Kenetrek Boots

Meth Elk

Big Whore,

What is your problem with the Yellowstone Club? The fact that the quality of construction on the houses was something you weren't competent enough to do???
 
JoseCuervo said:
Big Whore,

What is your problem with the Yellowstone Club? The fact that the quality of construction on the houses was something you weren't competent enough to do???
Click to expand...

They did a pretty good job of burying a stream there.......The fine was a million or two, so I got over it.
 
My dream is to see the yellowstone club go up in smoke. I used to hunt on the 'ski' hill when I was a kid, used to be some sweet country back in there now its full of rich doucebags from California. ;) Yep a fire and some strong wind... maybe Big Sky will go up with it, hell toss in Moonlight for an encore.
 
BHR,

No I dont think the tax payers got screwed. You selectively pick out a few acres of land out of 313,00 acres. I still contend that since its viable sheep habitat, very near one of the largest population centers in Western Montana and holds future value for the expanding herd of bighorn sheep in hunting unit 283...YES, worth every cent and a screaming deal to the tax payers. I bet that the bonner mtn side will eventually be a seperate hunting unit with available tags...OR 283 will be expanded to include the East side of hwy 200.

How much of that land in the legacy project was worth MORE than $1800 an acre?

Plus, look at things LONG term rather than the short term you deal in. Over time that land acquistion will be a huge benefit financially for the people of Montana as well as the tax payers as a whole.

What is access to land for bird watching, hunting, fishing, hiking, etc. worth?

You must be the only California transplant in the entire state of Montana that is against the legacy project...what a tool.

Also, on the land you purchased, I bet theres an acre or two that is worth less than $1240...but you dont negotiate a 160 acre land deal based on an acre to acre price. Its a package and you get some thats likely worth more than $1240 an acre and some thats likely worth less.

So, what you are proposing is that the legacy group should have negotiated individual prices on every acre of the 313,000 that was purchased?

You really are an idiot and truly unbelievable.

You are likely the only California transplant living in the State of Montana that is against the legacy project...what a frickin' tool.
 
So, what you are proposing is that the legacy group should have negotiated individual prices on every acre of the 313,000 that was purchased?

Good grief Buzz, where did I say anything close to that? Wouldn't you like to see the negotiations on this land deal Buzz? What about the comps? I sure would. If you used my property as a comp. $1000 an acre would be too much to pay on this land deal. It was a good deal for Plum Creek.....admit it.

Long term outlook, Buzz is the State is going to have to forgo a lot of years of Property tax revenue before that bare ground regenerates marketable timber. Sorry Buzz. I'm not seeing the HUGE financial benefit for the taxpayers on this one.

You must be the only California transplant in the entire state of Montana that is against the legacy project...what a tool.

Where did I say I am opposed to this project Buzz? I think it is overall a very good one. I do question the price tag of it and would like to see some transparancey here is all.
 
It was a good deal for plumcreek and an even better deal for the tax payers. I suppose it would have been a smart move to haggle price over a few acres on Bonner Mtn. and cause the collapse of the whole deal? Sometimes you should just shut your mouth...you dont have a clue.

As usual you choose to ignore the recreational value of PUBLIC lands.

Theres other values to State land besides timber...grazing, recreation, etc. Plus, you dont even know if the bonner parcel will be state or federal ownership.
 
LOL...

Dammed be the tax payer, it’s only about wild places...

One of the things he will never... never... never... understand is that both are inextricably bound...

With out the tax dollars protecting these places, they would be over run by those who would utilize any thing and every thing worth a dollar in the open and black markets...

Look at almost any third world country and see how the natural resources are utilized...
 
Theres other values to State land besides timber...grazing, recreation, etc. Plus, you dont even know if the bonner parcel will be state or federal ownership.

Since all the public sections in that area are state ground, I'm betting the state gets them. And they do log state land in Montana still. Proceeds go to fund schools. I don't have problem with that. In 80 years the schools may benefit from this purchase.

"As usual you choose to ignore the recreational value of PUBLIC lands"

That's real dumb statement Buzz. But if you want to go there, what additional recreational value did this purchase provide? As far as I know all of this plum creek land was open to the public to hunt, hike, bird watch, ect......
 
BHR,

For how long would it be open to recreation? As long as Plum Creek wanted it to be open for recreational uses and not one day more than that.

Thats your biggest problem...you deal in TODAY...you dont think long-term...hell for that matter sometimes I dont believe you THINK at all. Thats pretty typical logic of the short-sided, its all about YOU today. Who cares about anything in the future...right BHR? You sound like a spoiled 10 year old child.

You think Plum Creek is going to stay in Montana forever? You think it would have been a better deal recreation wise for all that land to be sold to a private owner?

Sorry BHR, but again you're grasping at straws...public ownership of land ENSURES future recreational and timber for the school trust. That would not have been possible without the legacy project.

Its now secured for FUTURE use and yes, there is recreational value in that property on Bonner Mtn. I've personally spent many hours there viewing bighorn sheep, also found some smoker whitetail sheds there as well.

Like I've said, that you have ignored, there is value in that land long-term. For the record, in Montana, 80 years is exactly how long it takes to grow timber...and thats pretty much everywhere in Montana. Nothing unique about that fact on Bonner Mtn.

Again if you had even the faintest clue about timber production...you would realize that.

