Remmett do you realize that the farmers that own AG land in Wisconsin farm the tillable and leave the woods for habitat, but the farmers that buy the land out in the western state will use it for grazing? hence no habitat for wildlife. And the loggers that buy the land, they will cut down the forests. So while you think just because it works for you in Wisconsin doesnt mean that it will work out there. You continually surprise me... I don't understand how a hunter will knowingly and willfully give up our public lands...
Go watch Randy Newbergs Podcasts about this issue. He goes through each state and the effects it would have. How about we stand together for the opportunity for all of us to have the ability to use these lands, instead of saying "It's not my problem-pay for it yourself". I bet you would change your mind if your landowners in WI decided to call you up and say, Your hunting isn't my problem, find your own place. But, since thats not the case, you will never understand. Let me know when your WI land owners have elk for us to hunt, until then I will stand up for one the the greatest things this country has gotten right for the outdoorsman
Some have proposed that management should be transferred to the state, and that the revenue should also go to the state. If the forest service can't do a timber sale due to lawsuits over environmental impact, how will the states manage? One good wildfire would probably bankrupt most of the states if they did not get some funding from the forest service. I spoke with a gentleman who was an assistant budget director for a republican governor here in Montana, and he flat out said the state does not have the funds to manage all of the federal land in the state. Consider the price of beef. Right now it costs a rancher about $1.74 per animal per month for grazing rights on forest service and BLM land. If they had to pay "fair market value" how much more would you pay at the store? If we all had to pay full price for unsubsidized fuel at the pump how much more would we pay? My taxes allow Walmart to underpay their employees so I can buy cheap Chinese products. If my money is going to be wasted, I would like for it to be wasted on public lands so I have a place to hunt.
All I know is we have state parks and national forest here and if I want to go ride my 4-wheeler on trails I have to pay someone to ride it on private land. I wish they would be more versatile in the land usage. I get not letting atv's and utv's go everywhere tearing everything up and causing erosion, but they are not fair with divvying up the land to everyone that wants to use it. Dont get me wrong.. Im happy to have state parks and national forests where we live.. I can hunt there if I choose to and thats awesome. We can and do ride horses a lot of different areas around here too. I just think there should be something for everyone. The bird watchers, hunters, horseback riders, bikers, campers and the 4 wheeler riders! lol
We spend 20 billion a year on farm subsidies to private land owners, but we worry about the cost of maintaining public land?
Look at the scare tactics. Loggers will cut all the wood. I guess that explains why states that are not federally owned don't have trees anywhere. Oh wait. Is there something different about farmers out west and in the Midwest that one worries about habitat and the others wouldn't? Why wouldn't timber sales be able to be done by the state? WI not only logs state owned land and sells it, so they can buy new land and log it to make more money, not to mention that part of the money private owners in landmanagement programs get for logging of their land goes to the DNR. Not to mention all those millions of acres of land, would start generating tax revenue which the states do not get today which easily could go to managing wildfires. As for Price of Beef or other goods. Subsidy doesn't make anything cheaper. It costs a certain amount to raise a cow, or create a gallon of gas. Subsidy doesn't change that amount, you just don't see it because government has already taken part of it from us so you are really paying the same amount just in two parts. Get rid of the subsidy and leave that money in my pocket and let the market set the price where it should be. The bigger government, and the further away the more inefficient and ineffective it is.
As someone who longs to take full advantage of all that the public lands of the west has to offer for as long as I can, this is an issue that demands immediate attention by all who consider themselves sportsmen and conservationists. It is an immediate threat to hunting as we know it. Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk
At the risk of turning this into a political scrum (which it ultimately is), Trump, despite his faults, has been blasted by fellow Republicans for his desire to not turn over the public lands... Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk
Makes me happy that there are a lot more supporters of saving our public lands this time around the subject has been brought up on here, so thank you everybody, keep fighting the good fight
Honestly is one of the only "non-hillary" things I do unabashedly put in the vote for him category. Remmett...I think you're misunderstanding the severity of the entire thing and just believe in no federal government services at all...I'm not saying it will change your mind or even trying to...but check out some of Randy Newbergs stuff and read up on it as well. As for me personally I know I never want the state taking over federal lands...one they have no right to them....two they have proven time and time again to not be able to fund them and while delayed they'll merely become private deep pocket owned....three especially out west our cattle farmers could not afford market rents of private ground WITHOUT skyrocketing beef prices.....I want the ability for myself and my offspring to go chase Elk or Muleys or all the other animals on federal ground.
I wrote a very long response to Remmet on the computer just to have BH log me off. So, here is paraphrased: I doubt anyone thinks loggers are the devil. But, blanket management isn't a thing. Habitat out west vs. the Midwest is an apples to avocados comparison. Farmers I work with daily beg to differ. A lot. None of us are advocating big government. All of us are advocating for something that is 100% uniquely American. Don't Hate While I Conservate – Ambitions of a Flunky. Just a hunter and angler attempting to answer the call of our Conservation Heritage in the 21st Century
I hope to some day meet Randy, shake his hand and buy him a dinner or a beer if a drinking man...he has done more for the hunting rights and preservation of our wildlife than all of us together x10.
He'd be cool to meet, but I'd really like to meet Shane Mahoney. Dude is our Teddy Roosevelt. And no knock on Randy, but there are people that have been fighting this non stop for years and don't have a platform other than on a local scale. My generation needs to cowboy up and start. Beyond frustrating when there are just a few of us at the meetings and less of us taking a stance. Don't Hate While I Conservate – Ambitions of a Flunky. Just a hunter and angler attempting to answer the call of our Conservation Heritage in the 21st Century
Randy actually turned me on to Shane Mahoney through a podcast and I love what he is doing too...both deserve a handshake and a meal and more!
Since we are giving praise to those who deserve it, throw in Steven Rinella, Land Tawney and the Backcountry Hunters and Anglers and so many others. Keep writing those representatives folks!
The comments made by guys in this tread gives me a lot of hope. I think the right message is getting out there. It's strange that I have found that the average educated nonhunter that I speak with about this issue is more supportive ( and angered) by this land grab then many of the hunters I spoke with. This issue will transcend hunting in the future and we will be on the cusp of either keeping our unique model of conservation or continuing to descend down the hole of corporatism above everything else. Make no mistake this movement stems from lobbying paid for by corporation interests. If we lose public land as we know it in America we lose a distinct part of what it means to be an American.
First to answer the question in bold, the short answer is yes. Farmer acres in midwest and east are dominantly crops, where farmers will plant what is tillable and leave what they can't till alone, essentially preserving the habitat for wildlife while supplying a great food source all summer long. Win Win for the deer. Farmer acres in the west are dominantly pastures, and ranchers cannot grow enough corn and alfalfa to feed their herds all year long without grazing. Instead of preserving the habitat they can't till, and supply feed all summer, ranchers destroy the habitat and their herds eat all the food available. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against ranchers as we all have a role in society, but this is a lose Lose for the elk and mule deer. You go deer hunt a pasture for a whole season, and then lets debate the land transfer. No on to my other point: Do you realize that Mule deer are already in an extremely dangerous position? Numbers are declining all over the west and we have no idea why? Even if logging companies and ranchers dont completely destroy the lands, lets say they just destroy 50% at a time, what will happen to the mule deer populations? When the Europeans arrived, there were roughly 10 million elk in the US, ranging all across our country except deserts and the deep south. Now there are only 1 million and they have been isolated to just the west. we have already reduced the herd by 90%, and now we want to risk the very few acres (relatively) that we have access to these great animals? Or even worse, look at the American Bison, once the great land animal in America, with populations in the range of 20-60 million, and now there are fewer than 5,000 pure, wild, and undomesticated and disease free bison in our country. That's 99% extermination brought to you by railroads, ranchers, and over hunting. Without careful management, this once dominate animal will be wiped out and replaced with their cross bred cousins. Remmett, just because certain things work well in WI, please do not fall in the trap of thinking these things will work everywhere. WI owns 3.645 million acres at a state level and 1.9 million at a federal level, but WI has a GDP of 232.2 Billion as of 2007 MT owns 5.196 million acres at a state level and 27.2 million at a federal level, however, MT only has a GDP of 34 Billion as of 2007 If the land transfer went through, WI would have 1/6 the amount of acres to manage as MT, and 7x the budget to do it. Clearly your one size fits all solution will not work for a state like MT, and I am sure the numbers would apply to nearly all the western states. This is why the federal land transfer would be devastating to our hunting as we know it.
A-FREAKING-MEN I think it is the "ain't my problem" mindset. Preservation of wildlife in public hands is such a crucial thing...and it amazes me the amount of hunters that care more about their right to play their stereo's loud than the chance to go Elk hunting or a DIY in Kentucky or Montana....
I disagree with the rhetoric of loggers and ranchers "destroying the land". They, like hunters, pay excess tax. They, like hunters, make up a large portion of non partisan boards across the nation and the National Association of Conservation Districts and are on and have always been on the front line of protecting and sustainably utilizing our natural resources. They have adjusted with time and what science has shown them. Rotational grazing practices and work by ranchers has led to extremely positive impacts on the Sage Grouse. We gotta eat. Logging is specific to the area. Where I live, regeneration makes it impossible for a clearcut to "destroy the land". But, we can further ostracize and marginalized if we join the battle cry against those who work the land. Not bashing anyone, just stating my opinion. Don't Hate While I Conservate – Ambitions of a Flunky. Just a hunter and angler attempting to answer the call of our Conservation Heritage in the 21st Century
so it comes down to wanting money from the rest of the country to pay for it. Ever think that if they had control of all that land and were able to start collecting taxes from it they would have more money to use to manage it.
