American Prairie Reserve Purchases 14,000 Acre Ranch

Dining options are definitely slim here. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Waffle House. Is that where people with two good legs get pancakes?

The only good thing about having been born in the south is knowing about Waffle House. None here either. It is an establishment of the finest repute where you can eat hash browns and pancakes while watching meth addicts fight the kitchen staff.
 
The only good thing about having been born in the south is knowing about Waffle House. None here either. It is an establishment of the finest repute where you can eat hash browns and pancakes while watching meth addicts fight the kitchen staff.
They don’t serve pancakes at Waffle House.
 
They don’t serve pancakes at Waffle House.
I feel like this is wrong, but I remember too few of my numerous 3am “endless waffles and coffee” runs in college.

You ever watch an Ozark sunrise from a Waffle House a fifth of tequila deep after a winter storm blows through? The sky is on fire and the world covered in glittering ice- spectacular. Which is a far cry from our sorry group as we stumbled out past the church crowd and truckers.

So yeah, that should give the uninitiated an idea of what Waffle House is like.
 
Good story on 60 minutes last night regarding American Prairie...anyone seen Gila?

I'm sure he was screaming and shaking his fist at the Television, and the clouds.

 
Good story on 60 minutes last night regarding American Prairie...anyone seen Gila?

I'm sure he was screaming and shaking his fist at the Television, and the clouds.

Thanks Buzz. I was going to post it last night but saw reference to BFF so decided against it.😜
 
"Help protect your land for future generations" haha!

Reminds me of this except I can actually understand a financial driver for the easements UPOM was calling "predatory".
SB 357 saw support from Charles Denowh with United Property Owners of Montana who testified that terms of the easements are lopsided against landowners and unfairly lock in any future owners of the property. He questioned why taxpayers should subsidize conservation and alleged that those proposing easements in some cases may be “predatory” and put pressure on landowners facing liquidity problems.
 
"Help protect your land for future generations" haha!

Reminds me of this except I can actually understand a financial driver for the easements UPOM was calling "predatory".

My thoughts exactly. I thought UPOM was beating the "perpetuity baaaad" drum.
 
Serious question here: Can a person draft any sort of easement they feel like or are there guidelines/process to creating them that would prevent a landowner from creating something.

So is the idea that they are promoting above is to have ranchers create an easement that says the land can never have bison on it?
 
Serious question here: Can a person draft any sort of easement they feel like or are there guidelines/process to creating them that would prevent a landowner from creating something.

So is the idea that they are promoting above is to have ranchers create an easement that says the land can never have bison on it?
The landowner gets to craft all provisions. If they refuse to place perpetuity in the language or they allow surface mining, it will restrict their income tax deductibility. But, it will still reduce the value for estate tax purposes.

I have seen some of the most creative landowner ideas you can imagine. Like all demographics, there are landowners who don't buy into the fear mongering and they see conservation easements as a great tool for certain objectives they have. They use all tools available to them and they succeed in their ranching/farming business. They are smart folks and they know how to find success in all they do.

Then there are the predatory fear mongers like UPOM who have nothing to sell other than fear and conspiracy. In the process they hope nobody undresses them and show what anti-property rights positions they are willing to promote to continue their path of fear-based misinformation.

Ranching/farming is hard, it's challenging, and the deck is stacked against the small guy. UPOM does no favors by trying to take away conservation easements as one of the useful tools working landowners have. And to reaffirm the answer to your question - the landowner, the holder of the property rights, drives the ship on conservation easement language and provisions, not the government, not the public, and not the non-profit that might hold the rights donated/sold as part of the easement.
 
Back
Top