If the State of MT does get that section, it also makes management and management decisions easier on that entire area. It can now be managed in one big chunk rather than in the piece-meal pattern on most other state lands.

For the future benefit of the TAXPAYERS, the state of Montana, the wildlife, and the ensured access of the legacy project...its worth EVERY SINGLE PENNY.

My only hope is that when PC decides to sell off the rest of their land holdings that people like Max Baucus will be intuitively smart enough to find a way to buy the rest.

Instead of running static and sounding like an asshole, you should be thanking Baucus for increasing the amount of land that is secured for future generations.
 
I was waiting for you to respond with this Buzz.....

"For how long would it be open to recreation? As long as Plum Creek wanted it to be open for recreational uses."

1: Plans are for the NC land in this deal to be sold back to PRIVATE ownership. Will you continue to have access to this land? I don't really know because NC has been very quiet about what they plan to do. Do you know what their plans are Buzz? Sell it to a Ted Turner type?

2: Bambi's childhood public hunting ground around Lone Mountain was sacrificed to make way for the Yellowstone Club (with Big Fin's endorsement BTW) Once public NF land is now a private ski resort for the rich and famous.

3: State land in French Basin was going to be traded for "a better deal" so a rich land owner there could expand his estate. That one was stopped at the last minute.

So can you really guarentee future access to these legacy lands as well?
 
Like I've said, that you have ignored, there is value in that land long-term. For the record, in Montana, 80 years is exactly how long it takes to grow timber...and thats pretty much everywhere in Montana. Nothing unique about that fact on Bonner Mtn.

Again if you had even the faintest clue about timber production...you would realize that.

Thanks Buzz, you are making my point here. What would be of higher value. A section of land with a good number healthy 65 year trees or a section of land that has recently been clearcut. I'm going with the section with the trees.

Plum Creek is no doubt tickled to get $1800 an acre for clearcut land in these tough economic times.
 
To be fair, I'm glad they consolidated that checkerboard crap around the Yellowstone club. I miss getting to chase elk on the back of Pioneer, but there is a ton of other area now open to the public. A good fire will clean it all up anyway. :)
 
BHR,

1. How much of the NC land is there in this deal of the 315,00 BHR? Ten acres?

2. Sure, the FS makes land swaps and deals all the time....more on this after number 3.

3. Stand land can be swapped and sold as well.

But, you know the difference between that (trading, selling, swapping, etc.) happening on PRIVATE versus Public?

I have a say in that, and so do the people in Montana and the tax payers. Plus, the state and federal lands fall under the scrutiny of state and federal land resource regulations and laws. Again, giving the citizens a say in how those lands are managed.

Before the legacy project, ALL of PC's holdings were a question mark. They could do what they wanted with their land and there wasnt anything anyone could do about that. Not true now.

For the record, can you provide me a list of land swaps the state has done lately that you disagree with?

With public awareness at an all-time high, its doubtful that the state or feds will be pulling many BS land sales or land swaps without someone finding out about it.

The taxpayers have got to become more active in demanding accountability of THEIR public lands and how those lands are dealt with and managed.

For a vast majority of the lands in question in the legacy project, the lands are much more secured for future use than any piece of private land in the state of Montana. Theres no denying that fact.
 
BHR,

How long will it take to replace those 65 year old trees that you cut in another 15 years?

As soon as the timber is cut should the state sell the land they log?

That would make a nice future for the school trust.

Buying that land is a long-term investment in the school trust, its just more state land in the rotation to be used to benefit schools. You wont see the greatest benefit of it in your life-time and I wont either. I will still see benefit in it, but not just from direct revenue. I'm OK with that.

The difference between you and I...I'm not a selfish bastard that doesnt give a shit about future generations.
 
How much of the NC land is there in this deal of the 315,00 BHR? Ten acres? About 1/3 to 2/5ths of the acreage from what I understand Buzz. Exact numbers are sketchy.

"With public awareness at an all-time high, its doubtful that the state or feds will be pulling many BS land sales or land swaps without someone finding out about it." Agree with this 100%

For a vast majority of the lands in question in the legacy project, the lands in question are much more secured for future use than any piece of private land in the state of Montana. Theres no denying that fact.

Excluding the lands going to the NC, I can agree with you here too, Buzz. If the NC includes easments on their properties prior to sale to a new landowner, that guarentees continued public access for hunting, hiking, ect, then there is nothing for me to worry about. Sure wish they would make their intentions known, don't you?
 
"As soon as the timber is cut should the state sell the land they log?"

No, but if they did, it would appraise at a much lower price per acre, then if had not been log. Exact value would take current timber prices into account. Get it?

Why is looking out for the taxpayers being a selfish bastard? Borrowing future generations money to buy overvalued log off land is being selfish IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Outfitter from Alberta Canada
Replies
7
Views
509
kiwi hunter
K
Bwillig
Texas Whitetail Hunt for sale or trade
Replies
0
Views
258
Bwillig
Bwillig
Bam Bam
Elk Smell Questions
Replies
7
Views
444
Rie Bread
Rie Bread
Sytes
CWD Spreads To Elk.
Replies
10
Views
445
jimss
J
Hilljackoutlaw
Lucky doe!
Replies
2
Views
237
Rackwatcher95
R
Advertisement

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,576
Messages
2,025,565
Members
36,237
Latest member
SCOOTER848

Share this page

Back
Top