What a waste of money!

[Ithaca 37]

How can any responsible taxpayer put up with this?

"The minimum cost to the federal taxpayer of the federal grazing program is $128 million a year.
The real full cost is likely to lie in the range of one half to one billion dollars a year.
Allowing grazing fees be determined by the market would not recoup the full costs of the program.
There is no accounting system that adequately discloses the numerous indirect costs of the grazing program."

http://www.sw-center.org/swcbd/press/grazing10-23-2002.html

 

[ELKCHSR]

I didn't realize there really were many of the bigger government agencies that can account for most or much of their money's..LOL..
I do have a good question for this though, if the $$$ weren't spent on this type of stuff, (Wasted in some eyes) then where else would it go?
I believe the moneys would be wasted on other things and spent unwisely on other venues...
Until that part gets fixed, then it really doesn't matter about the rest of it...

 

[Washington Hunter]

Elkchsr, where do you come up with that kind of logic? Maybe they could spend all that money on improving wildlife habitat on BLM land.

 

[ELKCHSR]

Maybe you could WH, I was just asking the question, and as usual, one of you guy's jump on things I say like I am going off some deep end, instead of just looking at it as if I am asking for opinions as is usually meant. I know these threads are only two dimensional, but you need to learn to not read fanaticism into every thing written by those that don't agree with your whims and wishes. I will ask it again, and try to be more specific. As we all know, these moneys are sitting in some ones coughers when they write the checks out for them, (some one being the government agencies involved). Yes we would like to see these money's going to other pet projects that are useful or look prettier, what ever they happen to be, and you named some, but in reality, what I was getting at, do you honestly think these money's will get into these other projects, good, bad, or indifferent, or do you think they will be wasted some where else as is the track record, or usually the case of our esteemed government officials in charge of the purse strings. Now this was meant to be a statement and question said with slight indifference, this way you know exactly how I am saying it. You can't read more or less into it, unless you personally so desire, I can't help that. I really don't think one needs to explain every little nuance of what they think or post just to keep some from jumping down their throats or taking every thing the wrong way or is usually the case with some to take what is said out of context. I will tell you as I have others in the past, I post most of this stuff with a bit of Sinicism, and humor, and it is you guy's that read it with hate and disdain, see the big difference? So if you read what I post with this attitude, instead of one malus, disrespect, distain, and or hate, you will personally have a better understanding as to where I am when I post my comments...

 

[Lostagain]

And while you're there Elk, better remind those welfare hunters just how much they actually contribute to the waste too.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Lost, Can you fill us in a little on welfare hunting? How much do the taxpayers lose?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Lost,

Please fill me in on Welfare Hunting. I would love to sign up for that package. If I could get the government to subsidize my hunting, that would be incredible.

"Will Hunt for Food or Subsidies"

 

[ELKCHSR]

I would say that owning and maintaining the land, roads, and infrastructure alone would speak volumes to that one if one wanted to put it in that light....

 

[JoseCuervo]

And I would then ask to end the welfare system, and quit maintaining the roads and land. Mother Nature is a very effective land manager....

er

 

[Washington Hunter]

Elkchsr, well I guess I understand what you're saying...if they did do away with the welfare ranching program, and saved all that money, you are saying that it would just be wasted in another way. Maybe that is true, I don't know. But I just don't see how it makes sense to throw money away on something that is so obviously a waste of taxpayers' money. At least if they're going to waste it, they could do it in less obvious ways, don't you think? And in a way that is less destructive to public lands? I am definitely no expert on economics, or politics, and I sure don't claim that I know what the hell I'm talking about. So...I'm just trying to say I didn't mean to jump on what you said like you were "going off some deep end." At least you have the guts to give your opinion, whether it's right or wrong, that's what this forum is all about.

 

[Ithaca 37]

As outdoor recreationists, we'd be better off if they eliminated welfare ranching and used the money for studying the effects of hula dancing in Pago Pago. At least our wildlife habitat would recover and support more game.

 

[Muledeer4me]

The smell from cow shit is easer to inhale then the smell that flow's so freely from the agenda pushing treehugger's.

We will alway's be subsidizing something, and a pile of shit is still a pile of shit.
At least when stepping in a pile of cow shit you know going in what it's going to look like comming out.

That's not the case when stepping in the pile thats left from the treehugger's.
That all depend's on what the agenda of the day has been and what they have been told to crap out.

 

[Lostagain]

Hell, IT, didn't YOU post the ID leg.s took a million taxpayer dollars Idaho out of the F&G budget, so the taxpayers were giving welfare to the hunters of ID.
And you folks whose state charges the Nonres more for tags than it charges res, then you res are receiving welfare from the nonres.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-05-2003 16:06: Message edited by: Lostagain ]</font>

 

[Oak]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> And you folks whose state charges the Nonres more for tags than it charges res, then you res are receiving welfare from the nonres. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Surely you said that with tongue firmly planted in cheek.

