Rep. Jason Chaffetz announces he will not run for any office in 2018

[pwsINC]

Also, one main argument for attempting the build the Dade-collier jet way.... You guess it, Jobs.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[Jason Snyder]

I do understand exactly what is at stake. But I think an all or nothing approach on either side is obtuse thinking.

And if I had a bunch of money how would that change the argument?

All I have said is that there should be a balanced approach to land use. If hunters and outdoor enthusiast take an all or nothing approach my fear is that we will wind up with nothing.

You can't put the self interest of a small minority group ahead of the economic interest of a state and or country. So, rather than stepping in front of a train with a crossing guard stop sign I say we help layout the tracks.

No one can possibly think that development will be stopped or is not coming. That's fantasy land... It is going to happen. So put control of it in the hands of people who live, eat and drink the water.

Real hard to steer from the very back- and the bus has already left the station.

Thanks to Congress , you now have very little say in land use planning on BLM lands. Under the Congressional Review Act, they repealed the new planning rule (Rule 2.0). As of right now, public input process for BKM land use is the same as it was in 1985. Your odds of helping lay the tracks just got worse my friend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kicker338]

See if any of you guys can clue me in on what is going on here in Nth. Idaho. When I first moved here back in 1999, I could go anywhere I wanted to on national forest land. Today go to the forest foundry first thing I encounter is a bunch of big signs telling me what I cant do on forest land. I drive up the road passing a big sign that says stay on designated roads, next sign says no shooting for next 6mi. nexy sign says no camping next 6mi. I finally get past all those signs, get to a place where public is suppose to be able to shoot, shoot a few rounds off then 2 forest service guys show up in an ATV then proced to try and stop me from shooting, tell me they just stopped 2 guys who were shooting pistols where there was a growed over water barred off road. Finally after telling them that the forest service was the one who designated the place where I was shooting as a spot to shoot they left. Don't know what to think guess you can hunt but cant shoot any game unless it's a designated shooting spot. If you guys think I'm making this up PM me I will give you my phone number, come visit me and I will take you for a drive and let you see for yourself.

 

[tipsntails7]

I do understand exactly what is at stake. But I think an all or nothing approach on either side is obtuse thinking.

And if I had a bunch of money how would that change the argument?

All I have said is that there should be a balanced approach to land use. If hunters and outdoor enthusiast take an all or nothing approach my fear is that we will wind up with nothing.

You can't put the self interest of a small minority group ahead of the economic interest of a state and or country. So, rather than stepping in front of a train with a crossing guard stop sign I say we help layout the tracks.

No one can possibly think that development will be stopped or is not coming. That's fantasy land... It is going to happen. So put control of it in the hands of people who live, eat and drink the water.

Real hard to steer from the very back- and the bus has already left the station.

You don't, and its glaringly obvious that you don't understand states will never take a balanced approach. Most if not all (I have not read them all) are bound by their state constitution to manage the land in a way that maximizes profit.

To think states would manage the land for multiple use is laughable. do you really think the state of Utah is going to spend 10+ million dollars just so they can gain control of land that is going to cost them more money? I think not.

The fact the you have already resigned yourself to allowing development to happen is shameful and particularly sad, grow a backbone and stand up for public lands.

 

[tttoadman]

See if any of you guys can clue me in on what is going on here in Nth. Idaho. When I first moved here back in 1999, I could go anywhere I wanted to on national forest land. Today go to the forest foundry first thing I encounter is a bunch of big signs telling me what I cant do on forest land. I drive up the road passing a big sign that says stay on designated roads, next sign says no shooting for next 6mi. nexy sign says no camping next 6mi. I finally get past all those signs, get to a place where public is suppose to be able to shoot, shoot a few rounds off then 2 forest service guys show up in an ATV then proced to try and stop me from shooting, tell me they just stopped 2 guys who were shooting pistols where there was a growed over water barred off road. Finally after telling them that the forest service was the one who designated the place where I was shooting as a spot to shoot they left. Don't know what to think guess you can hunt but cant shoot any game unless it's a designated shooting spot. If you guys think I'm making this up PM me I will give you my phone number, come visit me and I will take you for a drive and let you see for yourself.

