Rally for Public Lands - Montana

[Rimrock]

Rode the bus that it turned out came from Billings, some Livingston folks, and Bozeman. Apparently from about Big Timber to Bozeman wasn't much fun this AM, numerous wrecks, so gotta hand it to the bus driver.
I agree, that event was amazing! Absolutely packed the rotunda, and yes, I was guessing ~500 people.
Of all things, afterward I was wandering around, and ALC had a booth upstairs. I was standing there, attempting to absorb it (not successfully), looked up and who should I see but my "neighbor" Joe Balyeat.
But then he also works for Americans for "Prosperity" (for the Koch brothers, anyway) so...

 

[Wapiti Warrior]

Awesome rally! Good job to everyone who showed up! Now lets hope the politicians who are supporting this hears us.

 

[RobG]

Rode the bus that it turned out came from Billings, some Livingston folks, and Bozeman. Apparently from about Big Timber to Bozeman wasn't much fun this AM, numerous wrecks, so gotta hand it to the bus driver.
I agree, that event was amazing! Absolutely packed the rotunda, and yes, I was guessing ~500 people.
Of all things, afterward I was wandering around, and ALC had a booth upstairs. I was standing there, attempting to absorb it (not successfully), looked up and who should I see but my "neighbor" Joe Balyeat.
But then he also works for Americans for "Prosperity" (for the Koch brothers, anyway) so...

For those that don't know the name it's former State Senator Balyeat (R-Bozeman), who termed out and went to work for the people he was already working for. I can't believe we continue to elect these guys.

 

[MThuntr]

One of the better pictures I got since it was a little dark inside. Governor Bullock is giving a major tongue lashing to the American Lands Council upstairs. He got the crowd all sorts of wound up. I saw a few Hunt Talkers there also...a few for the first time.

 

[shoots-straight]

I was disappointed the the news had very little coverage of this effort. The water compact bill got all the news time on legislative news. We could have left a bigger presence in the legislative chambers if things were done a little differently.

Did get to see a lot of friends I have met over the years on HT and at the capitol.
'
Spent the day going and coming with Buzz H's dad, brother, and nephews. Their really great people.

 

[EagleEye]

Great event. Was proud to see such a diverse and charged-up crowd! Anyone else find the whole 'greendecoys' thing ironic? I think they have it backwards... Because in reality it is the Koch brothers who are providing the 'green' to distract from the real agenda...

 

[bigskyblueman]

Those who have any photos or video of the rally should send them to TV and newspaper media in their area . They readily accept such, most of the time. Far too good a rally to go unnoticed.

 

[Ben Lamb]

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/politics/2015/02/16/rally-lands-transfer/23521749/

http://www.nbcmontana.com/news/hundreds-rally-against-state-takeover-of-federal-lands/31304308

http://billingsgazette.com/news/gov...cle_6eab7c5c-9dcc-5b8d-af63-bc2b6d70121a.html

 

[bigskyblueman]

Outstanding.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Not a bad day at the office.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Here's a few shots.

 

[1_pointer]

Congratulations, all. Democracy as it should be.

Everyone got to vote on proposed bills??

 

[What Map]

I want to thank Randy, Ben and all the other Hunt Talkers who helped run a very successful event yesterday. I think we have a very good chance to stop this move in Montana, but it will take constant work from all of us until it is stopped.

 

[elkslayer100]

i am not sure why all you guys trust the federal government to do such a great job with public lands. have you seen all the dead and dying beetle kill timber out there. feds wont let us log, they like spending millions on fires instead of thinning and logging. oh and the feds kept the wolves protected a few more years than needed, oh and drained social security ,oh and forced obama care on everyone , and it goes on and on. I would think the state would do a better job.. IMO

 

[shoots-straight]

i am not sure why all you guys trust the federal government to do such a great job with public lands. have you seen all the dead and dying beetle kill timber out there. feds wont let us log, they like spending millions on fires instead of thinning and logging. oh and the feds kept the wolves protected a few more years than needed, oh and drained social security ,oh and forced obama care on everyone , and it goes on and on. I would think the state would do a better job.. IMO

Thinning projects are fine, but there' like 17 million acres of forest lands in Montana. Can we afford to thin the whole forest? There were a minimum of 3 timber sales in the Root last year that no one bid on. What's up with that? If diesel prices stay low enough then maybe that will change. The rest of your rant has nothing to do with how federal lands that are managed.

