Talking to Colorado House District 51 Candidates

[Fireguy69]

I recently had the chance to talk to both Republican candidates for Colorado House District 51 about their views on Public land, Access to public land, Protecting public land and Hunting.
After the primary elections are done on June 28th i plan on trying to talk to both candidates from each party so that I (and others) can vote for the candidate that will do the most for our public lands.
This was my first time ever doing an interview but i wanted more information about each candidates views and figured i might as well record the my conversations with them to share with others (both candidates were ok with me recording them).

Here is a link to my conversation with Hugh McKean https://youtu.be/D7MlQiP-iFA

And Tom Lucero https://youtu.be/uvC_5qZKtlY

 

[Oneye]

Thanks, good interviews. I never thought I would support the party that was anti-gun, but then came along the party that's anti-public land. I'll revoke my right to an assault rifle to keep my national public lands. While I get the constant "local control" approach, it just doesn't work for me. There are meetings on every decision the FS and BLM make. There are local land managers and officers in every county. There are issues and policies these same representatives could fix if elected, but won't and will continue beating the republican parties drum of transfer(sale) our public lands. While I get some at a local level just want more local control, the overall goal is to dispose of Theodore Roosevelts legacy, and it's disheartening. People act like things should not be made a partisan issue, but this issue is partisan. A vote for a republican is a vote to sale your public lands. The right has held gun control over my head for too many years now, and I haven't lost a right yet, sorry but 90% of my votes will go to democrats this year, and I never would have thought that.

 

[u1299]

I've heard and I hear many times over and over that people want unfettered access to their public lands, so correct me if I'm wrong, we already have that don't we? I can't think of any "accessible" public land anywhere that I don't currently have access to. I may not be able to access it by ATV but I can access by foot or horseback, it's still access. Enough of the BS lies some politicians and even some sportsmen are throwing out there that seem to suggest their access is being denied, it's not the case. If you're to lazy or out of shape to walk it's not my problem. Before you give me hell by suggesting older folks through no fault of their own simply cannot access these lands due to age, consider we're all getting older and there will come a time for all of us when we won't be able to access land we curretly can, all the more reason to stay in shape as long as possible and enjoy what we have now, cause that opportunity ain't gonna last forever. I know this, when that time comes for me I won't be the one bitchin that I need more roads to access what I used to hike into. I'll be thankful for the time I had and be happy to turn it over to the next generation to enjoy it the same way I did. End of my Rant.

 

[shootbrownelk]

I've heard and I hear many times over and over that people want unfettered access to their public lands, so correct me if I'm wrong, we already have that don't we? I can't think of any "accessible" public land anywhere that I don't currently have access to. I may not be able to access it by ATV but I can access by foot or horseback, it's still access. Enough of the BS lies some politicians and even some sportsmen are throwing out there that seem to suggest their access is being denied, it's not the case. If you're to lazy or out of shape to walk it's not my problem. Before you give me hell by suggesting older folks through no fault of their own simply cannot access these lands due to age, consider we're all getting older and there will come a time for all of us when we won't be able to access land we curretly can, all the more reason to stay in shape as long as possible and enjoy what we have now, cause that opportunity ain't gonna last forever. I know this, when that time comes for me I won't be the one bitchin that I need more roads to access what I used to hike into. I'll be thankful for the time I had and be happy to turn it over to the next generation to enjoy it the same way I did. End of my Rant.

You forgot to chastise the handicapped or wounded/disabled vets....your time is coming kid.

 

[Oneye]

It has nothing to do with chastising anyone. It has to do with being realistic. You can't have full vehicle access down every ridge, cubby, flat, and canyon and expect it to be good hunting or wildlife habitat. There needs to be open space untouched by the encroachment of people in the name of economic greed or access to absolutely everyone. There's plenty of roads and we are in no shortage of them. Instead of pulling out terms to make someone look bad for wanting people to walk and admit there is access just not unlimited access everywhere is ridiculous. No one is saying everyone shouldn't have some access, but it's not realistic on every acre of every parcel for everyone to have full unaltered access.

We all get older, we all have health issues, I've enjoyed my time on public lands and if it ended tomorrow or I lost my ability to walk, I would not want a road bulldozed through areas I walked into just so I could go there again. I had my fun. I would want it to stay the same way I enjoyed it for others to enjoy it from here and into the future. Why would I want to change an area that has meant so much to me and take away those opportunities for future visitors to the area? Chastising people is not his point, life happens, we all have our problems and none of us are promised our next walk down the trail, but today, tomorrow, and a year from now I will want my backcountry areas to remain backcountry regardless.

 

[Gr8bawana]

Last year while hunting with my brother in the White mountains of AZ some of his friends hunting with us were complaining about having so many roads all over the place. Then the next day they would be complaining about not being able to drive where they wanted to go. You can't have it both ways.
We need to keep large tracts of land everywhere roadless and when I get too old to be able to walk in there, then so be it. I've had my time to enjoy them and the younger generation can enjoy the roadless solitude like we did.

 

[Fireguy69]

I've heard and I hear many times over and over that people want unfettered access to their public lands, so correct me if I'm wrong, we already have that don't we? I can't think of any "accessible" public land anywhere that I don't currently have access to. I may not be able to access it by ATV but I can access by foot or horseback, it's still access. Enough of the BS lies some politicians and even some sportsmen are throwing out there that seem to suggest their access is being denied, it's not the case. If you're to lazy or out of shape to walk it's not my problem. Before you give me hell by suggesting older folks through no fault of their own simply cannot access these lands due to age, consider we're all getting older and there will come a time for all of us when we won't be able to access land we curretly can, all the more reason to stay in shape as long as possible and enjoy what we have now, cause that opportunity ain't gonna last forever. I know this, when that time comes for me I won't be the one bitchin that I need more roads to access what I used to hike into. I'll be thankful for the time I had and be happy to turn it over to the next generation to enjoy it the same way I did. End of my Rant.

The problem is that we do not have access to a ton of public land. Just look at the checkerboard or private land locked BLM and national forest, I can find area after area of "public land" that i can not legally get to unless i parachute in and then find a way to fly off from. so to answer your question again, Yes there is a ton of "public land" that only private land owners can access....
Personally i think that more roads should be closed and the money put to use in other areas, 85% of the hunting that I do is done in wilderness areas and the rest is done miles away from the road/trails. Access does not have to be roads or trails, just legal ways to get onto it.

 

[Jorgy]

There is a lot of unaccessable public land in colorado, and it has nothing to do with being accessible by
a vehicle. Do a little Google work, besides public land that is surrounded by private, there are the Colorado State Trust Lands. Our money that we pay for tags pays for a small percentage of these already public lands for hunting/fishing/recreating. The rest of those public lands are not accessible.

 

[u1299]

The problem is that we do not have access to a ton of public land. Just look at the checkerboard or private land locked BLM and national forest, I can find area after area of "public land" that i can not legally get to unless i parachute in and then find a way to fly off from. so to answer your question again, Yes there is a ton of "public land" that only private land owners can access....
Personally i think that more roads should be closed and the money put to use in other areas, 85% of the hunting that I do is done in wilderness areas and the rest is done miles away from the road/trails. Access does not have to be roads or trails, just legal ways to get onto it.

I'm not disagreeing with you, quite the contrary, but the fact there is so much inaccessible public land as you correctly stated is because it is landlocked by private holdings, it has nothing to do with the Forest service, BLM, etc. denying anyone access. As I said before I don't know of a single acre of Public land that is currently accessible via a public road or waterway that the FS or BLM is denying me access to.

 

[u1299]

You forgot to chastise the handicapped or wounded/disabled vets....your time is coming kid.

I'm 61 not a kid and if you paid attention to what I wrote I already said my time is coming, and so is your's. So you gonna bitch and holler and demand we build you a road so you can access some area until you're pushing a 100? I wasn't chastising anyone and if there wasn't currently millions of accessible acres of public land for the handicapped or disabled vets to hunt, fish or recreate, or for that matter all citizens, I'd be the first to demand more vehicle access, but that's not the case and you know it.

 

[Oneye]

u1299, I also know of not 1 acre that is Administered by the forest service and BLM that I cannot hunt. Heck there's a big national monument that has some of the most amazing deer hunting in the world here in my state. Some people will always complain they are being locked out of these loans by "the Feds" when in reality it just isn't the exact type of access they want. Then those same people never show up to a local Forest Service or BLM meeting, never email their input, never wrote a letter, never make a phone call and then scream bloody murder when they don't get it their way or their voice isn't heard.

Bottom line, we can work on improving our public land and the managment of them without a doubt, but they are also not the locked up wastelands that some politicians want to paint them as. They are amazing places that are not being properly funded because republican representatives currently in congress want to complain about them and then vote against fixing any policies or properly funding our land agencies which in turn is just making the problems worse. Lets the states get them and sale them, and then you'll get to see what "no access" truly means.

 

[u1299]

u1299, I also know of not 1 acre that is Administered by the forest service and BLM that I cannot hunt. Heck there's a big national monument that has some of the most amazing deer hunting in the world here in my state. Some people will always complain they are being locked out of these loans by "the Feds" when in reality it just isn't the exact type of access they want. Then those same people never show up to a local Forest Service or BLM meeting, never email their input, never wrote a letter, never make a phone call and then scream bloody murder when they don't get it their way or their voice isn't heard.

Bottom line, we can work on improving our public land and the managment of them without a doubt, but they are also not the locked up wastelands that some politicians want to paint them as. They are amazing places that are not being properly funded because republican representatives currently in congress want to complain about them and then vote against fixing any policies or properly funding our land agencies which in turn is just making the problems worse. Lets the states get them and sale them, and then you'll get to see what "no access" truly means.

Thanks for the reply, I agree.