Even though this is a little off the topic, I can simply say this is due to people trashing the forest and acting like idiots. In the central OR valley we get all kinds of illegal dumping, shooting up stolen cars, TV's whatever...Some people sit up there on the mountain top and shoot off the edge where there are houses 5-10 miles away. I think with the budget constraints and the level of stupidity that our law enforcement deals with, they are forced to try to post these types of restrictions.

As it relates to this original topic, I assume stiffer penalties also go along with monuments giving a little more deterrent for lazy stupid people who just want to trash the forest for their amusement. Just my thoughts.

 

[tttoadman]

You don't, and its glaringly obvious that you don't understand states will never take a balanced approach. Most if not all (I have not read them all) are bound by their state constitution to manage the land in a way that maximizes profit.

to think states would manage the land for multiple use is laughable. do you really think the state of Utah is going to spend 10+ million dollars just so they can gain control land that is going to cost them more money? I think not.

The fact the you have already resigned yourself to allowing development to happen is shameful and particularly sad, grow a backbone and stand up for public lands.

Thank-you. I drafted about 2-3 responses to that post primarily the developer comment. I could never make it sound right, and I just keep getting more pissed. Thank you for paraphrasing my thoughts.

The word "developer" is a self proclaimed title for people that rape the shit of something and morph it into something else that they can sell. They aren't developing anything.

 

[power54]

See if any of you guys can clue me in on what is going on here in Nth. Idaho. When I first moved here back in 1999, I could go anywhere I wanted to on national forest land. Today go to the forest foundry first thing I encounter is a bunch of big signs telling me what I cant do on forest land. I drive up the road passing a big sign that says stay on designated roads, next sign says no shooting for next 6mi. nexy sign says no camping next 6mi. I finally get past all those signs, get to a place where public is suppose to be able to shoot, shoot a few rounds off then 2 forest service guys show up in an ATV then proced to try and stop me from shooting, tell me they just stopped 2 guys who were shooting pistols where there was a growed over water barred off road. Finally after telling them that the forest service was the one who designated the place where I was shooting as a spot to shoot they left. Don't know what to think guess you can hunt but cant shoot any game unless it's a designated shooting spot. If you guys think I'm making this up PM me I will give you my phone number, come visit me and I will take you for a drive and let you see for yourself.

You're just describing regulations in high use areas. No mystery there. It's confirmed by the presence of Forest Service personnel. Target shooting and hunting are not treated the same on USFS property either.

 

[Shooter19802003]

Even though this is a little off the topic, I can simply say this is due to people trashing the forest and acting like idiots. In the central OR valley we get all kinds of illegal dumping, shooting up stolen cars, TV's whatever...Some people sit up there on the mountain top and shoot off the edge where there are houses 5-10 miles away. I think with the budget constraints and the level of stupidity that our law enforcement deals with, they are forced to try to post these types of restrictions.

As it relates to this original topic, I assume stiffer penalties also go along with monuments giving a little more deterrent for lazy stupid people who just want to trash the forest for their amusement. Just my thoughts.

Well, your wrong. It is habitat improvement. They are trying to shut down everything east of 95 in boundary county because of grizzly habitat. Just like they did for caribou habitat north of priest up by boundary creek. They don't want people there because they are trying to boost grizzly numbers. So by keeping you out.....grizzly are coming back. Same argument as always , animals are better than people .....yeah gov't.

 

[pwsINC]

Off topic but funny.... early days of parks people would through trash in geysers and paint on rock formations.... park service would make the vandals clean it up and give tourist a good viewing area to watch the shamed criminals... I do live this approach.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[pwsINC]

*I do LOVE this approach.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[Shooter19802003]

You're just describing regulations in high use areas. No mystery there. It's confirmed by the presence of Forest Service personnel. Target shooting and hunting are not treated the same on USFS property either.

