Transfer of Public Lands

[oneye]

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=38855774&nid=148&title=rep-chris-stewart-charlene-albarran-file-to-run-in-utahs-2nd-district

Utahns chance in the 2nd district to get rid of Stewart who is very supportive of the land transfer issue. Vote Stewart out.

 

[oneye]

http://www.sltrib.com/home/3651047-155/noel-timing-is-bad-for-utah


The wrong time? If you believe this has anything to do with the law you wouldn't need heavy political favoring to accomplish it. This is proof current Utah leadership at every level understands they have no LEGAL case, but are setting up pathways and millions of dollars for a fight even they know they have no chance at. Yeah....have I mentioned it's time to get rid of some of these career politicians, that continue to waste tax money. Anyway, let's not turn this into a political thing again, but into another public lands thread.

 

[MOHunter]

Anyway, let's not turn this into a political thing again, but into another public lands thread.

I thought the two were highly related.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

I screwed up and put this in the wrong thread...sorry.

 

[MOHunter]

CC just derailed us completely!!

 

[highplainsdrifter]

http://www.sltrib.com/home/3651047-155/noel-timing-is-bad-for-utah


The wrong time? If you believe this has anything to do with the law you wouldn't need heavy political favoring to accomplish it. This is proof current Utah leadership at every level understands they have no LEGAL case, but are setting up pathways and millions of dollars for a fight even they know they have no chance at. Yeah....have I mentioned it's time to get rid of some of these career politicians, that continue to waste tax money. Anyway, let's not turn this into a political thing again, but into another public lands thread.

I don't believe this issue will be solved in a court of law. Instead, it will be resolved in the court of public opinion. In either case, it is critical that a transfer advocate like Cruz not become president.

I see Rubio just dropped out of the race. Now we are down to three Republicans.

 

[highplainsdrifter]

Eight Colorado counties oppose transfer. Good for them! I hope there are more to come.

http://blog.trcp.org/2016/03/17/colorado-county-opposes-transfer-of-americas-public-lands-to-the-state/?utm_source=rooseveltreportshort&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Roosevelt%20Report%202015

 

[highplainsdrifter]

In mid-February, this thread had an extensive discussion about several transfer bills that were about to be discussed by the US House Natural Resource Subcommittee. Some of us sent emails objecting to the bills. I just received this update from one of the many organizations whose email list I am on. It looks like we had an impact on a couple of the bills:

And finally, I wanted to thank everyone who responded to our call for help with two bills in Congress—HR 3650 and HR 2316—that threatened to privatize our national forests. It appears that Congressman Cynthia Lummis’ office was flooded with calls and emails and there was a heated debate in the subcommittee. We hear that these bills will have little chance of moving forward.

Thank you for your help!

Stephanie Kessler, director of external relations, Wyoming Outdoor Council

I am especially happy to hear that Cynthia Lummis' office was flooded with calls and emails. There has been a lot of doom and gloom on this thread. It is great to have some good news for a change!!

 

[WY ME]

I wrote to Barasso, Enzi and Lummis way back when and both senators responded to me, albeit generically, but I never did hear back from Lummis' office.

 

[shootbrownelk]

I wrote to Barasso, Enzi and Lummis way back when and both senators responded to me, albeit generically, but I never did hear back from Lummis' office.

I got a response from Lummis WY ME, you didn't miss anything....basically it said that folks who live on the land (I thought we all did!) ....ranchers, minerals extraction folks know best on how to manage said lands. Kind of a "Don't worry...trust me" type of bull crap she usually spews. Being in ranching herself and with Governor Mead being one too, I expected the response I got. I hope the person who takes her place will actually represent the peasants who use public lands and not the well to do, who want title to it.

 

[HannahBunek273]

Agree. I see many useful information in here

 

[Fieldmouse]

Just a question I haven't be able to get answered elsewhere. Why should the federal government own the majority of any one state?

Btw, Cruz is only for the federal government to drop below 50%. If this was a corporation, the federal government would control it. How does it not place undue burdens on the residence of the state and on people who are forced to pay for this land?

 

[oneye]

If you don't like federal public land move to states without it. Cruz flat out said 2% public land is too much. He's a bought and paid for politician. I'm not going to take a guy who comes from a state with almost 0 public land when he professes as if he even understands public land so much. Public land is amazing and it needs to be left in tact.

 

[Fieldmouse]

Lol, I'm all for the Feds dumping some of our federal lands. They have screwed them all up and now we are severely restricted from using it. The libs have become very organized and are coming after all federal lands.

 

[oneye]

FM, I'm too tired to argue over it. What you've said is an oversimplification of a very complicated issue. A transfer of these lands will just make it worse for sportsmen. The informations out there, seek it. Just because you don't like how every tract of land is managed does not call for the extremist position to transfer or sell the land. There's 86 pages of discussion here, read through it. I'm not going to entertain your argument until you have put some effort into reading into the other side of the argument. Keep public land public and let's work on managment instead of selling them off. That's what I'll end the night on, goodnight.

 

[Fieldmouse]

Cheers, no worries. I too have studied this for years. Not just a Johnny come lately. The issue is much more than just hunting.

 

[go_deep]

Just a question I haven't be able to get answered elsewhere. Why should the federal government own the majority of any one state?

Btw, Cruz is only for the federal government to drop below 50%. If this was a corporation, the federal government would control it. How does it not place undue burdens on the residence of the state and on people who are forced to pay for this land?

A direct quote from the myth of Cruz, the federal government has no place owning land, in Texas where I'm from the own 2% and that's to much.
There is no argument about it that you can make that will change my mind, or must anyone else. He's a bought and paid for politician.

 

[Fieldmouse]

A direct quote from the myth of Cruz, the federal government has no place owning land, in Texas where I'm from the own 2% and that's to much.
There is no argument about it that you can make that will change my mind, or must anyone else. He's a bought and paid for politician.

You mean by the states?

His position is to introduce a bill to reduce the federal ownership to below 50% in any one state. He isn't able to do this by fiat. He won't be using his pen and a phone for this.

I actually look at it from the state's position. Why should their cost of living increase just because the federal government squeezes them into a small area?

Here is a question I don't know the answer to. When a president like BJ Clinton with the stroke of a pen creates a new monument out west as a payoff to those who put him in office, does that become off limits to hunting? I know Bush created a few too. They all seem to want to leave their mark on something. At what point do we have enough monuments?

 

[go_deep]

Cheers, no worries. I too have studied this for years. Not just a Johnny come lately. The issue is much more than just hunting.

Might not be a Johnny come lately, but your coming with facts that are incorrect. Earlier in this thread there are links to video clips of interviews Cruz did stating that the federal government should own any land, not the 50% you stated.

 

[Fieldmouse]

And that's just not practical. Where do our military bases go? As I mentioned, he can't do it by fiat. As I said, he would introduce a bill to divest the federal ownership below 50% of anyone state. I believe that 5.

Does anyone know the answer to the monument question?