Oak

 

[Ithaca 37]

Lost. The legislature tried to take a million bucks from the F&G depredation fund, which goes to reimburse landowners who have crop damage by game animals. They didn't succeed.

You can all talk about welfare all you want, but the most outrageous welfare in the country is paid to welfare ranchers who are destroying wildlife habitat, making our hunting and fishing worse, bragging about how tough and independent they are, and looking for handouts everyday. There's no way to defend it and no one here even tries. All they do is make excuses for it and try to change the subject because they can't stand the truth.

Here's some info about welfare ranching:

http://www.publiclandsranching.org/htmlres/wr_welfareranching.htm

 

[Lostagain]

I don't think anyone anywhere will defend the corporate rancher.....hey, they are playing by the rules you and your congressmen set up. I think it was Mars or Nut that said to vote the bumbs out, until you do get rid of the entrenched rule makers (congressmen and lobbyists) you will be forever whining about how some welfare receiptant is screwing around. They are just playing the system by the rules set by your reps.
Change the system. How many times do you need to be told? Change the system. But most americans apparently don't want the system to change, otherwise why are they continuing to vote the same folks back in again. They must like it as is. So you are in the minority. maybe someday. Food, security, and shelter are more important to most folks than a little bit of 'wilderness', or whatever it is that the doomers are screaming about.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Lost, I doubt if most people know anything about welfare ranching, so why would they do anything to stop it? And besides that, the majority of people don't care, because they don't hunt, and they don't see how it negatively affects wildlife and wildlife habitat on our public lands. They don't ever get out of the cities, what would they know about wildlife or ranching? It is the hunters that need to educate people on this issue. This is not a wacko environmentalist issue as you seem to think it is. You tell Ithaca to change the system...well it seems to me that that is exactly what he is trying to do. But it's kind of hard with people like you out there, that claim to be hunters, and supposedly care about wildlife, yet you won't admit when there is a serious problem affecting our wildlife, that is screwing up the hunting on our public lands. Geez, I just don't get how some people who hunt do not support protecting wildlife habitat on our public lands. I think people like that need to be just a little more greedy, and think about how much better the hunting could be without welfare ranching.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Lost,

I will gladly defend the Corporate rancher. I do not think their is anything wrong with "Corporate Ranching". I think anytime somebody wants to put their private capital into an enterprise, and compete in a free market economy, I will gladly defend them. It takes a helluva bunch of Cajones to decide to participate in the cattle raising business.

I dabble in it a bit, and I am fully aware of the economics it proposes, and if somebody can figure out how to make a good living raising cattle, my hat is off to them. They are: 1) smarter than me, and 2) luckier than me, as they get to spend all day working cattle, and being outside, where I have to spend much of my day inside, and dealing with people. I like cows much better than people. I think the average cow is smarter than the majority of people.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with "Corporate Ranching" as long. And please, don't insult the ranchers by somehow lumping them in with the Welfare Ranchers who are indefensible.

And on the IDFG and the Million Dollars the legislature wanted, here is how I understand the story. Way back when, many Ag interests were looking for a Welfare Check and they decided to convince their legislature to give the F&G a Million$ to set up a fund for repaying damages from wildlife to private Ag land/property. The F&G were told they had to manage the animals, and pay the damages, and here is the money. Well, the F&G then had to raise license fees to cover this new responsibility. Well, the first $1Million is long gone, and the fund now has $3 million, off the backs of the license purchasers. And due to mis-management by Representative Dolores Crow (R-Caldwell) and Gubenor Kempthorne, the state is in a Fiscal Mess. And somebody got the idea to go raid the fund of the F&G for the Million, which was long since paid to the farmers.

It doesn't make sense that Hunters/Fishers should have to pay this fund anyway, as Wildlife are owned by ALL the citizens, so the expense of the damage should be carried by ALL the citizens.

er

 

[Ithaca 37]

Lost, Yup, That's what I'm working on---changing the system. Educating people about it is a fundamental part of the process. Do you suppose anyone at HT knows any more about welfare ranching now than they did 18 months ago?

Meanwhile, I'm doing lots of other stuff too. But if 75% of the people in Idaho asked our congressional delegation to work on changing welfare ranching they still wouldn't do it. So the courts are the best option for now. And all the enviros ask is that they make sure the laws are enforced. It's gonna be a long process, but eventually we'll have much better range management on gummint land than we have now.

You and a few others here in SI sure aren't doing anything to help make it better.

Go take a look at some of these articles:

http://www.publiclandsranching.org/htmlres/wr_welfareranching.htm

You think that book and the pictures in it aren't having any impact? The welfare ranchers oughta be smart enough to read the writing on the wall!

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-05-2003 22:34: Message edited by: Ithaca 37 ]</font>

 

[Washington Hunter]

cjcj, well it's not just the $128 million, it's the loss of good healthy wildlife habitat that we could have on our public lands, but don't due to welfare ranching. I don't think you can put a price on that. But I agree, giving $15 billion to other countries is ridiculous. Where the heck does Bush think he can come up with all that money to just give away when our economy is as bad as it is?