You understand that state lands are not managed for multiple use, right. They are managed for the highest return in dollars that they can. That leaves very little concern for wildlife.

Maybe you didn't see what Mary Sexton said. Maybe you should. No matter what side of the isle you sit, the facts she presented are compelling information on THE WHY we can't afford to manage the lands ourselves.

Watch the video of the Rally and if your understanding or thinking doesn't change then there's nothing more one can say. Some people just refuse to get it, and for no apparent reason.

 

[Big Fin]

i am not sure why all you guys trust the federal government to do such a great job with public lands. have you seen all the dead and dying beetle kill timber out there. feds wont let us log, they like spending millions on fires instead of thinning and logging. oh and the feds kept the wolves protected a few more years than needed, oh and drained social security ,oh and forced obama care on everyone , and it goes on and on. I would think the state would do a better job.. IMO

This is a common comment, and given how the Federal lands could surely be better managed, we all hope for better management. Nobody is saying the Feds are a textbook example of land management laws and policy.

Yet, show me any details of this state take over movement that has one single notion of how states are going to manage any better than the Feds. I can save you some research and provide you the answer I arrived at when I tried to find out the details. There are no details.

If you want to see the crystal ball these groups are hoping for, go read the history of the Elliot State Forest in Oregon. 90,000 acres of state land where litigation has made it unprofitable to manage, even though it is managed by the state. For the last year, they have put together multiple plans to sell the forest, though recently was put on hold due to public protest.

That is exactly the model we will see when states are the one being litigated. When the state is being litigated, there will be none of the management actions that would be used to address the problems you identify in your post. States will have a liability on their hands, not an asset. And when these same promoters can then exclaim how these lands are sinking state budgets, they will propose to do what Oregon is faced with - sell them to the highest bidder.

Same old story tried again and again by those who hate public land ownership. Just repackaged and appointed some new slick promoters to give it another effort. They will get sized for asshats on this one, but will come back in a decade or two, with a new scheme to screw the public out of their public lands.

If the promoters of these efforts were serious about better management, they would be joining in with the national hunting organizations, the timber groups, and others who want to see some changes to the programs and laws the litigators use to block the plans these Federal managers propose. That is where the real solution lies and everyone knows it. You cannot have Federal land management if you do not allow those land managers to manage, rather have them in court all the time.

In his presentation yesterday, David Allen of RMEF spoke about how RMEF has asked all of these promoters for details and answers. Answers these people don't want to give. Valid questions, where the stand pat answer is to go to the ALC website and read about the Constitutional fiction as to why Federal ownership is illegal. Not a single detail ever gets provided and I was glad David pointed that out.

The promoters of these schemes do not want to work toward solutions, as it would ease the crisis they are trying to capitalize on. It would cause them to lose what they feel is their greatest opportunity.

And those who support state take over, are agreeing that they would rather have the access to these Federal lands governed by the rules of each state, all of which are to some degree more restrictive in hunting/camping access than what the current Federal rules are. Some state are so restrictive as to allow no open hunting on their state lands or no camping on their state lands. In Montana, we still have people who hold a grudge against me and other from the battle that got us the right to pay a fee to hunt these state lands.

 

[Ben Lamb]

i am not sure why all you guys trust the federal government to do such a great job with public lands. have you seen all the dead and dying beetle kill timber out there. feds wont let us log, they like spending millions on fires instead of thinning and logging. oh and the feds kept the wolves protected a few more years than needed, oh and drained social security ,oh and forced obama care on everyone , and it goes on and on. I would think the state would do a better job.. IMO

I think that everyone of us there yesterday believes that the Fed could be doing much better.The issue isn't about how the lands are managed so much as who owns them. Once transferred to the state, the government of that state owns those lands. Right now, they are owned by every American citizen, and that is something pretty amazing.

