Wisconsin Reviewing More Public-Land Sales

Click to read the full article...

 

Before the dnr bashing begins remember the dnr has been gutted in Wisconsin by Walker and Cathy Stepp. Who has about as much experience in land management and natural resources as I do. Will be interesting to see who exactly these lands will be "sold" to.

 

LOL again at durkin. At least he is consistent with his tortured and tedious rants. The DNR has more lands than it can manage. The list of lands made available for sale was well thought out and for good reason. Another fail on durkin's part.

 

This all stems from the govt being run on unlimited funds when Walker has run the state like a business and balances the budget and trims excess land that is not taxed people say things like the state is being gutted. Get used to it people look at the national debt that is not going away anytime soon.

 

Randy Newberg has a great 15 episode YouTube series on a topic very close to this. It is worth watching. PUBLIC LAND TRANSFER - Costs of Land Management (Episode 4 of 15) - YouTube

 

I saw some of the parcels they were going to put up for sale and they were crappy pieces. I think the DNR is going to have a harder time getting rid of the property then they think. Mine has been on the market for over a year at a fair price and nobody has any interest in it, there is 4 more properties around me of 80 acres or more up for sale with no bites. Let them try and sell but I hope they put a minimum price per acre on it otherwise it's just a waste.

 

In many cases, the DNR got the land because it was gifted and or was crappy land that would not sell so it was gifted to the state. Those crappy parcels that are not really a benefit to sportsmen but are rather a burden on the state are the ones being sold off. The state paid nothing for them but took on a great burden as the new managers. Governor Walker is doing the right thing by removing this bloat. A lot of thought went into planning which parcels to sell.

I hope nobody fell for durkin's tripe. Why any credible entity would associate with durkin is beyond me.

 

I like Durkin's style and his approach gets people at the very least thinking.

Any &, I repeat "any" public land, being sold is a travesty.

 

I disagree. The Dept. has more lands than they can manage. They admit it. They cant even generate usage plans. Once the land ends up in state hands, you and I are on the hook for the high costs. You and I are responsible for the taxes that must be paid to the municipality. What was once taxed to the owner now has to be paid from the state (you and me) via PILT (Payment in lieu of taxes) to that municipality because somebody saddled the state with land via a gift.

Those crappy lands (Many are land locked and cannot be accessed by the general public and) become accessible only to neighboring land owners who get their own piece of free public land that you and I pay for but cant access.

Kudos to the Governor and the Dept for going over all that land with a fine toothed comb and identifying which ones it makes sense to put back on the tax roles.

I am not a piggy bank, I will gladly pay for lands open to hunting, fishing, trapping, etc. Public dollars used to enure all residents is good and those lands are not being sold, only the ones identified as better off sold.

 

If you were a neighbor of a piece of land locked public why would you buy it? It's free

 

Public land does not need managed, neglect is the best possible plan.

 

It needs taxes paid on it (by me and I cant use it). Once it becomes owned by the state, they have to have a usage plan, It requires manpower. It cant be avoided. Parking areas, logging, all the things the state mandates. These lands are not conducive to usage by the public that is constantly being asked to pay for it. Those small number of parcels were identified for sale.

This governor got it right and realizes the public ought not be treated as a piggy bank and that they are using my money and should live within their means. Refreshing.

Durkin is such a partisan and Walker hater, he stopped being relevant a long time ago. He serves only as a laughing stock these days.

 

The next governor might get it wrong with the slippery slope that has been created.

I pay for roads I will never drive on; who cares?

 

Yeah but you could if you wanted to. The land locked parcels you can't use.

 

Yeah, you could:

Landlocked Parcels... - Wisconsin REALTORS

 

Nothing was created. This is not new. Also, being fiscally responsible is something future governors should embrace.

You have the choice to drive those roads at any time. Apples and oranges with this land that is land locked.

As to your claim that landlocked parcels are accessible, you ought to have read that story you linked before you linked it. It says the following.


“They do, however, have the statutory right to petition the government for access provided the landlocked owner has first attempted to purchase access rights through private negotiations.”

So you have to buy access (Thousands of dollars) to public land you are already paying for and then if surrounding land owners wont sell you access for public lands, you can petition the government and pay tousands of your own dollars so the public can access lands by creating a town road to it and hope that works out. LOL You really should have read that link before posting it. It did not help your cause in the least.

Governor Walker got this one right.

 

Good luck with that!

 

People would do well to educate themselves on the subject matter before forming an opinion.

Real Estate Program - Land Sale - Wisconsin DNR

 

I read the link & it is possible. My only point.

I am sorry I don't agree. I think Walker is more than wrong.

Selling public land will always be bad in my eyes; for the wildlife & the public.

If you're worried about tax dollars & land; maybe research the percentage of your tax dollars that go to support & maintain private land versus the amount you are paying to support public land. You'll be surprised.

 

But a very poor point that does not aid your argument.

We will agree to disagree. In this case, it makes perfect sense especially if the public was not able to access the land.

Without a link or anything of substance, that was just blahdy blah blah and is outside the scope of the topic. Sounds like a good thread to start though.