wild Bob;47214]It's bullshit concept pure and simple.[/QUOTE]

Man, I really wish you'd quit mincing words and just come out and say what you mean. :p

[QUOTE=Wild Bob;47214]I've been sleeping under a bridge with a Schlitz Blue Bull in my hand, drooling on myself...[/quote]

Luxury. We were evicted from our spot under the bridge. Why, in my day we used to [I]dream[/I] of having Schlitz Blue Bull....or drool.

8.) bluecat - 02/17/2017

classic

9.) Swamp Fox - 02/18/2017

The only thing I've found on Utah--and I haven't had as much time as I want to look at this yet---is moves to make the transfer of federal land possible/required, with no or not much further action taken.

I'm writing this quickly, but I think that's a fair translation of what I've read so far. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

But I'm particularly interested in anything concrete that goes or has gone beyond that. For example, an *actual* transfer, particularly into private hands and/or which has resulted in reduced access.

I'll work on Idaho when I get more time.

Thanks to anyone who can help with this. :beer:

10.) Wild Bob - 03/17/2017

Here is an interesting little read related to this. What strikes me is that as you can see in this article, this issue is [U]not[/U] isolated to the West...but again, mainstream media and most of our politicians are not talking about any of this. (Other than the Idaho incident which was sensationalized by the standoff) Go figure...

[url]http://www.trcp.org/2017/03/14/three-national-wildlife-refuges-nearly-taken-public-land-transfer-advocates/?utm_source=rooseveltreportshort&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Roosevelt%20Report%202015[/url]

I have more info to come, but don't have time now to post. Stay tuned.

11.) Swamp Fox - 03/22/2017

Bob, I read the article when you posted it. Anything new?

12.) Wild Bob - 03/22/2017

Just that Trump's most recent proposed budget doesn't intend to fund the Dept. of the Interior funds that go to National Refuge spending which ultimately goes to State and local Governments.

This is an article that OL put out just about a week ago that has some good information in it as well: [url]http://www.outdoorlife.com/report-next-for-americas-public-land?src=SOC&dom=fb[/url]

13.) Swamp Fox - 03/22/2017

Thx. Great link. Highlights what a mess this whole situation is.

You win the internet for today.

:tu:

14.) bluecat - 03/23/2017

You can't just declare him the winner.

15.) bluecat - 03/23/2017

It doesn't work like that.

16.) Swamp Fox - 03/23/2017

You're foolin' yourself...

17.) Wild Bob - 04/13/2017

I want nothing...my only aim is to inform.

...And then eventually suppress, covert, and occupy. (Remember, Norway 2nd!) :-)

18.) DParker - 04/13/2017

[QUOTE=Wild Bob;48301]I want nothing...[/QUOTE]

The I've got you taken care of. :tu: