Getting Rid of Public Land

[Ben Lamb]

Pretty sad statement coming out of the RNC regarding our public lands.


http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/11/3277571/republican-party-state-public-lands-drilling/

Many legal scholars believes state land seizure movements are constitutionally indefensible, because when states entered the Union, the federal government assumed the rights over federal public lands. According to the Congressional Research Service, the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution “gives Congress authority over federal property generally, and the Supreme Court has described Congress’s power to legislate under this Clause as ‘without limitation.’” And, Utah’s own Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel, said that Utah’s legislation had “a high probability of being declared unconstitutional.”

I don't want to be accused of breaching the grip & grin versus political thread ratio so here's some public land eye candy to keep Duncan at bay.

 

[mdunc8]

No gripping nor grinning but I suppose they'll suffice.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I usually grip, but don't grin.

 

[Nemont]

The GOP seems to be stuck looking in the rearview mirror and can't move forward on things that are settled already.

I guess if this is the National Strategy then once again the Republicans deserve to lose elections. Thought the past cycles would have learned them something.

Nemont

 

[mdunc8]

:hump::hump::hump::hump:

 

[mdunc8]

Are they going to force me to vote for Hillary or is there a chance they'll regain their sanity in the next two years?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Are they going to force me to vote for Hillary or is there a chance they'll regain their sanity in the next two years?

It's appeal to funders season. Public land hunters, anglers and hikers can't compete with the Oil & Gas Industry, Mining, Industrial polluters, etc.

If only we could buy votes. If only.

 

[Jwill]

If only they couldn't buy the votes....

 

[BBwheelgunner]

If only they couldn't buy the votes....

Exactly!

 

[TheShootist.41]

Jwill,
Well stated, and beautiful picture

 

[roadhunter]

Interesting first pic Ben.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Interesting first pic Ben.

Cee-gars & fishing go well together.

 

[roadhunter]

Cee-gars & fishing go well together.

The technique used to hold and operate that cigar made me think it might have been in Colorado.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Ha!

That was about 10 years ago up on the Clark Fork east of Cooke City.

 

[Forerunner]

I'm afraid I have to disagree

I understand that it is generally bad form for a person's first post to be about politics, or take a disagreeing tone, so I'll at least start by saying that of the outdoor forums I've been to, members here, and particularly Ben Lamb, seem good about keeping disagreements civil. I intend to do the same.

Whether or not states are permitted to "seize" public land within its borders, it seems reasonable that states should be allowed to develop land within their own borders according to the interests if its citizens. In areas where lands have multiple uses, and the development of certain rescources would come at the detriment of others, this would of course include balancing conservation with our nations need to develop vital sources of energy.

At any rate, contrary to some of the implicit opinions expressed by some, the political left in this country is no friend to the hunter/fisher. I am not saying that I endorse the proposal by the RNC, but one need look no further than my home state of California to see that leftists, which operate almost exlusively within the Democratic party are destroying opportunities for sportsmen.

A few examples include the MLPA, started under Gray Davis and furthered along by Arnold, closing thousands of miles of coastline to any and all kinds of fishing. The hiatus on mountain lion hunting, and due to the hard left turn recently taken by our Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (which includes the Brown-appointed director, a lefty, of F&W selecting the a rep. from the Human Society, a huge lefty, to be on a policy-making board within F&W) which has banned all lead ammo, use of dogs for bear hunting, and is currently seeking to end bobcat hunting, use of dogs for all mammal hunting, ban on use of traps on for-profit harvesting, etc. And as the leftists take over more and more of the Democratic party, such bans will be coming to your state too.

I am not claiming that the Republican party always acts in the intersest of the sportsmen, or of conservationists, but to suggest that they are the enemy, and by implication that the Democratic party are our friends, is irresponsible. As responsible conservationists, we should advance solutions that aim to balance resource development with our concerns as sportsmen.

 

[Oak]

The only saving grace for the Republican party is that most of the ideas they concoct to screw sportsmen are so far out in the weeds that they stand no chance of passing.

 

[Straight Arrow]

As a lifelong conservative conservationist and an almost exclusive Republican voter until the 2011 Montana legislative session, I agree with much of what you have expressed. However, in Montana it is primarily the Republican legislators who have been consistently and continuously proposing legislation adverse to the best interests of outdoor recreationists, hunters, anglers, and wildlife for the past decade.

During this past decade I have heard the expression, "They are turning me into a Democrat!" more and more. Sportsmen and women across Montana are increasingly having a voice and influence politically, mostly in opposition to bad ideas proposed by Republicans.

Although generally opposed to the current and past Democratic Presidential administrations, we now are represented by two Democratic Senators. Our Governor is a Democrat. It would not be surprising to see a Democrat in the Montana congressional House seat after the next election.

 

[jryoung]

A few examples include the MLPA, started under Gray Davis and furthered along by Arnold, closing thousands of miles of coastline to any and all kinds of fishing. The hiatus on mountain lion hunting, and due to the hard left turn recently taken by our Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (which includes the Brown-appointed director, a lefty, of F&W

What examples do you have of Chuck using his leftist ideology to take away hunting and fishing opportunities.

selecting the a rep. from the Human Society, a huge lefty, to be on a policy-making board within F&W) which has banned all lead ammo,

The lead ban was an Assembly Bill, not the Commission....what board is Jennifer on?

use of dogs for bear hunting,

Senate Bill, not the commission

and is currently seeking to end bobcat hunting,

Really, how come it wasn't on the agenda for the February 5th meeting? Most likely it will be an AB/SB.

use of dogs for all mammal hunting,

They would have done so with with SB1221, but pigs aren't cute like bears and bobcats. Doubtful they will try and bring this up again, they go their win.

One key reason why we see so many victories is that most sportsman are a bunch of bumbling boobs in this state. I watch the hearings, listen to the testimony and the vast majority of guys out there can barely for a coherent sentence let alone argument. Not to say there aren't some whackadoodles on the left at the hearings, but we need to show better.

Sportsman in CA need to be better organized, and turn the rhetoric down from 11. The HSUS has more money and better strategy, at a minimum we need a better voice and the state of that needs to bridge the gap between urban and rural CA.

At the end of the day, hunting and fishing are under attack not from both the left and the right because there is money to be made. There is money to be made from developing land for strip malls, oil and gas and ranchettes. There is money to be made from "protecting" wildlife and utilizing the court systems to do so and making emotional pleas to voters.

 

[Forerunner]

Straight Arrow, I cannot comment on the Democratic party in Montana, though I'd venture that they're much more conservative than the Democratic party nationally, and certainly more conservative than those in California. The problem is that as the Democrats move further and further left and push for more and more federal control, your more-conservative Democrats will have less and less control over their own state. And if you think that the Republicans have ambitions that are adverse to sportsmen, just wait until management of Montana by its own Democratic party is replace by the Democrats in D.C.

While the Republican party, and right-leaning organizations may have goals other than those of sportsmen, there is not one Republican, or right-ist organization I can think of whose aim is explicitly against those of sportsmen. None that I can think of who want to ban hunting/fishing. All such organizations find their home in the Democratic party. It seems it would be better to champion the cause of the conservationist, who must understand the need for some resource development, from within the Republican party, especially if you are a conservative, than to give up on the party.

Oak, to quote Dennis Prager, "There are two parties in this country. One is dumb, one is dangerous." I wish it was otherwise.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Forerunner, I'd say that's a pretty good first post.

There are a lot of processes in place now for folks to be involved in local land management planning under NEPA. From Resource Advisory Councils to any number of federal & state level management panels, decisions made at the local level are often put into place. There has been a big push in the sporting community to focus on place-based legislation like the Boulder-WhiteClouds in Idaho, Rocky Mountain Front in MT, etc.

I don't disagree that local folks should be making some decisions. Though it is important to remember that federal public lands are held in trust for all citizens. That means a guy in Chicago has the same opportunity to hunt and fish as a guy who can walk out his back door. That's one of the beautiful things about public lands, they're the greatest equalizer we have in the US, in my opinion. Everybody has some land they can hunt.

To be perfectly honest, if I were living in California, I'm pretty sure I'd identify as a Republican. What is happening in CA regarding hunting & fishing rights can be painful to watch.

My barometer has never been party, but position. Very well stated first post.