"Sportsmen" stab Theodore Roosevelt in the back

[CL3]

http://www.hcn.org/blogs/range/sport...lt-in-the-back

"Do you believe the wildlife of North America belong to all of us, equally, or do you think it should be sold to the highest bidder?”

[B.A.]

That's terrifying. When I see stories like this it makes me wonder wtf has happened to the country my ancestors fought for.

[Ranger P229]

Rep. sportsmen are up a creek right now when it comes to conservation and land ethic. Romney wants to sell off federal land, and so does santorum. Doesn't leave us with much. I wish more people could understand that public access to hunting and fishing is one of the biggest things that seperates us from Europe.

It also bothers me that my "pro-gun" party heads don't see the connection between hunting and firearms. Many people develop a love and interest in firearms BECAUSE of hunting. Gun availability becomes somewhat of a moot point if there isn't any place for everyday folks to go and use them.

"Smaller Government" is just used as an excuse to try and sell off the US citizen's lands to the highest private bidder.

[CL3]

Rep. sportsmen are up a creek right now when it comes to conservation and land ethic. Romney wants to sell off federal land, and so does santorum. Doesn't leave us with much. I wish more people could understand that public access to hunting and fishing is one of the biggest things that seperates us from Europe.

It also bothers me that my "pro-gun" party heads don't see the connection between hunting and firearms. Many people develop a love and interest in firearms BECAUSE of hunting. Gun availability becomes somewhat of a moot point if there isn't any place for everyday folks to go and use them.

"Smaller Government" is just used as an excuse to try and sell off the US citizen's lands to the highest private bidder.

You hit it all right on the head. Do we want to have to pay $1000s to hunt? We have an awesome system here. People take it for granted.

Meanwhile, you have people out there, who want to privatize it all to make a buck. This is where the really nefarious stuff takes place to take our country from us.

Whenever the talk of taking our guns come up I laugh. That is designed to scare us, but more importantly DISTRACT us into bickering over one another so they can do real damage to our liberties. No one is taking our guns! Plus, I heard that there's roughly 80 guns per 100 US citizens in this country!

[thefirstndsecond]

You hit it all right on the head. Do we want to have to pay $1000s to hunt? We have an awesome system here. People take it for granted.

Meanwhile, you have people out there, who want to privatize it all to make a buck. This is where the really nefarious stuff takes place to take our country from us.

Whenever the talk of taking our guns come up I laugh. That is designed to scare us, but more importantly DISTRACT us into bickering over one another so they can do real damage to our liberties. No one is taking our guns! Plus, I heard that there's roughly 80 guns per 100 US citizens in this country!

While I will agree about the open space issue, governments that specify open spaces do not necessarily allow hunting on the property. More and more TWP/county property is being stripped of hunting rights.

Also the idea of killing off animals on private land without counting towards the state level of game or having to account for the amount of animals bothers me.

As for no one taking guns, well I would say that is incorrect. Everyday people have their guns taken. Some make it to court and some decide not to go to court and purchase another $500 gun.

I am originally from NJ. I have had friends who have had their guns taken. I know some who have had them stolen, then when they went to claim them, the state would not return them.

So work together to save, keep hunting rights, along with keeping the guns to do it.

[Azzy]

They want to sell of federal land, but realize there is a lot of federal land that is off limits to you or I, as the fed has been gobbling up what they can.

There has to be a balance, between collective stewardship of lands and the ability to privately own land.

[Yellowfin]

By far the bigger threats to hunting and firearms are as follows:

1. Divorce/single parenting
2. Schools and other liberal/leftist anti gun influences of youth
3. Video games and other technology
4. Urbanization and resulting culture shift
5. Taxes and inflation cutting into disposable income for firearms and hunting

Oh, and we're talking about this in a state where you can hunt ONE day a week if you work and/or are in school. ONE. Because some dunces can't get their stuff straight and get a SECOND, count em TWO, days of hunting a week enacted into law yet because somehow it's "controversial" among the "sportsmen community."

[Ranger P229]

They want to sell of federal land, but realize there is a lot of federal land that is off limits to you or I, as the fed has been gobbling up what they can.

There has to be a balance, between collective stewardship of lands and the ability to privately own land.

Then it sounds like the issue is one of increasing hunting/shooting opportunities on already publicly owned land. Selling federal land to private owners won't increase the ability for the general populace to use that land for outdoor recreation.

You're absolutely right that there needs to be a balance. A lot of land is federally owned. But I'm not sure what you mean by "the ability to privately own land". You currently have the ability to own whatever you can afford. If land is (and it is) expensive, that is a function of a capitalist market. It is not the fed's job to make land available for cheap just because land is, generally, expensive.

I'd also like to know what the push is behind the idea of selling fed land. If the push is from businesses that could lease the land while still having opportunities open to the public, then selling only seems to be beneficial to one party. Lease it to OGM/lumber/ranchers/etc. These are all businesses than can, to a large extent, co-exist happily with sportsmen. Give them fire-sale lease deals, but I'd rather have it remain publically owned.

If the idea is to sell plots for people to build on, I'm not for that at all. Its not the government's job to make land cheap for you and me. Land is expensive, so are a lot of other things.

[YosemiteSam]

The United States government has direct ownership of almost 650 million acres of land (2.63 million square kilometers) – nearly 30% of its total territory.


The top 10 list of states with the highest percentage of federally owned land looks like this:

1.Nevada 84.5%
2.Alaska 69.1%
3.Utah 57.4%
4.Oregon 53.1%
5.Idaho 50.2%
6.Arizona 48.1%
7.California 45.3%
8.Wyoming 42.3%
9.New Mexico 41.8%
10.Colorado 36.6%

[Ranger P229]

Federal government ownership= ownership by citizens.

A good deal of that is leased for private companies use as well. A good example of this is the ANF. Federal land, but used as much (or more) by OGM and timbering than sportsmen.