The way to fix federal land management isn't to cash out, it's to keep the focus where it should be: congress.

Congress can fix fed land management very easy, but it requires political courage and a will to actually spend the kind of money necessary clear a $100 million backlog of shovel-ready projects, and to quit playing games with public land. Most of the proponents and opponents of transfer share a frustration with land management, some of us just don't want to lose our American birthright in the process.

As we saw in the economic study out of Utah, in order for the state to make money, commodity prices have to stay artificially inflated, and aggressive resource extraction would take precedent over hunting, fishing, etc. That study even told us that hunting spots would need to be "reallocated" in order to achieve the goal.

At $55 a barrel for oil, it looks like more taxes and less access to me.

 

[mtmiller]

Interesting.

Proposals in Montana to transfer federal lands to the state are politically divisive and could distract from broader efforts to expedite forest management, according to the Montana Wood Products Association.

The Missoula-based trade group, whose members include sawmills, timberland owners and loggers, today issued a policy statement opposing legislative efforts in Helena to wrest control of national forests and other public lands from the federal government.

"Even though we are intimately aware and are directly affected by the decline in resource management within our borders, we do not -- at this time -- support the movement to transfer federal lands to the state of Montana for either ownership or management responsibilities," the group's policy statement said.

MWPA Executive Vice President Julia Altemus said efforts to take over federal lands are partisan and fraught with questions over how to handle mineral rights and pay to fight wildfires. For now, Montanans should support the Forest Service's use of new management authorities in the 2014 farm bill and urge Congress to support expedited restoration and logging.

"If we start talking about transfer, we're going to pull ourselves right back into the timber wars we've had over the past 20 years," Altemus said.

MWPA said timber harvests on federal lands in the West have decreased 80 percent over the past two decades. In Montana, harvests were at 540 million board feet in 2013, down from 1.6 billion board feet in 1986. The decline has forced the closure of 28 mills and the loss of 3,252 industry jobs, it said.

Transferring federal lands to states also would not address underlying problems with litigation and regulatory delays holding up timber sales, the MWPA statement said.

"Regardless of who holds the deeds to the land, we must first address, change, and fix the hurdles to active management," the statement said.

A resolution last summer by the Montana Republican Party endorses the transfer of public lands to Montana, though there are divisions within the party's ranks. The transfer effort has been spearheaded by Montana state Sen. Jennifer Fielder (R) with support from the Utah-based American Lands Council.

 

[Nemont]

i am not sure why all you guys trust the federal government to do such a great job with public lands. have you seen all the dead and dying beetle kill timber out there. feds wont let us log, they like spending millions on fires instead of thinning and logging. oh and the feds kept the wolves protected a few more years than needed, oh and drained social security ,oh and forced obama care on everyone , and it goes on and on. I would think the state would do a better job.. IMO

What makes you trust politicians in Helena? Legislators in Helena can be influenced with a free Prime Rib dinner and some expensive liquor. At least to gain influence in DC one needs serious cash.

Nemont

 

[RobG]

i am not sure why all you guys trust the federal government to do such a great job with public lands. have you seen all the dead and dying beetle kill timber out there. feds wont let us log, they like spending millions on fires instead of thinning and logging. oh and the feds kept the wolves protected a few more years than needed, oh and drained social security ,oh and forced obama care on everyone , and it goes on and on. I would think the state would do a better job.. IMO

The folks in the state legislature supporting this have already made laws designed to reduce the numbers of elk. Imagine what would happen if these nutjobs obtained complete control. The grass on the state land in the northern Snowcrests (not the WMA) is grazed to stubs, leaving nothing but hounds-tongue, and knapweed patches are also starting to crop up. The abuse stops once you get into the federal forest.