Reply
Go Back   TexasBowhunter.com Community Discussion Forums > Topics > Around the Campfire
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-30-2017, 01:14 PM   #1
2050z
Pope & Young
 
2050z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Way North of Dallas
Hunt In: Grayson when drawn/Coryell/Scio Ohio/Unit 11 Kansas
Default Us h.r. 621

H.R.621 - To direct the Secretary of the Interior to sell certain Federal lands in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming, previously identified as suitable for disposal, and for other purposes.


Your thoughts?
2050z is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 01:19 PM   #2
justhrowit
Ten Point
 
justhrowit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: DFW
Hunt In: Your tree stand.
Default

It sucks. Don't forget HR 622 to terminate the law enforcement functions of the BLM and Forest Services. Us Congressman Jason Chaffetz (UT-R) is the forefront leader to these bills. Light up his phone with calls and inundate his email box. He's on social media as well.

Both bills are horrible for hunters and fisherman, particularly in the west.
justhrowit is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 01:21 PM   #3
Stoof
Pope & Young
 
Stoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Souther Austin
Hunt In: Will work for hunts.
Default

Really not enough info to take a edumocated guess if it is a good idea or not. My gut says no.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...-bill/621/text

Text: H.R.621 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)All Bill Information (Except Text)

As of 01/30/2017 text has not been received for H.R.621 - To direct the Secretary of the Interior to sell certain Federal lands in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming, previously identified as suitable for disposal, and for other purposes. \n\n Bills are generally sent to the Library of Congress from GPO, the Government Publishing Office, a day or two after they are introduced on the floor of the House or Senate. Delays can occur when there are a large number of bills to prepare or when a very large bill has to be printed.
Stoof is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 01:57 PM   #4
Texas Grown
Pope & Young
 
Texas Grown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Burleson, Texas
Default

Who are those lands being sold to? And what will they do with those lands? Do those lands have a public hunting and fishing resource? Or other resources, including mineral? How much are the lands being sold for? What will be done with the funds?

And dose Theodore Rosevelt know about this? Do the people know what he did for our country? And for what purpose the lands were set aside? And why?
Texas Grown is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 02:15 PM   #5
175gr7.62
Ten Point
 
175gr7.62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hallsville, TX
Hunt In: Red River County,Harrison County, SW Kansas,
Default

I'm torn on it. The Constitutional side of me says the Fed should have never owned it anyway. The Constitution says the government can acquire and retain land necessary for carrying out its enumerated powers. This includes parcels for military bases, post offices and buildings to house federal employees undertaking enumerated functions. I don't think anything the BLM or Forest Service does counts as anything enumerated. Several Supreme Court cases have said the govt can own it but I think that's just case law.

The hunter in me said it could be bad if the Feds sell the land because it could be bought by a private citizen who can then prevent its use. That being said, if they sell it and I don't have the money to buy it that's my fault...I should have gotten a better education or made better investment decisions.

Tough call.
175gr7.62 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 02:22 PM   #6
xman59
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Default

the land should belong to the state it is within, if the federal government no longer wants to maintain, or drain it......
xman59 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 02:30 PM   #7
.270
Ten Point
 
.270's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Texas
Default

Texas sold all of it's school trust lands during a cash crunch. Which is why less than 3% of land is public here and of that 3% less than 1% is available for big game hunting or use. Utah has already sold some land in a cash crunch. Keep public lands in public hands.
Attached Images
 
.270 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 02:49 PM   #8
TxNurse
Ten Point
 
TxNurse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: San Angelo, TX
Hunt In: Southern Nolan County
Default

So the federal government should acquire all of the land or hunting rights in Texas and start a draw system to determine who hunts and where they hunt? I am sure ending private ownership and control would improve the management of our resources and "equalize" the access.
TxNurse is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 02:54 PM   #9
Ishi&Elvis
Four Point
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Default

