Editorial for Less Access

[Nameless Range]

What's wrong with the current state of public land access?

Well clearly, we may have too much of it according to PERC in a recent editorial. You know, because they clearly have the best interests of sportsmen in mind based on their push for the transfer of public lands, their undying hate for stream access, and a host of other things.

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/opinions/guest_columnists/how-much-access-is-too-much/article_e6fffdff-8c6d-5524-b576-336cdc5dbfa8.html

They name dropped Mr. Newberg on this one as well.

 

[Big Fin]

They name dropped Mr. Newberg on this one as well.

Yeah, the same article appeared in the Billings paper over the weekend. I'm at a loss of how an editor at a newspaper would let someone write a guest editorial that quotes a speaker (me), then allow that speaker's quote to have words added by the guest writer that gives a completely different meeting than what was the substance of the testimony given.

The level of journalistic integrity is at an all-time low.

 

[RobG]

Some areas got overused in the past so let's give users even less places to go. Brilliant. Luckily for them their billionaire friends are closing access faster than we can obtain it.

 

[Ben Lamb]

You're not famous until your enemies attack you in public, Randy.

It's kind of funny - but PERC is basically arguing for good travel management, like less ORV trails in the Root, Divide, etc travel plans. Their take away, however, is wrong. We can manage public lands and the travel on them for increased opportunity, better chance of harvest, etc, or we can throw the gates wide open, spend millions on road management and enforcement and have less opportunity.

PERC has a longstanding position that the transfer & SALE of public lands is a good idea. Only recently did they drop sale, but now we see them go after access because, well, how dare the American public want to have access to their own land.

This follows the UPOM model of trying to eliminate our access funding the last few legislative sessions or eliminating our stream access law (both PERC and UPOM don't like the stream access law). It's pretty funny that the darling of the American Lands Council, PERC is now advocating for less access in order to protect the environment.

 

[MT_elk]

Unbelievable! That's the press for ya!

 

[Cornell2012]

"We want to let more people enjoy the land by reducing the number of people we allow to enjoy the land." - paraphrasing

 

[HSi-ESi]

"We want to let more people enjoy the land by reducing the number of people we allow to enjoy the land." - paraphrasing

I felt like it was more "we want a select group of people to be able to enjoy the land in a manner we want them to".

Either way though - the opinion piece speaks volumes to their idea of entitlement.