American prairie. What's the issue?

[BrentD]

Force a private landowner to allow access on their property or take away their grazing lease on public land? That would go over really well with the UPOM crowd.

Maybe so, but holding public land hostage for personal, private, financial gains is far worse, wouldn't you say?

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

The federal government represents all citizens. What makes you sure they want public access to the landlocked portions of these federal lands for hunting? I don’t think your idea is a bad one if applied to all landowners since I support access and hunting but currently no laws on the books that even remotely address that. Grazing is codified by the Taylor grazing act. The AP is just like any private property owner. They are free to change their access ideology just like any other private landowner.

Its hard to make an assumption of what "the federal government" wants as that is so many branches and organizations that have many different agendas. If there are actors or entities at high levels within our own government that actively don't want landlocked public land to be accessed by citizens of the public then that is probably a much larger issue than anything else discussed in this thread, however that is quite a conspiratorial claim if that is what you are alleging? As you say i would apply the access/ grazing permit thing across the board to all landowners, perhaps I didn't make that clear enough when I first said it. As I stated earlier "Incredibly cheap grazing leases and in return you have to allow the public to access that land, seems like a reasonable and fair trade to me". To be clear I completely respect the ability of the APR to do whatever it wishes on its own private land.

 

[CycleFishHunt]

I might’ve missed it in the last 34 pages and am admittedly too lazy to go read through their financial disclosures, but what kind of foreign funding is APR receiving?

After reading that statement I skimmed the most recent audited financials and 990. The only thing I saw were a few references to a German organization.

The Friends of the American Serengeti Germany (FoAS) is an independent, tax-privileged organization in Germany formed to provide supporting funds for the Reserve.

I have not yet read up on anything about them.

 

[406dn]

@Eric Albus didn't say anything about the average price for diesel. He was talking about what he could fuel up for. You stated "I WISH diesel hit $6-7/gallon. All of the company stock I accumulated from working 28 years in the oil refinery would be double what it is." It did hit that mark. If you are going to call someone out over facts like you said "Yeah, you need to explain more, maybe with verifiable facts" then I'd make sure your facts are straight. Eric is in the middle of nowhere MT....his fuel prices are probably higher than they would be in Billings.

Yeah his prices might be higher than the Billings area. When I have hunted up near Plentywood, diesel is maybe $0.25/gallon more than I normally pay. Other parts of eastern Montana usually have lower prices for diesel than the Billings area, maybe a nickel a gallon.

Add them all together across the country and the gallons sold at various prices and you have an average price. That has not topped $6.00/gallon much less 7

 

[rogerthat]

Its hard to make an assumption of what "the federal government" wants as that is so many branches and organizations that have many different agendas. If there are actors or entities at high levels within our own government that actively don't want landlocked public land to be accessed by citizens of the public then that is probably a much larger issue than anything else discussed in this thread, however that is quite a conspiratorial claim if that is what you are alleging? As you say i would apply the access/ grazing permit thing across the board to all landowners, perhaps I didn't make that clear enough when I first said it. As I stated earlier "Incredibly cheap grazing leases and in return you have to allow the public to access that land, seems like a reasonable and fair trade to me". To be clear I completely respect the ability of the APR to do whatever it wishes on its own private land.

I guarantee there entities at higher levels of government that actively don’t want landlocked public to be accessed. The government is not one like minded being. The government is made up of normal people like you and I that have a wide range of ideology and opinions. Hell there will be a bunch that only have a vague idea of what landlocked public lands are. Obviously things change with all the changing of staff that comes with the SESs with an administration but to my knowledge the best we have gotten is an executive order or two regarding optimizing access. No laws directing anyone to throw caution to the wind and potentially infringe private property rights to force access to these landlocked lands. I like your idea but it would take an additional law to be passed imo.

 

[Beignet]

After reading that statement I skimmed the most recent audited financials and 990. The only thing I saw were a few references to a German organization.



I have not yet read up on anything about them.

That group sounds deeply conspiratorial, ha.

With one comment a few pages back I thought the local lore might’ve had the Chinese or Qataris pulling the purse strings.

 

[Ben Lamb]

AP puts their 990's and audits up on their website. That's a level of openess hardly any other non-profit has. UPOM, for example, is literally a dark money group so they can hide their donor network instead of provide bare minimum accountability in this regard.

 

[Beignet]

AP puts their 990's and audits up on their website. That's a level of openess hardly any other non-profit has. UPOM, for example, is literally a dark money group so they can hide their donor network instead of provide bare minimum accountability in this regard.

Those UPOM sunsabitches are a crafty bunch.

Lots of interesting info on the PR/Lobbying firm called the Montana Group (who “hatched” UPOM) on a website called Money Trails.

 

[brocksw]

Those UPOM sunsabitches are a crafty bunch.

Lots of interesting info on the PR/Lobbying firm called the Montana Group (who “hatched” UPOM) on a website called Money Trails.

Chuck from UPOM is a paid employee of the Montana Group. They are one in the same as far as I know.

 

[Eric Albus]

Yea, old 7.3L Ford. Filling up took its toll, but was 1/10 what a semi would need

The 'ol 7.3, that's what I drive.

 

[Eric Albus]

U.S. No 2 Diesel Retail Prices (Dollars per Gallon)

At no time has the average price for #2 diesel topped $6.00/gallon. In some place at some time, yes.

