RobG
Well-known member
James has a history of fighting for wildlife and public lands.
Idaho - Public Land Politics
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
I was planning on looking into him today. He looks very promising although that D next to his name is really going to hurt him over here. They have the district lines drawn to wear it's going to be hard for him to get enough votes.
Labrador is Idaho's Cruz
Labrador is Idaho's Cruz
Good to see a solid conservationist throwing down in support of public lands. Hope he'll have the support of Idaho's sportsmen and women.
https://www.facebook.com/VotePiotrowski
https://www.facebook.com/VotePiotrowski
From the ID Statesman...
Piotrowki said Labrador’s advocacy of a state takeover of federally-owned public land was “the final straw” that moved him to run.
Link to his view on public lands- http://www.votepiotrowski.com/issues/public-lands
Piotrowki said Labrador’s advocacy of a state takeover of federally-owned public land was “the final straw” that moved him to run.
Link to his view on public lands- http://www.votepiotrowski.com/issues/public-lands
Last edited:
Just an FYI that I did follow-up with Rep. Labrador's office in Lewiston after not hearing anything back regarding my letter and spoke with a lady answering phones for him on Thursday; she confirmed my worries that Rep. Labrador doesn't typically engage with non-ID residents but did respectfully listen to my concerns regarding H.R. 2316 and said that she would pass my comments on to him. I also expressed my thoughts that if Rep. Labrador is going to propose legislation to take away land from 320 million plus Americans in all 50 states, then he should listen to concerns from all of those landowners that he is affecting no matter where they reside. I also did reach out to Rep. Young's office in Anchorage and was given an email address by a lady in his office whom promised to forward my concerns to him regarding H.R. 3650.
It seems like proponents of the land transfer issue reference lands in the east as an example of how a lack of federal lands "can work" and as a model to follow; on the contrary, I believe President Roosevelt saw the exploitation and degradation of lands in the east and midwest that had already occurred and believed that the Federal Government was the best way to conserve lands in the west that hadn't yet fallen victim to mismanagement and to preserve various remaining wild places for posterity. TR understood what sustainability meant long before it became a buzz word in today's society.
It seems like proponents of the land transfer issue reference lands in the east as an example of how a lack of federal lands "can work" and as a model to follow; on the contrary, I believe President Roosevelt saw the exploitation and degradation of lands in the east and midwest that had already occurred and believed that the Federal Government was the best way to conserve lands in the west that hadn't yet fallen victim to mismanagement and to preserve various remaining wild places for posterity. TR understood what sustainability meant long before it became a buzz word in today's society.
Last edited:
Well said. And thanks for trying to get a hold of Labrador. My fingers are crossed we can get this guy out. Although unfortunately in Idaho (and Utah) he meets the only two requirements needed to hold the job.
Paul in Idaho
Well-known member
Here's another article on House Bill 582 from an ag news outlet.
http://www.capitalpress.com/article/20160311/ARTICLE/160319945
Here's the management criteria of HB582 ( http://legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2016/H0582.pdf )
That text hardly makes me confident the authors put wildlife and conservation high in their priorities. Besides those items being listed last in 58-1504, the bill text throughout makes it clear financial considerations are higher priority. There's also a lot of what I would call weasel words that give them opportunity to undercut conservation.
http://www.capitalpress.com/article/20160311/ARTICLE/160319945
Here's the management criteria of HB582 ( http://legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2016/H0582.pdf )
That text hardly makes me confident the authors put wildlife and conservation high in their priorities. Besides those items being listed last in 58-1504, the bill text throughout makes it clear financial considerations are higher priority. There's also a lot of what I would call weasel words that give them opportunity to undercut conservation.
Paul in Idaho
Well-known member
When the Attorney General states, "This premise has no support in the law.” yet Legislators push forward with these kind of "principles" (tongue in cheek), the voters, whether a conservative person as myself, or one feeling the Bern, can only scratch their head and ask, "WTH are these people thinking?"
And folks wonder how a person like Trump, lacking any details to his plan and probably demonstrating even less couth in behavior, can attract so many people within the supposed conservative movement. Well, when politicians, from local to Federal, are bought and paid for by ideologues pushing this kind of agenda, they will get what they asked for. I am at a loss as to how these folks can say they represent the votes, when the few studies about vote opinions on this topic show far less support for the positions represented by this legislation.
Yet, to quote a once famous Montana Copper King who had tried to buy a US Senate seat and for whom Clark County, Nevada is now named, "I've never bought a politician who wasn't for sale."
As true as it is funny. You can't buy someone who is not for sale. And the inverse is true; those who are for sale are easily bought and paid for. Some use their actions to self identify as being bought and paid for. They are pretty easy to sort out.
Pretty much sums it up BF.
I'm starting to wonder how I made it out of HS with collage units and a degree or if I did ,when I listen to most anyone these days,particularly politicians.................am I really as stupid as they think I am?
