MT GOP: Transfer Federal Lands to the State

[JoseCuervo]

Hard to beat the hypocrisy pointed out be Nemont. I am sure some will argue that even though Nemont's case has mountains of black and white evidence, "It just isn't so."

Since Roadhunter struggles with Google searches, I decided to provide a little assistance on his struggle to see who is in charge of hunting access on state lands in CO. It is surely not CPW.

Here is a screen shot of the FAQ related to hunting state lands in Colorado, straight from the Colorado State Land Board website. Given the reading comprehension displayed here, this might not be helpful to him. But some people are better with pictures than they are with words and sentences, so I will post a picture.

View attachment 41725

You can read it at this link.

http://www.trustlands.state.co.us/Sections/FieldOperations/Pages/FAQs.aspx#A17

It is funny to see people think the State's have any interest in hunting and fishing. Look how many State fish and game departments that get ZERO dollars from the State general funds.


Hell, I am sure roadhunter won't spend the time on reading up on the topic, but here is what Idaho says from the State Landboard's website:

State Land Management
vs. Federal Land Management

The federal government manages 34.5 million acres of land in Idaho, nearly two-thirds of the 53.5 million acres that make up Idaho's land mass. The lands are managed for multiple uses.

The 2.4 million acres of State endowment trust lands make up less than five percent of Idaho's total acreage, but the uses of the lands generate nearly $50 million annually for public schools and other State institutions, and provide ancillary benefits for the economy and health of the lands on a landscape level.

Unlike federally managed public lands, State endowment trust lands are managed not for multiple uses but a dominant use - to generate long-term financial returns to public schools and other State institutions.

If you can come to the State of Idaho with a proposal to completely destroy a piece of property, and pay them more than alternative options, the State will gladly lease you the right to destroy State lands.

AGain, for road hunter, to quote above:

State endowment trust lands are managed not for multiple uses but a dominant use - to generate long-term financial returns to public schools and other State institutions

Go search on the State Land Board's website for the word "hunting".....

Hint, it ain't there..... (other than a few references on "rock hunting" and a discussion on navigable waterways.)


Linky-link if anyone needs it...... Idaho Land Board Website

 

[NoWiser]

I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I think maybe Roadhunter is having a tough time realizing that the State of Colorado and CPW are not one and the same. CPW can be working overtime trying to recruit hunters, but it will be to no avail if the federal lands end up as state trust lands. Nobody will be able to hunt it anyways, and there is no possible way CPW could afford to lease it all to allow hunters on it.

From a NR perspective, though, I agree with Fin that by the western states taking NRs to the cleaners, they are not making any allies. In MN a NR deer tag costs 5.5X that of a resident tag. In MT it is over 36X that of a resident. It's almost impossible to find friends of mine willing to budget for a NR tag given the high costs. Those people don't give a rip what happens to the public lands of those states.

 

[mdhunter]

And you were right too. I stand corrected. Exxon paid 14% income tax. I was wrong, and gladly admit that I was corrected.

What was your percentage? Mine was about 32%.

Ben,

My facts were overstated but here is where I pulled some quick numbers ( with a few beers ). Anyhow, I just wanted it clear that Exxon is not skating by without paying income taxes, that's all:

Good ol Big Fin, can't put much by him

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2014/01/08/companies-paying-the-most-taxes/

 

[bigskyblueman]

I trust Teddy Roosevelt and his vision of public lands and his memorializing it into federal law. Public policy on a national level that gives every citizen a stakeholder interest, not subject to venal state and local influences. True enough , federal managers make mistakes, but allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good, is a much bigger mistake. The best lie always has a grain of truth in it.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Ben,

My facts were overstated but here is where I pulled some quick numbers ( with a few beers ). Anyhow, I just wanted it clear that Exxon is not skating by without paying income taxes, that's all:

Good ol Big Fin, can't put much by him

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2014/01/08/companies-paying-the-most-taxes/

No worries. Appreciate being called out when I'm wrong. If I ever get to the point where I can't admit that I've made a mistake, then I'll just hang it all up.

 

[katqanna]

I have been dreading listening to the SJ15 work group audio. I am even finding chores to do to procrastinate, but saw this article on the meeting.

Draft bill stirs federal land debate

But the draft bill will come under greater scrutiny following the Montana GOP’s resolution and as the drumbeat for taking control of federal lands in the West builds. Last week, Montana Sen. John Walsh entered the fray by introducing a bill that would stop Congress from selling public lands. Walsh said his bill was in reaction to Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan’s GOP budget which includes reference to selling “millions of acres of unneeded federal land.”

Fielder, who was a primary sponsor of the legislation to create the working group, said she didn’t see what the draft bill and GOP resolution have to do with each other.

Bovine Blossoms they dont have anything to do with each other. I noticed the other day that the Draft document was changed again, all those pages of federal lands transfer information were gone. Good thing I downloaded the original.

 

[Ben Long]

You know what this is about? The Wilks Brothers and their ilk. Texas oil billionaires who are buying up Montana ranches and locking out hunters from those lands and (if they can) adjoining public land. http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...cle_e5d4b7cc-f23b-509f-b6d7-80c94c75b041.html
The Wilks brothers happen to be major contributors to the self-same politicians who are pushing to get rid of federal lands. (followthemoney.org) They and their family members have given all they can legally give, though we'll never know about backdoor channels. I'm not saying it's a conspiracy; I'm just asking which side are they on?

 

[katqanna]

This came up on my news this morning. Woodings rips Denney over hiring of private attorney for public lands transfer panel

Two members of Idaho's Interim Committee hired an attorney to give them the answer they wanted on federal lands transfer after their Idaho Attorney General stated that there is no legal standing for the state to take ownership or control of federally administered public lands. Apparently Idahoans did not know about this until, “The other committee members learned of this decision only after Sen. Winder disclosed the hiring to Montana legislators.” This was at our Montana Interim Environmental Quality Council Meeting on May 14th where the SJ15 work group had members from other states advocating the federal lands transfer. Idaho Sen. Chuck Winder spoke through the conference call line. After the meeting it was reported in a June 2nd article Idaho’s federal lands panel hires private attorney

We may need to keep an eye out for this here in Montana, that the same type of run around with our taxpayer dollars does not occur. I bet Fielder did not include the Idaho Attorney Generals assessment on the legalities, or rather lack thereof of federal land transfer to states in her documents.

 

[Ben Lamb]

We may need to keep an eye out for this here in Montana, that the same type of run around with our taxpayer dollars does not occur. I bet Fielder did not include the Idaho Attorney Generals assessment on the legalities, or rather lack thereof of federal land transfer to states in her documents.

In fact, they have repeatedly ignored the Attorney's General positions from UT, ID & WY on this, as well as Dr. Martin Nie of the University of Montana. Welfare consultants like Ken Ivory and Ryan Benson love these kinds of contracts. It's easy money and they never have to take the blame when they lose. They just blame the other guys and promise that for another $2 million, they can make all your dreams come true.

This is unconstitutional. Plain and simple.

Article over the weekend:

http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...cle_e238c7aa-cf58-54a6-b2e5-620eb637b0c3.html

At least the Gov has his head screwed on straight:

Gov. Steve Bullock’s director of communications, Dave Parker, emailed a comment on Friday stating, “Gov. Bullock is continually looking for opportunities to improve forest health in Montana, with an emphasis on collaborative projects that have on-the-ground support. But, he has also told legislators, and all interested parties, that he will oppose any scheme to sell off public lands, because they are the birthright of every Montanan.”