Right now in the Billings area it's going for $4.44999/gallon, down over a dollar in the last month or so.

Yahoooooo, diesel is four and a half bucks??? How long you think it lasts? Forecast I listen to is leaning to 7-10 dollar clear diesel by next Nov..

 

[Eric Albus]

After reading that statement I skimmed the most recent audited financials and 990. The only thing I saw were a few references to a German organization.



I have not yet read up on anything about them.

Keep digging.

 

[Ben Lamb]

If we want to get serious about energy independence, we need to stop selling our oil and nat gas overseas. Eliminating the export market and forcing refineries to match demand would do far more to bring gas prices down than new drilling.

 

[Beignet]

Chuck from UPOM is a paid employee of the Montana Group. They are one in the same as far as I know.

Yup. Looks like they had some ties to the Carlyle Group when the City of Missoula was trying to wrest back control of the municipal water supply. Just as an example of the out of state interests with whom they conduct business.

 

[406dn]

If we want to get serious about energy independence, we need to stop selling our oil and nat gas overseas. Eliminating the export market and forcing refineries to match demand would do far more to bring gas prices down than new drilling.

There will very likely NEVER be a new from the ground up an oil refinery of large size built in the United States.

A refinery manager told that to those of us on the union committee thirty years ago. So far he is right.

Gasoline demand in the United States is essentially flat. There is no reason why an oil company would build a refinery to create slack in the chain. That same refinery manager said that the cheapest barrel of oil to refine is the next one. That is if you are running wide open, that's where a refinery can make a good profit. When you are running well below capacity, you're likely treading water.

The future holds a declining demand with improved fuel efficiency standards and more electric vehicles coming on board.

Speaking of energy independence, a high up *xx*n big whig speaking to our work force panned energy independence. He was all about finding the lowest cost of production resource, wherever it might be.

 

[CycleFishHunt]

Keep digging.

I have no horse in this race, frankly. I’m only an interested spectator, not Bob Woodward.

Since you claim to have additional knowledge, spare us the “follow the money” routine, and please just spill it. What are their foreign sources of money beyond what’s in their financials? And please provide sources.

 

[antlerradar]

Just thinking out loud but If the APR ever did shut the doors to hunters and public access would it be possible to lobby the BLM to suspend their grazing permits? If that is possible it would seem like a good way to ensure public access. If the APR didn't have the BLM to graze on they would then have to maintain fences and keep their bison off that BLM land, then they couldn't have the giant open range they want.

I can understand the desire to connect access to grazing leases. Just not going to work out like you would think. If ranchers were required to provide access to the landlocked public as part of the grazing lease, most would drop the grazing lease. It would just not make sense to keep the lease. For example, I lease one parcel of BLM. It is rated for 15 AUM's per year. Because the parcel is a mile and 1000 feet of elevation change from the nearest water, I doubt I have had 15 cows on that BLM in my life time. Simply not going to open up to wide open access for that little value. On the other end of the spectrum, not far form me is a large parcel of landlocked public. Three different landowners lease the grazing. Because of lack of water and rough country l doubt that any of the landowners run more than 250 AUM's even on the best of years. If you take in to account the differences between a private lease and a public lease you could replace that with a private lease for around 5 grand and maybe much less if you can find the right lease. Maybe some one would bite for this type of money, but most would not.

 

[Eric Albus]

After reading that statement I skimmed the most recent audited financials and 990. The only thing I saw were a few references to a German organization.



I have not yet read up on anything about them.

Go to website opensecrets.org

One note of interest I found, the APF contributed ONLY to “D” candidates

 

[Eric Albus]

Its hard to make an assumption of what "the federal government" wants as that is so many branches and organizations that have many different agendas. If there are actors or entities at high levels within our own government that actively don't want landlocked public land to be accessed by citizens of the public then that is probably a much larger issue than anything else discussed in this thread, however that is quite a conspiratorial claim if that is what you are alleging? As you say i would apply the access/ grazing permit thing across the board to all landowners, perhaps I didn't make that clear enough when I first said it. As I stated earlier "Incredibly cheap grazing leases and in return you have to allow the public to access that land, seems like a reasonable and fair trade to me". To be clear I completely respect the ability of the APR to do whatever it wishes on its own private land.

I also respect the APR’s wishes to do as they please on their private holdings.

Forcing a landowner to give up anything, let alone access is the wrong tact. Give a landowner an INCENTIVE.

How’d you like it if I came at you with “you’re accessing “my” BLM lease FOR FREE, while I PAY for it and fix fence on it, so it is only FAIR that you begin paying to recreate on it”. How would that fly?

 

[Beignet]

Go to website opensecrets.org

One note of interest I found, the APF contributed ONLY to “D” candidates

Are you talking about the “Prairie PAC?” That’s a PAC associated with Senator Dick Durban (D-IL). Not affiliated with APR.

Only thing I can find about APR on Open Secrets is that they had a hefty ~$10,000 of lobbying expenditures in 2014 to a firm called the Livingston Group.

EDIT:

Looks like the 2014 farm bill had some provisions for sodsaving on prairies to keep ecosystems intact.


Curious if that’s the source of their lobbying efforts in 2014?

For context into the above screenshot, expansion of those sodsaving provisions went into the American Prairie Conservation Act introduced by Senator John Thune (R-SD) in 2017, but didn’t seem to go anywhere.