I would be curious to know more about this claim. Can you explain in more detail or give me links to go and read more about it?
Disposal of Federal Lands
- Thread starter Corax
- Start date
I would be curious to know more about this claim. Can you explain in more detail or give me links to go and read more about it?
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
Release the buffalo!!
I've seen the same kind of rhetoric that wisemen is dispaying here, in multiple other places.
This type seems to scream, 'Muhh Property rights, muhhhhh property rights!' when the ranchers are being told they can't run roughshod over OUR public lands, being subsidized by MY tax dollars, without following a few rules - but when a private entity, uses private capital to purchase private property, and do with what they see fit, it becomes a conspiracy theory.
It doesn't matter if APR is funded by George Soros and is going to build a compound for all heathen leftists to gather in a socialist commune and raise funds to kick every consumptive user off of all land completely. What they do with their money, on their property is not your business.
If you have a problem with that, maybe you should work harder, or invest your money wiser so you can buy it from them.
This type seems to scream, 'Muhh Property rights, muhhhhh property rights!' when the ranchers are being told they can't run roughshod over OUR public lands, being subsidized by MY tax dollars, without following a few rules - but when a private entity, uses private capital to purchase private property, and do with what they see fit, it becomes a conspiracy theory.
It doesn't matter if APR is funded by George Soros and is going to build a compound for all heathen leftists to gather in a socialist commune and raise funds to kick every consumptive user off of all land completely. What they do with their money, on their property is not your business.
If you have a problem with that, maybe you should work harder, or invest your money wiser so you can buy it from them.
Last edited:
HighDesertSage
Well-known member
That is a false claim, and anyone who knows me would argue otherwise.
So tell me Wiseman, what exactly is the problem you have with the APR? As you can see, I do not reside in Montana. So I would not pretend to understand Montana issues as well as some of the locals. So I would like to hear, first hand, from a local how the APR has wronged you.
Last edited:
Dinkshooter
Well-known member
Like!
James Riley
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2015
- Messages
- 1,821
Should they open it to all if it looks like a rush for antlers at the National Elk Refuge? http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?268579-Jackson-Hole-hunt
Who is stopping anyone from making a living? On the other hand, buggy whips.
Last edited:
Dinkshooter
Well-known member
Indeed, I do not care about the people trying to make a living AND I just care for my hunting. Thanks.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
3wisemen, where did you go? You gathered an attentive audience eager to learn the factual information and truth behind your opposition of APR and your apparent fear of APR conspiring to ruin your way of life.
Those of us recognizing the benefits of APR's existence may be missing something. Please explain your perspective.
Those of us recognizing the benefits of APR's existence may be missing something. Please explain your perspective.
Schaaf
Well-known member
Crickets...
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,680
The APR is a cancer, and it will continue to spread until they own all 3,000,000 plus acres they want/need to create their "American Serengeti". The wolves and grizzly bears will do the hunting and keep nature in balance. People will be able to sleep in a yurt, hike a trail, or maybe they will put some railroad tracks and run an electric train around the reserve....but you won't be hunting it.
It is inevitable....and feel free to write it down and remember "I told you so".
One thing I am a little confused/curious is to why they would buy the PN (20+ million$$) with it being on the wrong side of the crick? Anyone shed light on that one? Maybe they need a spot to swim the buffalo across so they can drown a few and help keep numbers in check?
It is inevitable....and feel free to write it down and remember "I told you so".
One thing I am a little confused/curious is to why they would buy the PN (20+ million$$) with it being on the wrong side of the crick? Anyone shed light on that one? Maybe they need a spot to swim the buffalo across so they can drown a few and help keep numbers in check?
Last edited:
Not sure if you're trolling or serious. In the off chance you're serious... I was wondering how many big cattle ranches you're hiking on trails, sleeping in yurts, etc.. on?
You might be right, might not be. What if you are? If you are, then there will be fairly large chunks of private land that have no hunting pressure. These chunks border a lot of public land. Isn't it still going to make the hunting better on the BLM?
What saddens me about the APR is that they are "saving" something that doesn't need to be saved. The land has been used to graze cattle for a hundred years and the wildlife have prospered as well. It is to the ranchers benefit to keep the range healthy. The isolated nature of the area is it's greatest attribute. APR is removing the cattle and inserting bison and inviting people to come and see it. In the beginning they said they were going to replace the ag economy with tourism. If they ever do that they will in fact have destroyed the thing they set out to save. Isolation and the lack of people is what defines the area. I will admit these are just my opinions but I like the local cattle ranches and I like the local ranchers. They are good folks. I realize the all of the land is acquired from willing sellers, but I feel for their neighbors that have to feel squeezed when they see the APR trying to change BLM grazing rights from cattle to bison.