They sure seem to be MORE IGNORANT than I can even imagine.....
I'm starting to wonder how I made it out of HS with collage units and a degree or if I did ,when I listen to most anyone these days,particularly politicians.................am I really as stupid as they think I am?
They sure seem to be MORE IGNORANT than I can even imagine.....
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
'Wonder if Judy Boyle has a cousin Jennifer across the Montana border?
You can voice your disapproval of HB582 here, courtesy of TRCP. It goes to Moyle, and a few others. It takes about 1 minute: https://secure3.convio.net/trcp/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=513
quarterhorse
Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2011
- Messages
- 137
I like how bill is about "management", but doesn't address not selling the land. There will be sweetheart deals made on choice pieces, land sold in hard times, and all the management they intend to do will get protested by environmentalists just like what happens when the Feds try to do something. Do they really think environmental groups won't take aim at the states if they get control of the land?
Paul in Idaho
Well-known member
There are a couple more great letters in the Statesman today.
Zane Joseph Beal:
Ed Nothen:
Zane Joseph Beal:
http://www.idahostatesman.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article67182147.html
Ed Nothen:
http://www.idahostatesman.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article67182227.html
TheDudeAbides
Well-known member
I recieved this email from Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming.
Dear Jeremiah,
Thank you for contacting me concerning H.R. 2316 - the Self-Sufficient Community Lands Act. I appreciate your comments.
H.R. 2316, introduced by Representative Raul Labrador of Idaho,would establish an elective pilot program that allows participating states to temporarily manage a small portion of U.S. Forest Service (FS) land within their borders. I am a cosponsor of this legislation. The House Natural Resources Committee recently held a legislative hearing on this bill, and I hope that the committee takes further action to send this bill to the House floor. In the meantime, I would like to provide you with more information about the bill and hopefully clear up some concern about the bill that has been brought to my attention.
To ensure that a particular state is able to properly manage the land, H.R. 2316 requires participating states to have established forestry management laws or regulations. In addition, the pilot program is limited in scope. There are over 188 million acres of National Forest in the U.S. This bill allows a maximum of 4 million acres nationwide to be managed by the states. That means a maximum of 2.12 percent of FS land could be managed by the states, and this could not include wilderness areas or national monuments.
Under H.R. 2316, states would manage this limited amount of qualified lands through an advisory board whose members are appointed by the governor. Board members would have to include representatives of local governments, the timber industry, land use permit holders, and recreational users of the land. The Secretary of Agriculture would review each application set forth by a governor to ensure the land to be used qualifies, and the composition of the advisory board is constructed in accordance with the bill. The bill also protects sportsmen's access to any land being managed by the state.
Public lands have always been an important part of Wyoming's heritage and culture. Effective stewardship of National Forests is vital to protecting these areas that help define our state, and why I believe H.R. 2316 is a necessary step towards more sound management of these lands. I've seen firsthand where beetle kill in state forest land, because of conservation logging and sustainable forestry practices, was far less severe than in the surrounding National Forest Service land that was less actively managed. In an Appropriations Committee Hearing last year, Tom Tidwell, Chief of the United States Forest Service, acknowledged that the Forest Service could only treat a fourth of the timber in Montana than he would have preferred.
I believe that Wyoming has the talent and expertise necessary to improve the stewardship of Wyoming forests if they are given more opportunities to do so, and H.R. 2316 creates such an opportunity. We have an excellent Forestry Advisory Board that puts forth sound policy on the management of our sate forest land. The land managed through this bill would be subject to existing state forestry laws. H.R. 2316 will allow for more public lands decision-making by those who actually live near and use the land and want it available for their children and grandchildren, not by those who work and live in Washington who do not have the same connection to the land.
I know some have labeled H.R. 2316 as a 'land-grab bill,' claiming that it would harm our FS land. To the contrary, H.R. 2316 would ensure Wyoming people can use Wyoming expertise to manage Wyoming land. This bill does not deny, restrict, or hamper public use or recreation on public lands. In no way can this land be transferred or sold by states to private parties. A diversified advisory board ensures the land is managed in a way acceptable to all interested parties - sportsmen, ranchers, and conservationists alike. Most importantly, the bill will enable more effective management of FS land in Wyoming that has suffered from decades of neglect. Finally, as a pilot program, H.R. 2316 is limited in scope to allow states a chance to demonstrate on the ground that they can more effectively manage this land as I and other supporters of the bill believe they can.
Thank you again for taking the time to write to me. I value your input. If you haven't done so already, I would like to encourage you to visit my website at www.lummis.house.gov. There you can sign up to receive my newsletter, and have access to a wealth of other information. I won't flood your email box, but I will provide you with updates once in a while about activities in Washington that affect our lives in Wyoming. I hope you will sign up so that we can stay in close touch, and I look forward to seeing you in Wyoming.
Well, as the dude once said "This affects all of us, man."
Similar threads
