Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

H.r. 621

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    H.r. 621

    From Steven Rinella,

    "You need to call your U.S. congressional representatives and urge them to oppose H.R. 621. If passed, this bill will direct the Secretary of the Interior to begin disposing of your federally-owned public land hunting and fishing grounds in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This is no joke, it’s real. "

    Articles, videos, podcasts, recipes and more covering hunting, fishing, wild foods, conservation and everything in between.



    #2
    I'm all for this thing to get passed!

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by justin156bc View Post
      I'm all for this thing to get passed!
      I hope you've done your research before pot stirring.



      Along with Steve Rinella, GB had The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation on their podcast recently and they did a great job of summing it up. Being anti-big government really isn't the issue here. Bad management practices are. Giving it to the state doesn't solve that.

      Once it's gone, you aren't getting it back. Randy Newberg has an even shorter summary here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekv996IhjLM

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Kirby86 View Post
        I hope you've done your research before pot stirring.



        Along with Steve Rinella, GB had The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation on their podcast recently and they did a great job of summing it up. Being anti-big government really isn't the issue here. Bad management practices are. Giving it to the state doesn't solve that.

        Once it's gone, you aren't getting it back. Randy Newberg has an even shorter summary here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekv996IhjLM
        good info

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Kirby86 View Post
          I hope you've done your research before pot stirring.



          Along with Steve Rinella, GB had The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation on their podcast recently and they did a great job of summing it up. Being anti-big government really isn't the issue here. Bad management practices are. Giving it to the state doesn't solve that.

          Once it's gone, you aren't getting it back. Randy Newberg has an even shorter summary here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekv996IhjLM
          Well I don't know about not getting it back. How much land did the last administration take up in its 8 years?

          I love federal provided land too; I hate big government, and hate that they own our land. That being said, there isn't really a better solution out there yet, so I think keeping federal public land as it is currently is the best thing we can do. Change just for change sake is never a good idea.

          I also don't understand how this is one of the biggest fish to fry in this current administration. Seems like Welfare reform/Tax code should be. If we solve the big problems, we can come back to this one.
          Last edited by WItoTX; 02-01-2017, 06:56 AM. Reason: .

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by justin156bc View Post
            I'm all for this thing to get passed!
            May I ask your reasoning behind this stance?

            Comment


              #7
              Not the biggest fish

              Originally posted by witotx View Post
              well i don't know about not getting it back. How much land did the last administration take up in its 8 years?

              I love federal provided land too; i hate big government, and hate that they own our land. That being said, there isn't really a better solution out there yet, so i think keeping federal public land as it is currently is the best thing we can do. Change just for change sake is never a good idea.

              I also don't understand how this is one of the biggest fish to fry in this current administration. Seems like welfare reform/tax code should be. If we solve the big problems, we can come back to this one.
              amen ^

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by WItoTX View Post

                I also don't understand how this is one of the biggest fish to fry in this current administration. Seems like Welfare reform/Tax code should be. If we solve the big problems, we can come back to this one.
                Because big political campaign donors are now demanding a return on their investment. They want that land!

                The recent movement to do away with the concept of federal lands has nothing to do with freedom. It’s just the opposite—and would change hunting and fishing as we know it.


                From the linked Field and Stream article.
                "The new leaders of the so-called “divestiture movement” are not ranchers, at least not in the conventional sense. They are inspired by the work of theorists and political appointees like Terry L. Anderson, who wrote “How and Why to Privatize Federal Lands” in 1999. They are men like Utah State Rep. Ken Ivory, of the American Lands Council, a group advocating for the transfer of public lands to the states. Ivory, who sponsored legislation that would do just that, told reporters that the transfer of the lands was “like having your hands on the lever of a new Louisiana Purchase.” (Of course, in the Louisiana Purchase, the U.S. actually bought 827 million acres from France, paying $15 million. Ivory makes no mention of buying any public land from the American people who currently own and use it.)

                Rep. Ivory is not a rancher. He represents the district of West Jordan, Utah, a suburb of Salt Lake City, but he knows where the money is in American land. His group receives funding from Americans for Prosperity, the main political advocacy arm of Charles and David Koch, of Koch Industries. Ivory’s bill, the 2012 Transfer of Public Lands Act, has been followed by similar bills in the legislatures of 10 Western states. The Utah legislature has passed a resolution to spend $14 million of Utah taxpayers’ money on a lawsuit against the federal government, demanding transfer of all public lands within the state."

                Comment


                  #9
                  I haven't read up on the subject and I could be way off base, but I see it as a scare tactic.

                  First they say they are going to turn the land over to the states and get negative pushback. How do they over come that, ok, we are going to sell the land. Now people will be begging them to turn it over to the state, where the same thing will happen, the states will sell it.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by WItoTX View Post
                    Well I don't know about not getting it back.
                    My point is that if it goes to the state and then the state has to sell it, you're not going to be allowed to hunt there anymore. Land owners of that private aren't going to let you chase elk on their property out of the kindness of their heart.

                    Once access is lost, it's hard to get it back. I should have clarified that better!

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by justin156bc View Post
                      I'm all for this thing to get passed!
                      Unless your one of the folks buying a big chunk of this land I don't understand you stance, just because you don't use it you don't care?

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by WItoTX View Post
                        Well I don't know about not getting it back. How much land did the last administration take up in its 8 years?

                        I love federal provided land too; I hate big government, and hate that they own our land. That being said, there isn't really a better solution out there yet, so I think keeping federal public land as it is currently is the best thing we can do. Change just for change sake is never a good idea.

                        I also don't understand how this is one of the biggest fish to fry in this current administration. Seems like Welfare reform/Tax code should be. If we solve the big problems, we can come back to this one.
                        100% correct


                        If you wonder what could happen with state control look at all the private land our great State has....

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by 150class View Post
                          100% correct


                          If you wonder what could happen with state control look at all the private land our great State has....
                          Bingo. And while selling off a bunch of public land out West might not affect Texas hunters right this second, it sure will in the future.

                          Currently, only about 6% of the US population hunts. What happens to this number when large amounts of public lands are sold off or closed to hunting? What will that do to our representation in the ongoing fight against anti-hunters? What about the cost of leasing here in Texas? After all, we'll be removing a large chunk of the supply, so demand can only go up.

                          The great Teddy Roosevelt, a republican, set this land aside for us and future generations to enjoy. We should not deprive our children of what makes this country so unique, especially when so many of us on here got to experience it for ourselves.

                          "Defenders of the short-sighted men who 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 sometimes seek to champion them by saying the 'the game belongs to the people.' So it does; and not merely to the people now alive, but to the unborn people. 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 restrain an unprincipled present-day minority from wasting the heritage of these unborn generations. The movement for the conservation of wild life and the larger movement for the conservation of all our natural resources are essentially democratic in spirit, purpose, and method."
                          - Teddy Roosevelt
                          Last edited by garby; 02-01-2017, 03:40 PM.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Looks like it's dead, maybe




                            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                            Comment


                              #15
                              ^^^^. I was just about to post that!

                              Great news!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X