Discussion in 'Bowhunting Talk' started by Bowhunting.com Staff, Oct 23, 2016.
Click to read the full article...
Thanks for helping to get this out. This more then any other issue is the biggest threat to the north American model of wildlife and conservation through hunting.
“Short-sighted men … in their greed and selfishness will, if permitted, rob our country of half its charm by their reckless extermination of all useful and beautiful wild things … The ‘greatest good for the greatest number’ applies to the number within the womb of time, compared to which those now alive form but an insignificant fraction. Our duty to the whole, including the unborn generations, bids us to restrain an unprincipled present-day minority from wasting the heritage of these unborn generations.”
One of my very favorite Teddy Roosevelt quotes (though there aren't many I don't like)
The threat is real. I only wish public lands could be protected by an amendment
If not a designated national park or a protected conservation area, government land for public use should be 100% funded by fees collected from those using the land. If not, it should not be government owned.
It is public hunting grounds across the nation that is one of the biggest reasons at times I consider voting for a Democrat. Typically speaking they are more in favor of keeping these lands available and owned by all than one or two deep private pockets. Mark Kenyon had an awesome podcast a few months back with Randy Newberg that is a must listen podcast...Randy just gets your feet wet on the issue, but if this article and this podcast and others doesn't make you want to fight for public land to stay just that I say good riddance to you....
This is a HUGE concern and one despite my state being just a blip on the map of federal ground is one I hope to get more involved in over time.
The podcast I mentioned is #90... Wired To Hunt Podcast #90: Randy Newberg on Public Lands Issues and Threats | Wired To Hunt
There are two very important things to consider when talking about this issue. In the western states state lands are not public like they are in Minnesota or Wisconsin. In Colorado you can only hunt state land if it has been leased by fish and wildlife. In Montana we pay a fee on our license and that has only been in place for a short time. Before that you could not hunt state land. The other point is that the states don't have the money to manage the federal lands in their boarders (several studies have pointed this out) and by most western state constitutions they will be required to sell it to make up the difference. For a very informative series on this issue look up Rand Newberg's YouTube series on public land transfer. If land transfer happens, don't wait to come out west for your elk hunt, unless you can afford to pay for trespass fees.
Yup, Federal Operation of land is the one time I 100% support Big Government running something. Randy Newberg has an awesome way of explaining things in a way anyone can understand. His episode on Wired To Hunt is also worth checking out.
Land transfers( I am using that very loosely, thievery is a better description)is the biggest threat to hunting and the North American model of wildlife conservation that we currently face.
So is the point of dumping the land on to the states to take it off of the federal governments payroll?
I did hear that Randy Newbergs podcast a few months ago but didn't recall the reasoning with Republican want to give the lands to the states.
Kilboars Hunt Club
If you look into it more.....while not set in stone...the crazy thing is more Republicans are in favor of either giving the lands back to the States or to private hands (which is what will happen anyways if given to states).
It infuriates me because typically speaking I agree more so with Republican or Libertarian politicians over Democrats...but this is one category I find myself strongly supporting this aspect of some Democratic politicians.
I'm in the same boat. What's are our Republican up to?
I'm all about keeping the government small and giving back to the private industries but this seems like one of those things like national security and our military that need to be handled by the federal government.
It's sad but shows you the foresight Theodor Roosevelt had in human nature.
Kilboars Hunt Club
Why should the west have massive amounts of Federal land paid for by all taxpayers when only a small few use them? States should be responsible for their own land and how it is managed to benefit that state.
States cannot fund them and they'd be gone forever. FACT. Sad truth is despite me choosing not to go utilize the land I'm an owner of (public federal lands) is my choice. I hope to change that frequently on some DIY type hunts and possibly even some fishing trips here soon. Camping out of truck on those trips, save tons of cash and have chance of huge rewards....priceless.
Also, me personally stating my opinion here:
I will gladly allow taxes collected from me for the preservation of wildlife.
With all the stuff we've been doing locally on the USFS forest plan revision, I can tell you there are many factors at play here.
Red tape leads to mitigation by "environmental groups" thatvise EJA and ASA to slow the process down. People who have dedicated their lives to being a land manager, that work with land grant universities to utilize what they research shows, are told what they can and can't do by politicians and trust fund kids that like to play biologist/conservationist. The higher ups in the USFS have their hands tied on so many things. Step number 1 that Sportsmen and Sportswomen need to say to their reps? Let those in the USFS and BLM and other agencies do their job. This litigation foolishness is what is causing a lot of heartache and headache.
The other portion that is probably the biggest factor behind all this, is the fire budget, or lack there of.... I believe it's been the past 3 years (could be 2, but I know it has been more than once) that the USDA (the agency that the USFS and BLM are in) has had to steal from the DOD and other agencies to pay for wildfires across the country. The cost of fighting those fires depleted the USDA budget. So that's the second thing that needs to be addressed.
So the GOP decided that selling it off is the way to go. Because the left decided some granola munching tree licking moron knows more than the PhDs that work with fellow PhDs about what's best. It's ridiculous. Political polarization has no business in the natural world.
So, how do we fix this? The Forest Resilience Act of 2015 is, IMO, the best solution. Fuel load in these lands will increase as long as management is not allowed or considered. Which leads to fires. Which leads to depleting the budget.
I won't even get into how many board feet and carbon sequestration that can occur.....
And one side note: Wilderness in the Rockies is much different than Wilderness in the Southern Appalachians. Know your local area and work with those who know it. This blanket "what works here works everywhere" mentality needs to stop. Sorry for the rant.
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
Preserved lands are of global significance, for this generation and those in the future; consequently they require as much protection as possible be it state, federal or beyond. The luxury of large western tracts of land "used by only a few" are available to all, so all should help pay. Additionally, given the far larger tax base of federal reserves, it is more likely that under federal funding they will be better protected and less likely severed of and sold as a result of a small tax base in WY, MO etc.
"what works here works everywhere" mentality needs to stop... absolutely!
“Short-sighted men … in their greed and selfishness will, if permitted, rob our country of half its charm by their reckless extermination of all useful and beautiful wild things … The ‘greatest good for the greatest number’ applies to the number within the womb of time, compared to which those now alive form but an insignificant fraction. Our duty to the whole, including the unborn generations, bids us to restrain an unprincipled present-day minority from wasting the heritage of these unborn generations.” - Damn he was good with words.
Separate names with a comma.