Oh, the irony!

[WildWill]

You have some ridiculous posts in this thread, but you know, the 2nd amendment was written before primers were invented. U suppose it could probably use an update too, eh?

It could have used a rewrite from day one! Most vague wording imaginable.

 

[Treeshark]

Have a talk with Roosevelt, Pinchot, Muir, Stegner, Marshall, Leopold, Yard, Abbey, Newberg. . .

Roosevelt was actually a huge proponent of transferable landowner tags. Most people don’t know that.

 

[SAJ-99]

Thanks for posting that info @SAJ-99.

As I said previously- I do not see this effort really going anywhere.

I wish I could share your optimism. I figure the SCOTUS case is 50/50. The long game has been going on for years. Every chance is taken to cut funding. The long game will speed up now. You think a couple of billionaires in charge of “Government efficiency” are going to view USFWS or BLM as immune from budget cuts because people like to camp and hunt?

 

[Perlodid]

Roosevelt was actually a huge proponent of transferable landowner tags. Most people don’t know that.

This conversation is so much bigger than landowner tags.

 

[BrentD]

It could have used a rewrite from day one! Most vague wording imaginable.View attachment 348922

I wish I could share your optimism. I figure the SCOTUS case is 50/50. The long game has been going on for years. Every chance is taken to cut funding. The long game will speed up now. You think a couple of billionaires in charge of “Government efficiency” are going to view USFWS or BLM as immune from budget cuts because people like to camp and hunt?

SAJ-99 I think you are hugely optimistic.

 

[Irrelevant]

it's a rock and a hard place for some.

for me if it is between Governor Polis and some moderate republican governor that would sign on to the state transfer train, i think i'd choose the moderate repub.

one has and is pulling very strong, very real, levers that are actively threatening the heritage of hunting. the other is gonna sign on to some bat shit idea that really might not be going anywhere, but at least will put some normal thinking humans on my wildlife commission.

on most days, one actually seems like a greater threat to my hunting, and it's not the republican.

that might be really shortsighted. it's hard for me to actually say though

I think we're having two different conversations.

 

[ismith]

In over 10 years of this issue being in the forefront of our minds, the proponents in any state have yet to set forward a plan that details how our individual freedoms will be protected if this happens.

Also, that dapper young fella in the photo has a really odd choice of firearm for what appears to be water fowling.

Where have you been? Everyone is sky busting and ground sluicing with long range scoped shotguns nowadays!

 

[Buffs35]

you just can't throw out the 10th amendment.

You should tell that to the Supreme Court, they've missed that memo for the last 50 years.

 

[Treeshark]

This conversation is so much bigger than landowner tags.

I know man, that was meant to be a joke.

 

[Perlodid]

I know man, that was meant to be a joke.

Ha of course, I was too lost in the sauce to see it at first glance. Fair enough

 

[TOGIE]

I think we're having two different conversations.

Are we though? Weren’t you wondering how anyone could/would vote for a PLT advocate?

 

[SAJ-99]

SAJ-99 I think you are hugely optimistic.

I’m depressed enough. I need some support here. lol.

But I’m also realistic. The “write your congressman” doesn’t work here. (And let’s be honest, it is hard to get people to simply vote, let alone write their congressional reps.) SCOTUS can say it’s unconstitutional and call for the Feds to work on a plan to divest. There is no appeal I can think of. Then people will be begging states to manage this land in a way that benefits them, but there will be no funds, because people don’t like taxes and such. So states will sell them because the cost of managing for fires and such.

 

[FI460]

I’m depressed enough. I need some support here. lol.

But I’m also realistic. The “write your congressman” doesn’t work here. (And let’s be honest, it is hard to get people to simply vote, let alone write their congressional reps.) SCOTUS can say it’s unconstitutional and call for the Feds to work on a plan to divest. There is no appeal I can think of. Then people will be begging states to manage this land in a way that benefits them, but there will be no funds, because people don’t like taxes and such. So states will sell them because the cost of managing for fires and such.

Do states pay counties PILT? I don't think I've ever heard that addressed in these discussions.

In a hypothetical where federal public land is divested to the states will the county then lose out on that PILT money?

I think multiple western states still have language that state land has to be managed for maximum revenue as well.

 

[Irrelevant]

Are we though? Weren’t you wondering how anyone could/would vote for a PLT advocate?

not really, I was more pointing out the hypocrisy of certain groups of sportsmen giving the middle finger to NRs with one hand whenever wildlife is mentioned but then asking NRs to bail them out from their own voting-induced public land issues. "We're all in this together! All for one and one for all! Except you. You don't get a tag."

 

[SAJ-99]

Do states pay counties PILT? I don't think I've ever heard that addressed in these discussions.

In a hypothetical where federal public land is divested to the states will the county then lose out on that PILT money?

I think multiple western states still have language that state land has to be managed for maximum revenue as well.

Need a emoji. It probably varies by state. Part of the problem is that people think laws are static when they are not. If in some states counties didn’t get taxes from states for state land, it can be changed with a vote and swipe of the pen.

on a side note, the question reminds me of a conversation I had 20yrs ago on why we even need county governments. They have become largely irrelevant.

 

[Irrelevant]

on a side note, the question reminds me of a conversation I had 20yrs ago on why we even need county governments. They have become largely irrelevant.

What are you talking about? It's literally the most important level of government. They have the most control over your day to day actions

 

[BrentD]

What are you talking about? It's literally the most important level of government. They have the most control over your day to day actions

Really? With 99 counties in a tiny state like Iowa, I think they are PITA, and I cannot see much of any benefit from them. They are pretty whimsical about what their policies.

 

[brocksw]

… hypocrisy of certain groups of sportsmen giving the middle finger to NRs with one hand whenever wildlife is mentioned but then asking NRs to bail them out from their own voting-induced public land issues. "We're all in this together! All for one and one for all! Except you. You don't get a tag."

Is this as common place as you make it sound?

 

[BrentD]

Is this as common place as you make it sound?

Absolutely. Have you not been paying attention?

 

[SAJ-99]

What are you talking about? It's literally the most important level of government. They have the most control over your day to day actions

Agreed. But are they relevant? I can probably argue both ways.