It's a catch 22. States should have first dibs on purchasing it. Sportsmen in those states should band together and buy up as much as they can if they want to protect it. States could designate it as state land and use it appropriately, including but not limited to hunting, fishing, recreational areas, etc. Tough call, but the bill has not passed anything yet, so there will be a lot of information forthcoming I would imagine.
Ishi&Elvis is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 02:57 PM   #10
AJ the TP Guru
Associate Sponsor
 
AJ the TP Guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Elgin
Hunt In: Lexington/Elgin
Default

NO. Call or write your representative, and tell him so.
AJ the TP Guru is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 03:06 PM   #11
RiverRat1
Pope & Young
 
RiverRat1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Leander
Hunt In: San Saba
Default

I want to know how much they would sell it for. And who would buy it. Knowing our government they would sell to China for 1/10th of it's worth.
RiverRat1 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 03:20 PM   #12
WItoTX
Ten Point
 
WItoTX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Katy
Hunt In: Wisconsin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2050z View Post
H.R.621 - To direct the Secretary of the Interior to sell certain Federal lands in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming, previously identified as suitable for disposal, and for other purposes.


Your thoughts?
They really haven't provided any details besides "suitable for disposal", whatever that means.

Be happy they are going about this one the right way, and not executive order.
WItoTX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 04:17 PM   #13
150class
Pope & Young
 
150class's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: San Antonio
Hunt In: Uvalde, Boerne
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by .270 View Post
Texas sold all of it's school trust lands during a cash crunch. Which is why less than 3% of land is public here and of that 3% less than 1% is available for big game hunting or use. Utah has already sold some land in a cash crunch. Keep public lands in public hands.
X2

It seems like the possibility of "give them a inch; they'll take a mile" situation.

Keep it public. Absolutely no need to allow the government to decide whats "sellable" or "suitable for disposal" and what isn't because we know how that goes
150class is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 04:23 PM   #14
SaltwaterSlick
Pope & Young
 
SaltwaterSlick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Pretty much ANYTHING the Feds get involved with besides defending this country against all enemies foreign or domestic gets screwed up... on second thought, scratch that too... They don't even do that very well and now that we have a new Commander-in-Chief and he does try to lay the groundwork to defend us, all the lib-tards are up in arms about it...
It would seem to me that since for hunting purposes, the game animals hunted are considered property of the state in which they reside, it would stand to reason that IF there is publically held Federal Lands on which these animals live, IF the fed decides to divest themselves of it, the various states should be given the opportunity to assume responsibility for the lands...
SaltwaterSlick is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 04:41 PM   #15
backwoods
Eight Point
 
backwoods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Hunt In: South East Texas
Default

Im truly baffled at how many people are willing to give up their land to others.
This land really is YOURS
If it gets sold off, it is no longer yours to use....and you will never get it back.
States have an incredible record of selling off land to pay down debt.
States want to get land out of their possession and into to private hands so that they can tax it.
The fed has held this land for hundreds of years and its ability to own the land has been defended in court case after court case. Its not a constitutional question in my mind.
I know it is cool to hate on the American goverment, but the fed does a pretty good job with America's land.
backwoods is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 04:51 PM   #16
Bob G
Ten Point
 
Bob G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Harper, TX
Hunt In: Gillespie,Gonzales,Dewitt,San Patricio
Default

I'm not in favor of selling...
I will work to persuade my 2 friends to vote "NO" as well...

tending the fire,
Bob G.
Bob G is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 05:37 PM   #17
ladrones
Pope & Young
 
ladrones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NM
Default

3.3 million US just a very small percentage of the overall holdings. It needs to be thinned down as the bureaucracies have proven unable to properly manage the land anyway.

