Romney: "I don't know what the purpose is" of public lands

[MNHunter]

Don't kid yourselves, if Obama is elected for a second term he will be coming after our guns.

Romney is accruing quite a list of sound bites we will get to hear again in a few months. Of course that is what the liberal media does to the R's...."gotcha questions".

He'll take yer guuunnnzzz!!!

 

[PackInLight]

Good thing I'm a bowhunter then.

 

[Devil Diver Down]

Aren't they all?

Correct! Driving them all off a cliff into a high tide would be a good start.

Porn enjoys a 30% approval rating. Congress: not so much

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awXdkKgF3Qw&feature=player_embedded

I had no idea 70% of the country were wives, girlfriends or Puritans.

I draw the line at hi fence stocked strippers. I prefer urban spot and stalk.

Elitist snob.

It explained why our government is so unable to work. It is because in an attempt to fix things we elect people that reflect the extremes of their parties. You wind up with far right facists fighting with far left socialists and nothing gets done because they are too far apart to get together. If we'd elect moderates from both parties they could work together and fix the country instead of battling political points of view while nothing gets fixed.

Most correct of all, IMHO. The only people we are electing--and probably 99.9% of the people running--are people who just want to be re-elected. That is their interest. It certainly isn't what is best for their constituents--that's only a side benefit with accruing more votes. That goes for both parties. There are good people on both sides of the aisle, but they are outweighed--and, more importantly, out-moneyed by the people who care only about themselves first and second and screw everyone else.

I'm afraid that the point has passed where anyone who would try to solve issues (instead of just point fingers, which is easier) will ever be in a position to do so and vice-versa.

 

[mixedbag]

jose,fun when all the people alot smarter then me say that gov't health care has been the main reason why companies aren't hiring.They don't know what the true costs to their business will be yet
Yep, I don't like him cause he's black,lol.
I guess I shouldn't say all.We all know that people on MSNBC,and CNN tend to make up their own shizz.Explain to me the easy answer so I don't have to look it up.My brain cell count is down to one,sorry,but hey thanks for the help
You guys that think the Dems are supporters of publicland hunting may want to look over their supporters for their campaigns also.No need to worry about them Republicans drilling in your favorite high country elk spot I don't think.But, you may have to worry about gun bills and hunting rights if you keep voting liberal.

 

[1_pointer]

I'm not very interested in politics so if this is a dumb thing to say please excuse it;

But as public land hunters, wouldn't we rather have a democrat in office? I mean, my impression is that if republicans had there way, they would cut govmt spending on land management agencies, open public land to mineral interests, and stop designating new wilderness areas. As public land hunters we sort of need well staffed land management agencies to responsibly manage our public lands (i.e. prevent off road enthusiasts from tearing them up). We want roadless areas free from mineral extraction/habitat disturbance. And as far as I'm concerned for hunting, the more wilderness the better. That way I have the opportunity to get away from the crowds by hoofing it into areas with higher game densities.

Thoughts???

Not to be too much of a party pooper, but in this economy with our deficit the land management/conservation agencies are not going to fair too well under either party. Even though the combined budgets of all of those agencies are a drop in the bucket compared to the items driving the deficit.

Though I think these types of issues are as important as many/most here, does anyone really think that any presidential candidate really cares about this stuff? I don't. None of them give more than lip service to these issues.

 

[Solohuntr]

2012

I will again close the curtain on the voting booth and search for the lever that sez
"NONE OF THE ABOVE",,,,,,,,, sad the Republician party cant support a good person, instead the small ones band up and vote off the best choices. kinda like survivor,,, that I dont watch anymore...

 

[sweetnectar]

Many amaze me at their perspectives on here. I don't value public land over my family. I don't value public land over my guns and don't value public land over many other issues.

I also don't get too emotional over what politicians say with out understanding it in perspective. Here is an example of what I mean.
http://youtu.be/cWt8hTayupE

Now drink the kool aid.

 

[174in]

The Dems for sure want more public land and they would take all the land they wanted if they could even your private property its called GOVERNMENT CONTROL! If you want government to control your every move vote for the jacka$$e$.

 

[174in]

Oh yea I am not sure about that Romney guy myself.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Many amaze me at their perspectives on here. I don't value public land over my family. I don't value public land over my guns and don't value public land over many other issues.

I also don't get too emotional over what politicians say with out understanding it in perspective. Here is an example of what I mean.
http://youtu.be/cWt8hTayupE

Now drink the kool aid.

Nectar,

While public lands might not be a top tier issue for some, they matter beyond what it gives us for recreational opportunities. In the west, for example, our water supplies and our irrigation water start on public lands. Healthy watersheds means healthy people and healthy crops.

Public lands provide low cost grazing options for ranchers and can be managed in a sustainable fashion.

Public lands help fill the United States treasury through energy production (coal, oil, natural gas, uranium).

Public lands are economic drivers in areas where there are large blocks, and protective designations like National Monuments have been proven to be revenue generators. Public lands help diversify local economies if managed in a sustainable fashion, and help create more jobs than if the land was privately held.

 

[DRAFTSTUD]

Good post Ben, I agree with the water issue. But everything else you posted has been vilified by most Posters over the years, especially the grazing issue. As for Energy, you believe the current administration is Energy friendly?
I also believe public lands are local economic values, but I also believe they are being priced out of alot of Hunters budgets, although they are still a bargain in my opinion. John

 

[1_pointer]

Nectar,

While public lands might not be a top tier issue for some, they matter beyond what it gives us for recreational opportunities. In the west, for example, our water supplies and our irrigation water start on public lands. Healthy watersheds means healthy people and healthy crops.

Public lands provide low cost grazing options for ranchers and can be managed in a sustainable fashion.

Public lands help fill the United States treasury through energy production (coal, oil, natural gas, uranium).

Public lands are economic drivers in areas where there are large blocks, and protective designations like National Monuments have been proven to be revenue generators. Public lands help diversify local economies if managed in a sustainable fashion, and help create more jobs than if the land was privately held.

I largely agree with your statements, however I find the examples you chose interesting and find that they are often the defining lines between political affiliations for lots of folks. Similarly interesting is how much the 4 examples you provided often conflict each other or are often used to create conflict.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I largely agree with your statements, however I find the examples you chose interesting and find that they are often the defining lines between political affiliations for lots of folks. Similarly interesting is how much the 4 examples you provided often conflict each other or are often used to create conflict.

Yes.

The reality of public lands is that they will always have controversy. The beauty of public lands is that it is one of the best issues in which Americans can employ the power of democracy to manage those lands.

God forgive us if we ever quit debating how to best manage places like the Breaks, Red Desert, Palouse, Yaak and others.

I don't mind arguing the merits of multiple use, but I also strongly believe that there has to be adequate regulation to protect the land, and the people who use it.

 

[Ben Lamb]

As for Energy, you believe the current administration is Energy friendly?
I also believe public lands are local economic values, but I also believe they are being priced out of alot of Hunters budgets, although they are still a bargain in my opinion. John

Production of energy is at an all time high right now. That largely was by design of the Bush administration, and their breakneck paced permitting processes. However, the Obama administration has slowed some aspects of energy development and re-instated some Clinton era regulations. Clinton, btw, wasn't what I'd call progressive on energy development policies, and was only slightly more regulatory inclined that Bush II.

This administration is being crucified by the energy industry because they don't have unfettered access to the administration like the last one. But the Obama admin is really a moderate on the issue - so I'd say that they're not anti-energy, just cautious.

Curious as to what you mean about being priced out of public lands?

 

[DRAFTSTUD]

Production of energy is at an all time high right now. That largely was by design of the Bush administration, and their breakneck paced permitting processes. However, the Obama administration has slowed some aspects of energy development and re-instated some Clinton era regulations. Clinton, btw, wasn't what I'd call progressive on energy development policies, and was only slightly more regulatory inclined that Bush II.

This administration is being crucified by the energy industry because they don't have unfettered access to the administration like the last one. But the Obama admin is really a moderate on the issue - so I'd say that they're not anti-energy, just cautious.

Curious as to what you mean about being priced out of public lands?

No Ben, This administration can now seem to be Pro Energy, especially Natural Gas because we now have more behind pipe than we have a use for. It is easy to seem all for Natural Gas when with this Gas bubble the only drilling will be to maintain leases. I have around 120 Energy Companies that I do regulatory Plats for and they are not drilling at the pace 3 years ago, who would place a product on the market at below it's replacement cost?
The Obama administration has never been friendly to Oil and Coal. As for my statement about pricing out public lands I was referring to the phenomenon that occurs everytime a state increases it's tag prices someone comes on and post that they will no longer go out west because of the price. If I go on vacation I will average 3-400 dollars a day, I doubt that I spend that much on a DIY Elk hunt. John

 

[BuzzH]

Public land and the price of a tag dont have anything in common...nothing.

Can you tell me what public land agency is in charge of setting tag prices?

 

[onpoint]

"watching" this discussion, I reiterate - if only politicians and wolves were our only problems....

 

[DRAFTSTUD]

Public land and the price of a tag dont have anything in common...nothing.

Can you tell me what public land agency is in charge of setting tag prices?

Yes it does to a NR. He is not coming out to You Name It Western State unless he draws that tag. If that person wishes to hunt a state WMA he must obtain a Tag though the state to hunt that WMA. Your opinion does not matter to what my statement is trying to get across here Buzz. John

 

[BuzzH]

Huh?

Thought you said this: As for my statement about pricing out public lands I was referring to the phenomenon that occurs everytime a state increases it's tag prices someone comes on and post that they will no longer go out west because of the price

Public land management agencies do not set tag prices...never have.

Maybe try some new bait...all you're catching is these:

 

[DRAFTSTUD]

Red Herring? LOL OK, I understand your statement. But to a NR it does come down to without the Tag there is no enjoying Public Lands. John