So far from a hunting perspective I have not gained any access from APR acquisitions. Thankfully I have not lost any either. It is just sad to see the loss of the heritage. I much prefer the model the Nature Conservancy is using in the area, allowing ranchers to graze their land in exchange for the grazers implementing prescribed conservation practices on their own land.
It's just a little hard to swallow if you are from "here".
So far from a hunting perspective I have not gained any access from APR acquisitions. Thankfully I have not lost any either. It is just sad to see the loss of the heritage. I much prefer the model the Nature Conservancy is using in the area, allowing ranchers to graze their land in exchange for the grazers implementing prescribed conservation practices on their own land.
It's just a little hard to swallow if you are from "here".
MTGomer, they are have built a short trail and are building more and the yurt camp has been there for years. Like I said it is a little easier to go along with if you don't know a lot about the APR, and the local area and if you haven't seen the changes firsthand.
They won't own 3 million acres. Currently they own 86K acres.
James Riley
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2015
- Messages
- 1,821
I know it's risky talking about sincerely held sentiments, especially when a response might sound "flip" but in reading your post I could not help but think of karma, what goes around comes around, and how lucky we are that we buy and sell, instead of rounding up, raping, murdering and stealing. Where were these ranchers back when the shoe was on the other foot? What was their personally held opinion about Indians, wolves, griz and whatnot? Heck, they're (settlers) dead. So, as to their descendants, on the land now, how do they feel about Indians, wolves, griz, etc.?
I'm sure their response to my sentiments is that they don't want my sympathies. Good. Because I can't think of a reason to extend them beyond those who express sincere regret about how they came into what they love so dearly.
A rancher might say:
"And it's not that I blame them for claimin' her bounty
I just wish that they'd taken her slow
'Cause where has the slow-movin', once quick-draw outlaw got to go" Willie Nelson
An Indian might say "I blame them for claimin' her bounty, and I wish they would not have taken her."
Is the answer a "park" that we love to death? The National Park Service has a mandate to balance the Park with the Public. The APR is under no such requirement. They don't have to let us love it to death.
Last edited:
Schaaf
Well-known member
That is their right on deeded land. If they ever do a 180 on their stance on hunting the public still has about 80% of their "Serengeti" they can access as they please.
Schaaf, interesting point you bring up about the 80% of the APR holdings that are government leased lands. If there is ever a large scale federal land transfer, and I hope there is not, who do you think will buy that 80% as well as untold other acres that are now public land? I will never question their property rights, I'm just disappointed with the model they have chosen to follow.
I would rather see the land owned and managed by the locals: ranchers, BLM, USFWS, NRCS, MTFWP, etc. than the board of directors of the APR.
I would rather see the land owned and managed by the locals: ranchers, BLM, USFWS, NRCS, MTFWP, etc. than the board of directors of the APR.
James Riley
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2015
- Messages
- 1,821
I would rather see the land owned and managed by us, but IF it goes to the private sector, I'd MUCH rather it be owned and managed by APR than ranchers. They've already demonstrated their willingness to sell out and if APR doesn't get it, it could very well be subdivided, paved, clear cut, stripped mined, damned and trashed way beyond anything APR would do. That's when the REAL money comes into play and APR gets put in the ranks of peons like the rest of us.
Schaaf
Well-known member
We could play the game of "ifs" all day long. The fact of the matter is that these ranches are willingly selling their place and the APR is purchasing. What they do with the land is their business but I for one am happy that an organization such as the APR that takes great pride in the fact they provide public access to all their holdings and to public land within their boundaries is first in line.
We've seen the alternatives of what could happen in Montana with the likes of the Wilks brothers.
Also, the emotion is directed towards the APR for buying but I have yet to see any directed towards the sellers. Last I checked there aren't many locals that can afford these ranches.
We've seen the alternatives of what could happen in Montana with the likes of the Wilks brothers.
Also, the emotion is directed towards the APR for buying but I have yet to see any directed towards the sellers. Last I checked there aren't many locals that can afford these ranches.
