I wonder who you can believe

[Sparkyprep]

there are not too many problems that cannot be solved with the proper application of high explosives.

I LOVE explosives!

[shootbrownelk]

There lies the problem. Does the Constitution allow for Federal owned Land or should it be owned by either the state or privately?

I believe that the Feds have no business owning any Federal Land/Property.

If you lived out here you'd think differently.

[hawgrider]

[Slippy]

If you lived out here you'd think differently.

Respectfully shootbrownelk, I wouldn't think differently.

I do not believe that the US Federal Government should use my and your tax dollars to own and maintain land. I cannot find anything in the US Constitution that says the Feds should take State Land and dictate what should be done with it and use tax dollars taken from us to manage it.

That is wrong.

The options are to return the land to the States. I have no problem with the states managing the land or selling the land to We The People.

My mind is made up on this issue regardless of where I live in the US.

Again, respectfully, What makes you think that my mind would be changed if I lived in one of the states that had a huge percentage of BLM or Dept of Interior managed/owned land?

If the Feds did not own land, you would not have situations like this.

[OSFG]

I can see were a state with a sparse population could have trouble maintaining the lands of the state that aren't owned...therefore seeks funds from the federal government to maintain. In essence turning the land over to the federal government. To me this is wrong. If a state cannot maintain it...sell it off...homestead it out. The federal government should not own anything but buildings in DC. The fed is not supposed to own parts of this country...they can provide tax dollars to help keep up national parks etc....but our federal government is of the people...by the people...FOR the People...so land is either open to the public....owned by the state...or owned by a person.

My 2cents
Osfg

[Inor]

Thanks for that! I had forgotten about Wild Bill. He makes more sense than all of the talking heads on T.V. put together.

[hawgrider]

Thanks for that! I had forgotten about Wild Bill. He makes more sense than all of the talking heads on T.V. put together.

Me too. His web site got hacked he was down for a bit a while back. I hit his site today looking for his take on recent events.

[hawgrider]

Since Saturday, the brothers and a small band of supporters have occupied the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, which they seized to protest the U.S. government’s control of vast tracts of Western land.

On Tuesday, for the first time, they allowed two reporters to join them inside their refuge for a night marked by long discussions and moments of hair-trigger tension.

Earlier, the Bundys had heard from people they trusted that federal law enforcement agents were assembling in Burns, the nearest town,

http://news.yahoo.com/pizza-rifles-t...055624373.html

[shootbrownelk]

Respectfully shootbrownelk, I wouldn't think differently.

I do not believe that the US Federal Government should use my and your tax dollars to own and maintain land. I cannot find anything in the US Constitution that says the Feds should take State Land and dictate what should be done with it and use tax dollars taken from us to manage it.

That is wrong.

The options are to return the land to the States. I have no problem with the states managing the land or selling the land to We The People.

My mind is made up on this issue regardless of where I live in the US.

Again, respectfully, What makes you think that my mind would be changed if I lived in one of the states that had a huge percentage of BLM or Dept of Interior managed/owned land?

If the Feds did not own land, you would not have situations like this.

I hunt exclusively on BLM & NF lands, so does everyone I know out here. Ranchers pay out 12.1 Million dollars in Grazing fees. BLM spent 34.3 Million for Livestock Grazing administration. If the State of Wyoming gets ahold of these Federally owned land (Taxpayer owned) they will manage it like they do the state land now. Which is, NO camping, NO fires, NO access unless the Lease holder agrees to it. No Thanks, There are a lot of Non Resident hunters that rely on these lands too.
Not everyone has deep pockets to pay a Rancher or Outfitter to hunt Private lands, I know I don't. Lease holders here, In my experience are horrible stewards of the land. I can't believe that this site doesn't have any Hunters on it that use BLM & NF lands to hunt, and that will back me up on this. This State would sell off huge chunks of this ground to the wealthy for short term gain.

[hawgrider]

I hunt exclusively on BLM & NF lands, so does everyone I know out here. Ranchers pay out 12.1 Million dollars in Grazing fees. BLM spent 34.3 Million for Livestock Grazing administration. If the State of Wyoming gets ahold of these Federally owned land (Taxpayer owned) they will manage it like they do the state land now. Which is, NO camping, NO fires, NO access unless the Lease holder agrees to it. No Thanks, There are a lot of Non Resident hunters that rely on these lands too.
Not everyone has deep pockets to pay a Rancher or Outfitter to hunt Private lands, I know I don't. Lease holders here, In my experience are horrible stewards of the land. I can't believe that this site doesn't have any Hunters on it that use BLM & NF lands to hunt, and that will back me up on this. This State would sell off huge chunks of this ground to the wealthy for short term gain.

Ive hunted both state and fed land in Mi. for about 30 years or so. But Mi. Does not lease the land to ranchers. Now thanks to my son inlaw I hunt many acres of private very productive farm land.

I would think the land in question being leased for grazing rights would be for that only and the lessee would have no say so of how other tax payers are using our land to hike and hunt. I don't see how the fed could keep any of us from using our land for the intended purpose it was protected for.