My only problem is that most of the lands will probably go to Clintnon cronies.
ladrones is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 05:45 PM   #18
backwoods
Eight Point
 
backwoods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Hunt In: South East Texas
Default

Quote:
the bureaucracies have proven unable to properly manage the land anyway.
How has the fed improperly managed the land?
You think private, for profit, developers would manage the land and resources better?
backwoods is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 05:49 PM   #19
ladrones
Pope & Young
 
ladrones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NM
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by backwoods View Post
How has the fed improperly managed the land?
You think private, for profit, developers would manage the land and resources better?
The land has been identified as disposable by the fed.
ladrones is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 06:16 PM   #20
justhrowit
Ten Point
 
justhrowit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: DFW
Hunt In: Your tree stand.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ladrones View Post
The land has been identified as disposable by the fed.
ALL federal lands have now been identied as disposable, or is half way there. They've passed that through the house already making land values zero. Once it passes the senate this will allow the disposal of the lands without a vote.

Prepare to have all your public lands in this country turned into private lands, developments, oil fields, etc. One step closer to eradicating hunting to the masses in this country. Welcome to Europe.
justhrowit is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 06:19 PM   #21
150class
Pope & Young
 
150class's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: San Antonio
Hunt In: Uvalde, Boerne
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by justhrowit View Post
ALL federal lands have now been identied as disposable, or is half way there. They've passed that through the house already making land values zero. Once it passes the senate this will allow the disposal of the lands without a vote.

Prepare to have all your public lands in this country turned into private lands, developments, oil fields, etc. One step closer to eradicating hunting to the masses in this country. Welcome to Europe.
All the billionaires and millionaires will be jumping for joy.

And the other 95% of Americans screwed
150class is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 06:27 PM   #22
backwoods
Eight Point
 
backwoods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Hunt In: South East Texas
Default

The Clinton administration labeled them as disposable. No one has evaluated the land in a long time
The money from the sale is targeted to pay down national debt.
Ive read the cost to sell the land (legal, survey, legislative, etc) is greater than the market value of the land.
So instead of cutting wasteful spending from things like welfare and other entitlements, we are selling the people's land (which is becoming more and more scarce) so that developers and land speculators can have a field day with it
backwoods is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 06:31 PM   #23
justhrowit
Ten Point
 
justhrowit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: DFW
Hunt In: Your tree stand.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 150class View Post
All the billionaires and millionaires will be jumping for joy.

And the other 95% of Americans screwed
How any hunter or fisherman is goodnwith the sales of these lands is beyond me. We're always talking about our rights, but some are just ready to give these away no questions asked.
I'm all about smaller gov't, but this is one area where I'm supportive of the Feds.
justhrowit is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 06:32 PM   #24
ladrones
Pope & Young
 
ladrones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NM
Default

I love HR 622. I have not been able to read 621 yet. If anyone has a link to the actual bill I will read it.
ladrones is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 06:40 PM   #25
Rebel15
Four Point
 
Rebel15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Austin, TX
Default

Everyone should be contacting their representatives and asking them to oppose HR 621.


here is a link to do so:

http://www.themeateater.com/2017/cal...-need-you-now/

a majority of outdoorsmen do not have the opportunity to hunt/fish or utilize private land. regardless of if you do or not, take a moment and support those who dont. Or we should at least educate ourselves enough to make a decision.

and for all you know, it could be the land your great grandchildren one day hunt.
Rebel15 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-30-2017, 07:16 PM   #26
Jspradley
Ten Point
 
Jspradley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: League City, TX
Hunt In: Wherever I can
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by backwoods View Post
Im truly baffled at how many people are willing to give up their land to others.

This land really is YOURS

If it gets sold off, it is no longer yours to use....and you will never get it back.

States have an incredible record of selling off land to pay down debt.

States want to get land out of their possession and into to private hands so that they can tax it.

The fed has held this land for hundreds of years and its ability to own the land has been defended in court case after court case. Its not a constitutional question in my mind.

I know it is cool to hate on the American goverment, but the fed does a pretty good job with America's land.


Yep, public lands are one of then few things the Feds do pretty well. Still lots of problems but they can be resolved

When they are sold you WILL lose access to them, it has happened in every case so far and it will happen again.

The better solution is to force the Feds to manage them better and do away with the lawsuits from PETA and the HSUS that prevent active land management


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Jspradley is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 10:28 AM   #27
Stoof
Pope & Young
 
Stoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Souther Austin
Hunt In: Will work for hunts.
Default

The bill has been withdrawn.
Stoof is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 10:31 AM   #28
Stoof
Pope & Young
 
Stoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Souther Austin
Hunt In: Will work for hunts.
Default

622 is still on the table.
Stoof is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 11:30 AM   #29
popup_menace
Pope & Young
 
popup_menace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: El Campo, tx
Hunt In: Back yard, stand, or my dreams
Default

It's a tough call as a constitutional conservative. I am happy it has been withdrawn because this means the hunters in the west won't lose their hunting spots. It sucks that our govt is in so much debt that it is in liquidation mode to begin with. However, there are a lot of hunting opportunities on privately owned land in Tx, and a lot of hunters. Public land can have all the right ingredients for hunters and yield zero results because of sheer hunter numbers. On the other hand, public land means that future generations of hunters will be able to get out and hunt for a very low cost. It's a catch 22... but I will side with the hunters using public lands. The overall income generated from hunting and it's offshoot businesses generates a LOT of taxable sales. I'd rather the government keep the land public and the programs that do not benefit tax payers get the chop.
popup_menace is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 11:31 AM   #30
popup_menace
Pope & Young
 
popup_menace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: El Campo, tx
Hunt In: Back yard, stand, or my dreams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoof View Post
622 is still on the table.
All 622 will do is get officers to change uniforms and decrease Fed presence. I'm alright with that.
popup_menace is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 11:33 AM   #31
justhrowit
Ten Point
 
justhrowit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: DFW
Hunt In: Your tree stand.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoof View Post
622 is still on the table.
...and now we start working on that one.
justhrowit is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 11:34 AM   #32
popup_menace
Pope & Young
 
popup_menace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: El Campo, tx
Hunt In: Back yard, stand, or my dreams
Default

The truly best scenario would be the states buying the land and then retaining it as public property. This way the state's taxpayers have more of a direct effect on how the land is managed. But, as others have said, this has caused a lot of lost public land in other states
popup_menace is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 01:30 PM   #33
backwoods
Eight Point
 
backwoods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Hunt In: South East Texas
Default

Quote:
The truly best scenario would be the states buying the land and then retaining it as public property. This way the state's taxpayers have more of a direct effect on how the land is managed
Watch this short video that explains why states could not handle the volume of public land

https://youtu.be/ekv996IhjLM

Last edited by backwoods; 02-02-2017 at 01:34 PM..
backwoods is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 02:09 PM   #34
Felix40
Ten Point
 
Felix40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Tyler
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popup_menace View Post
The truly best scenario would be the states buying the land and then retaining it as public property. This way the state's taxpayers have more of a direct effect on how the land is managed. But, as others have said, this has caused a lot of lost public land in other states
The states don't have the means to take care of all that land. We need to leave this land the way it is unless you want to see a ski resort built in your favorite hunting spot.
Felix40 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 02:19 PM   #35
rattler03
Four Point
 
rattler03's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: richardson
Hunt In: archer county
Default

this is bad idea all around for the American people. there are countless ways we can cut down on our debt, selling off public lands that everybody has access to should not be at the top of the list of things to liquidate.

It amazes how many so called "sportsman" on TBH aren't staunchly opposed to this bill.
rattler03 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-02-2017, 02:20 PM   #36
doppelganger
Ten Point
 
doppelganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Houston
Hunt In: Where the animals be
Default

http://discussions.texasbowhunter.co...d.php?t=632393

doppelganger is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 02-03-2017, 12:52 PM   #37
Bob G
Ten Point
 
Bob G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Harper, TX
Hunt In: Gillespie,Gonzales,Dewitt,San Patricio
Default

We need to keep this at the top...
Way to important to let this get away from us...
Make sure you let officials know...
This would only be a part of the deterioration of what we own together...
If we give it away now what will be left for future generations???

tending the fire,
Bob G.
Bob G is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2012, TexasBowhunter.com