Nowhere in north Idaho is high use....

 

[1signguy]

Thank-you. I drafted about 2-3 responses to that post primarily the developer comment. I could never make it sound right, and I just keep getting more pissed. Thank you for paraphrasing my thoughts.

The word "developer" is a self proclaimed title for people that rape the shit of something and morph it into something else that they can sell. They aren't developing anything.

I don't know why you guys would be getting mad at me- I sit on the same side of the table as you. We just disagree on the how to fight this...

 

[1signguy]

Thanks to Congress , you now have very little say in land use planning on BLM lands. Under the Congressional Review Act, they repealed the new planning rule (Rule 2.0). As of right now, public input process for BKM land use is the same as it was in 1985. Your odds of helping lay the tracks just got worse my friend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The reason it needs to become state land.

 

[Jason Snyder]

The reason it needs to become state land.

I couldn't disagree more.

1) Currently, state lands are typically held as trust lands for state school systems and are usually mandated by law and/or Constitution to maximize revenues. Federal lands are currently managed for multiple use.

2) Several states have studied the feasibility of taking over federal lands, and all results thus far have reached the determination the states do not have the tax funding base to support the maintenance and management of said lands.

3) Public input into state land management pretty much takes a backseat to revenue generation. The only input you would typically have would be a violation of SEPA rules.

4) State grazing lease fees are typically much higher than federal fees. I know I'll be an outlier on this subject, but I see this as a major detriment to rural ranching communities in the west. I'm fine with a federal grazing subsidy that maintains the integrity of rangeland tracts.

5) In reality, what the Congressional Review Act did was reduce the amount of public input on land use policy and place it in the hands of the extractive resource industry, much like would happen under state trust management.

 

[tipsntails7]

I don't know why you guys would be getting mad at me- I sit on the same side of the table as you. We just disagree on the how to fight this...

Sir, We surely do not sit on the same side of the table.

 

[1signguy]

Sir, We surely do not sit on the same side of the table.

Okay- enough said.
Good luck to you and thank you for the discussion.

 

[bally]

i think we should sell off all the BLM land. Why waste public money managing it? There's a million square miles of it, 640 acres to the mile, a probable average price of $2000 per acre, so a total of 13 billion $, nice little chunk of money, with which to pay rewards, say, $200 each) to people who snitch out people who are hiring and/or sheltering illegal aliens. There's about 5 million such people, of course. Toss them into tent cities for 6 months. Make it a felony to be in the US without permission. With no income, no housing and facing a couple of years in a tent city, eating green baloney, all the illegals would leave, saving us half a trillion $ per year currently wasted on them. The average american doesnt spent $1000 a year on produce. So why would you CARE if it doubles in price, eh? You'd save 20x as much by having the illegals gone. The labor cost is 1/3rd of the retail cost. So you can pay the workers 6x as much and only double the retail cost of produce. The middlemen and employers do NOT have to get a raise, just cause the laborers do. In short order, the produce picking would be done by mahinery, made in the US and run by US citizens.

 

[pwsINC]

Okay- enough said.
Good luck to you and thank you for the discussion.

...this is what make this site great. Members usually show some class in disagreements.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[bally]

i really like the way he has gone after clinton and the other pos's. I hope he finds a spot in Trump;s administration.. Between him and Gowdy, we need to lock up at least half of DOJ, DNC and the State Dept

 

[sneaky]

Utah has an enormous amount of natural resources- that should be and could be far better regulated to the betterment of its citizens at the state level.

The federal government is a machine who's only interest is sustaining and growing itself. Don't think for one minute the federal government won't change on a dime to serve its own self interest. Your land is far safer in the hands of the men and women who live there and know you!

You obviously don't live in Utah. Those bastards in office here can't wait to screw their constituents over.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk