Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33

Thread: END THESE ABUSES':Trump vows to reverse Obama national monuments 'land grab

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Sweet Tennessee
    Posts
    1,903

    Default

    Is crazy horse completed?
    Don't bring skittles to a gun fight.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TripSeven View Post
    There must be a middle ground in this.
    I recently visited both Crazyhorse and Mt Rushmore. I enjoyed Crazyhorse more. It's privately owned and funded.
    Mt Rushmore was a govt mess, It was big and pretty, and wrapped in red tape.
    Rules and regulations- which I suspect none of the four men (who's faces are on that mountain) would support.

    Put a set of private small businesses in place where their profit and livelihood are motivation to keep the parks open and operating. Let competition drive prices, let the market decide.
    Didn't think Crazyhorse was privately owned, I thought it was indian land owned by the entire tribe (their version of our federal government)

    Perhaps that could work if the land was still owned by "We the people" and the park was just administered by a company, but if it was privately owned the owners could change the land use anytime they wanted

    Yellowstone and old faithful, well that's a geothermal power plant now instead because it was more profitable.

    Instead of the redwood national forest, they might open up a timber company and strip the national redwood forest of it's trees, that would have to be immensely profitable.....still wouldn't make it right.

    Once you sell something you lose the right to control and administer it.

    I agree that a solution needs to be found, but I won't support a solution that removes public oversight of our parks and monuments.
    Last edited by Tdale; 04-26-2017 at 10:05 PM.
    Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,738

    Default

    You all bring up valid points . I cannot speak so much as far as national parks and monuments are concerned, but I can speak to National forests. The national forests in our county create a lot of activities for hunters, fishermen, hikers, campers, nature lovers, etc.
    To hunt or fish you have to purchase the necessary state licenses of course, and a national forest stamp , but most access to the forests is free , except for campgrounds and special service areas of course.

    However, access is not guaranteed . Most forest areas have gates that can be closed and locked at the discretion of the forest service/ DNR. So even though it is the people's land, the people can and are denied access at the whims of the government.

    Also, the forests are routinely logged by private timber companies who pay pennies on the dollar to what timber sells for on private land. That money goes to the Federal government, as I understand none goes to the state, at least not directly . The feds do give stipends to the state but apparently not based on the actual sale of timber, but what they decide to give. That is not right. First, those companies should pay at least the prevailing rate for the timber , and the states and counties should get a percentage. Also, grazing rights are sold where grazing is possible to farmers / cattle men who also pay far less than the prevailing rate of private land . I suspect it is the same on federal lands that are mined . This needs to be changed.
    Last edited by bambam; 04-26-2017 at 09:51 PM.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bambam View Post

    Also, the forests are routinely logged by private timber companies who pay pennies on the dollar to what timber sells for on private land. That money goes to the Federal government, as I understand none goes to the state, at least not directly . The feds do give stipends to the state but apparently not based on the actual sale of timber, but what they decide to give. That is not right. First, those companies should pay at least the prevailing rate for the timber , and the states and counties should get a percentage. Also, grazing rights are sold where grazing is possible to farmers / cattle men who also pay far less than the prevailing rate of private land . I suspect it is the same on federal lands that are mined . This needs to be changed.
    I agree 100%
    Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tdale View Post
    The desert can be very beautiful....and fun with a RZR

    or a DR...

    I like the desert, forest, mountains and tent camp in all of those.
    flock6, your retarded in your thinking about the desert.

    Private sector will take away from all of us.
    Do you really think they will keep it as it is?

    They will split it up and develop into sub-divisions.
    Talk about subsidence now, wait till then.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Sweet Tennessee
    Posts
    1,903

    Default

    Come live Yosemite! Private estates with year round sporting, members only 18 hole golf course, live the American Heritage.

    Lol, I could put a nice cul-de-sac right under Washington's nose.

    Seriously though, if y'all are worried about land being used up go buy a couple hundred acres. It's not hard to do, especially if you're passionate about it.

    I stand firm that the FED has over stepped it's powers in taking land
    Don't bring skittles to a gun fight.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mountains & Lakes of the extreme NorthEast
    Posts
    1,134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bambam View Post
    We need to have national parks and monuments to preserve areas of the country that are rare or unique, but I believe Obama overstepped his authority just to prevent mining and oil exploration on as much land as possible. Some western states have so much land controlled by the federal government that they suffer because of the loss of tax revenue. I dealt with that right here in WV when I was on the school board. A lot of our county, around 30 % , is national forest,. I love the national forests because they give everyone access for a wide variety of activities, but it constantly caused us budgetary concerns because we received no tax monies for all that land, and only a small yearly stipend from the feds in lieu of taxes.

    We need national monuments and parks and forests, controlled by government / the people , not corporations, but there has to be a limit to how much land the government can remove from control of each state so as not to put a state into dire fiscal circumstances.
    bambam caught the essence of what I was trying to say, thanks....

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Tx Hillcountry
    Posts
    1,307

    Default

    Crazyhorse is not complete, prolly be another 50-60 years. They finished his face in '82. this monument is huge! It dwarfs Rushmore. Rushmore could easily be fit into the area for CH's face and hair.

    Once the federal government is involved you lose the right to control and administer it too.

    I've become a small and limited gov't kind of guy. Our Federal government has overstepped its granted authority, and is quite busy excersizing usurped powers secure in the knowledge We the People accept the loss of freedom more fully with each passing moment.
    777 FGG

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Tx Hillcountry
    Posts
    1,307

    Default

    I agree, parks and monuments should not be administered by corporate America.

    Corporate charters were originally forbidden by our founding fathers, excepting specific projects of limited scope and duration.

    For instance, the transcontinental RR . Once the job is done, the charter is dissolved.

    Another ferinstance -- the Federal Reserve Bank. It's not federal, nor is it a bank. It is a corporation intent on screwing us out of our wealth and freedom.
    777 FGG

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TripSeven View Post
    I agree, parks and monuments should not be administered by corporate America.

    Corporate charters were originally forbidden by our founding fathers, excepting specific projects of limited scope and duration.

    For instance, the transcontinental RR . Once the job is done, the charter is dissolved.

    Another ferinstance -- the Federal Reserve Bank. It's not federal, nor is it a bank. It is a corporation intent on screwing us out of our wealth and freedom.
    Perhaps the land could be held in a trust by the people but be administered by a non-profit....but then it gets complicated if it's mismanaged. How do we fix problems if we can't vote out the board of directors like shareholders can.......and as citizens of the USA aren't we all equal shareholders of public land?

    Having the land administered by the Feds gives us the absolute right to vote their sorry asses out if they don't do their job.....I just don't know how a private/public option would work, but I'd support it if the land remains public and if there was public oversight of the land administrator
    Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •