BHR- The entire article was based on a group of private property owners attempting to stop the state from acquiring another individuals private property. The property right that is therefore being violated would be the sellers. By attempting and possibly stopping this sale, the "seller's" right to sell (specifically to the state) is being violated. If stopped, the ramifications of a group of private property owners being able to create "terms" on a private sale would be tremendous. I doubt they will be able to stop this sale but there is a possibility and that would set horrible precedence.
Whose Property Right is it?
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Matt,
The guy in the article said he would sue the state if the sale went through. How would that impact the seller?
If you build a house next to my hog farm, don't whine about the stink. If I want to build a hog farm in the middle of an established neighborhood, I should expect some resistance.
Here's an current example of a group of Montana's sueing to stop developement on public land. Does this group have a right to say what happens on public land?
HELENA, Mont. (AP) - Opponents of a plan to develop a military biathlon course on U.S. Forest Service land west of Helena have filed a lawsuit saying the agency inadequately considered environmental effects.
The Helena Hunters and Anglers Association is among those who filed the suit yesterday in federal court.
The case says the biathlon course on MacDonald Pass about 15 miles from Helena stands to harm wildlife and violate Forest Service standards for soil protection.
Calls seeking comment Tuesday from the Forest Service were not returned immediately.
Plans call for a National Guard course that would be groomed and open to the public when not in military use. The sport of biathlon involves rigorous cross-country skiing and target shooting.
The guy in the article said he would sue the state if the sale went through. How would that impact the seller?
If you build a house next to my hog farm, don't whine about the stink. If I want to build a hog farm in the middle of an established neighborhood, I should expect some resistance.
Here's an current example of a group of Montana's sueing to stop developement on public land. Does this group have a right to say what happens on public land?
HELENA, Mont. (AP) - Opponents of a plan to develop a military biathlon course on U.S. Forest Service land west of Helena have filed a lawsuit saying the agency inadequately considered environmental effects.
The Helena Hunters and Anglers Association is among those who filed the suit yesterday in federal court.
The case says the biathlon course on MacDonald Pass about 15 miles from Helena stands to harm wildlife and violate Forest Service standards for soil protection.
Calls seeking comment Tuesday from the Forest Service were not returned immediately.
Plans call for a National Guard course that would be groomed and open to the public when not in military use. The sport of biathlon involves rigorous cross-country skiing and target shooting.
smalls
Well-known member
Bighorn, why do insist on making everyone dumber?
BigHornRam
Well-known member
One last question for BF (Maybe he will finally grasp where I was going with the welfare comments?). Do you consider Harry Reid's 8 billion dollar earmark for a train from Las Vegas to Disney Land, welfare for his constituents.........or an important investment in taxpayer money for the benefit of the PUBLIC?
Thanks.
Thanks.
Nemont
Well-known member
BHR,
Do you think there is any difference between Public lands and Private lands? What about management, disposition and ownership differences?
This is hardly comparable to putting a pig farm in the middle of an established neighborhood.
Nemont
Do you think there is any difference between Public lands and Private lands? What about management, disposition and ownership differences?
This is hardly comparable to putting a pig farm in the middle of an established neighborhood.
Nemont
Nemont
Well-known member
It is neither, it a political payoff so that Reid could deliver the bill on time to Obama for his signature.
Nemont
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
this is almost enough to make me pour gasoline on myself..
BigHornRam
Well-known member
"This is hardly comparable to putting a pig farm in the middle of an established neighborhood."
So there is a point where NIMBYism is acceptable? Big Fin doesn't think so. I just used an extreme example to make my point.
So there is a point where NIMBYism is acceptable? Big Fin doesn't think so. I just used an extreme example to make my point.
Nemont
Well-known member
You really need to be more of a producer, per Matt's usage of the word, then a typer here on Hunttalk.
I think there are these little legal things called zoning, convenants and ordinances that govern the rules of locating a commercial hog operation in an established neighborhood.
Can you name the legal mechanism that allows for the neighbors to have a say in the sale of a large parcel of land in an unincorporated area without such legal devices? Other then not liking sharing with the public everyone of their concerns can be addressed via rules/ regulations on the use of this land.
Nemont
BHR:
I am with Greenie on this. Your ignorance and bullheadedness is enough to break out the gas and matches.
As much as I wouldn't want a pig farm next door, if I bought property in a place where it was allowed and by doing so the landowner was not violating any laws or covenants, too bad for me. If I don't like it, time to break out the check book and buy it from him.
Not sure how this can be so difficult for you to understand and why you have to pull out all kind of obscure examples that have little relevance to the topic.
From this discussion, I have concluded you are really bored, or really ignorant, or stupid beyond measurement, or some combination of all.
Given your inability to comprehend what is written, and my foolishness for thinking explanations would help, I am done commenting on this thread.
Where's the friggin siphon hose? Gonna need it, if this guy doesn't find a life. |oo|oo|oo
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Feelings are mutual Fin....have a nice life.
My first response to this thread that YOU started was that maybe it would be better to purchase this particular property through a local sportsmen's group instead of using limited gov. funds. Local group could purchase it, put in minimal improvements, and donate it to the public. I know of a number of similar properties that have been bought that way.......100% non-welfare access. Funny how those that like to throw the welfare word around all the time, don't see it that way.
My first response to this thread that YOU started was that maybe it would be better to purchase this particular property through a local sportsmen's group instead of using limited gov. funds. Local group could purchase it, put in minimal improvements, and donate it to the public. I know of a number of similar properties that have been bought that way.......100% non-welfare access. Funny how those that like to throw the welfare word around all the time, don't see it that way.
JoseCuervo
New member
BigWhore,
Is your whole problem that a government agency is buying a piece of land?
Is there any situation that it is acceptable for the government to buy land?
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Not opposed to the goverment buying land Jose. Just would like them to negotiate the deal like they were using their own money. Also make sure the projects they select are the best ones out there. These funds are not unlimited.
The Legacy Deal I can support using tax dollars to fund. The government gave the land away generations ago to the railroads.......don't have a problem with them buying some of it back today.
I didn't like how it was funded however......stuffed in a bloated farm bill. But a lot of things go on in DC that I don't like.
