Page 16 of 26 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 257
  1. #151
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Allegan, MI
    Posts
    1,076
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 242 Times in 198 Posts
    Congratulations
    2
    Congratulated 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by okielite View Post
    Has nothing to do with me taking it as an insult. It was an insult. Here is your exact quote. If you knew half as much as you think you do, Don't be surprised when you get a negative reaction when you say something like that to someone.

    You don't know who I am but I know who you are. In fact I've communicated with you via PM on another site.

    Baseless statements that are incorrect? Feel free to point them out.

    You can hunt in the state parks I mentioned. I know there are tags for Curt Gowdy and you can hunt a good part of Glendo. You can also hunt Ft Robinson St park which I used as an example. So clearly my examples allow hunting.

    The piece of land North of Manville looks like it covers appx 50 sq miles. Obviously a nice piece of property that holds deer, elk, antelope, etc..
    Ft Robinson is appx 22k acres and Packsaddle WMA in Oklahoma is about 20k acres.
    Obviously I have given examples of states managing larger pieces of land for public use including hunting.

    Obviously there would still need to be some federal $ to assist the states in doing this but I have no doubt that there are ways to manage that land more efficiently with less $. That is how you help slow down the debt we are creating for out kids, cut costs.

    Again please point out what I said that was incorrect, and baseless. I have given you examples of everything I talked about so far and have not insulted you in any way shape or form and plan on keeping it that way.
    That last one was my attempt at an apology, but I guess it didn't come out right either! In fact the initial post would not have remained up there as sooon as I read what I had said and if there was an edit button on this Forum it would have been taken off because it was not proper. However, at this time there isn't and I had no way to correct or delete it! I also do know who you are even though you are using another name on here and we've talked about hunting together out in your area a couple times on that other site! You also know from there that I can get carried away at times in a debate, so again I'm sorry for my indiscretion and let's move on! My hunting comments about Parks was not meant specifically for Wyoming, but for all states that I thought we were talking about and not just Wyoming. The main baseless statement I was referring to is the fact you didn't know the State Land Board has certain parameters it has to stay within as far as land usage and sales in Wyoming. The monies they get every year and will continue to get through their oversight of the state lands the way Wyoming set it up will last forever and certainly be more than what they could get in a one time fire sale if things were changed in the future. If the Legislature ever gained a majority that had the land sale philosophy, IMHO the state would be in deep dodo. Peace Bro!

  2. #152
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    576
    Thanks
    111
    Thanked 160 Times in 128 Posts
    Congratulations
    21
    Congratulated 1 Time in 1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by okielite View Post
    You can hunt in the state parks I mentioned. I know there are tags for Curt Gowdy and you can hunt a good part of Glendo. You can also hunt Ft Robinson St park which I used as an example. So clearly my examples allow hunting.

    The piece of land North of Manville looks like it covers appx 50 sq miles. Obviously a nice piece of property that holds deer, elk, antelope, etc..
    Ft Robinson is appx 22k acres and Packsaddle WMA in Oklahoma is about 20k acres.
    Obviously I have given examples of states managing larger pieces of land for public use including hunting.
    The ranch the State owns North of Manville that you mention is under Game & Fish control (if I remember correctly, but could be wrong) meaning that the cost of maintaining the property is partially funded by license fees and partially funded by any grazing or farming leases that are in place. This is the case with almost all of the larger acreages that the state has title to other than the State Parks and most of the State Parks now charge fees for use as their revenue. The State actually doesn't own most of the State Parks anyway since most of them are on reservoirs and owned by the Bureau of Reclamation. The Game & Fish is currently scrambling to find ways to balance their budget and the same goes for the State Parks showing that the State is having a hard time making ends meet on this front in it's current situation. If the State can't find the financial means, with help coming from the Feds mind you, to meet the current demands for maintenance of properties it currently owns, where are the funds going to come from if that number is multiplied by 5 or 6 times? Are we going to put in toll booths every 5 miles on all of the FS and BLM roads to pay for road maintenance? Who's going to pay for construction of the toll booths?

  3. #153
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    16
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by okielite View Post
    Cool off. No reason to start insulting peoples intelligence or get angry. I think you must have gotten confused about who said what. I'm not the one claiming Wyoming would sell off land if it could. That was the guy who claims he worked for the state for 30 years (you would think he might know about the statutes you mentioned). Thanks for confirming that Wyoming has laws in place to prevent the sale of state owned land. Obviously things can be done to prevent the land from being sold if it was transferred to the state.

    As far as large tracts I've already given some examples in Wyoming. There is a nice piece of state land north of Manville that I have hunted in. Really nice. Also some of the state parks are quite large. I've also given examples of land in other states like FT Robinson which was federal land that was transferred to the state and the state has done a great job of managing it for outdoor recreation. Obviously states can manage land.
    okielite, I never said there are no rules/laws governing the disposal of state land. W.S. 36-9-101 grants authority to the State Land Board to sell land: "The board of land commissioners may at any time direct the sale of state lands subject to any lease thereof. Subject to criteria established by the board, any person may request that a parcel of state land be considered for sale by the board, but such lands shall only be nominated for sale by a majority vote of the board." Please see the statute for further details.

    My point is that the laws/rules do not provide the protection against sale that is provided by federal ownership.

    I ask you again to provide information about your apparent extensive knowledge of Wyoming government. Information about my background is provided in my profile. No more BS, let's hear why you are more qualified to say what is best for Wyoming than many of the Wyoming people that have posted on this form. Without some background information, your credibility is lacking.

  4. #154
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    NW Nebraska
    Posts
    140
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 20 Times in 18 Posts
    Congratulations
    13
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by libidilatimmy View Post
    The ranch the State owns North of Manville that you mention is under Game & Fish control (if I remember correctly, but could be wrong) meaning that the cost of maintaining the property is partially funded by license fees and partially funded by any grazing or farming leases that are in place. This is the case with almost all of the larger acreages that the state has title to other than the State Parks and most of the State Parks now charge fees for use as their revenue. The State actually doesn't own most of the State Parks anyway since most of them are on reservoirs and owned by the Bureau of Reclamation. The Game & Fish is currently scrambling to find ways to balance their budget and the same goes for the State Parks showing that the State is having a hard time making ends meet on this front in it's current situation. If the State can't find the financial means, with help coming from the Feds mind you, to meet the current demands for maintenance of properties it currently owns, where are the funds going to come from if that number is multiplied by 5 or 6 times? Are we going to put in toll booths every 5 miles on all of the FS and BLM roads to pay for road maintenance? Who's going to pay for construction of the toll booths?

    The ranch is listed as state land but I dont' know if there are some other considerations.

    As far as the other stuff in your post please try to be realistic. toll booths every 5 miles? C-mon man.

    The money would come from the same place it comes from now, the difference is that we would use less of it to manage the same land. Dont' you think its possible that there are ways to operate more efficiently than the federal government?

    I watch the USFS office and employees in my area pretty closely and its' amazing how many people they have and how little they actually do to manage a couple hundred thousand acres in this area. I could walk in and cut half the jobs and the person doing the recreating on the land would never know the difference.

  5. #155
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    NW Nebraska
    Posts
    140
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 20 Times in 18 Posts
    Congratulations
    13
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Topgun 30-06 View Post
    That last one was my attempt at an apology, but I guess it didn't come out right either! In fact the initial post would not have remained up there as sooon as I read what I had said and if there was an edit button on this Forum it would have been taken off because it was not proper. However, at this time there isn't and I had no way to correct or delete it! I also do know who you are even though you are using another name on here and we've talked about hunting together out in your area a couple times on that other site! You also know from there that I can get carried away at times in a debate, so again I'm sorry for my indiscretion and let's move on! My hunting comments about Parks was not meant specifically for Wyoming, but for all states that I thought we were talking about and not just Wyoming. The main baseless statement I was referring to is the fact you didn't know the State Land Board has certain parameters it has to stay within as far as land usage and sales in Wyoming. The monies they get every year and will continue to get through their oversight of the state lands the way Wyoming set it up will last forever and certainly be more than what they could get in a one time fire sale if things were changed in the future. If the Legislature ever gained a majority that had the land sale philosophy, IMHO the state would be in deep dodo. Peace Bro!
    No worried TG. Sounds like you remember our conversations as well. There are some things this forum needs to improve with navigating and things like editing posts but I'm sure they will get it straightened out soon.

    Apology accepted. I also can get carried away so I try my best not to.

    You are correct that many state parks dont' allow hunting but there are many that do. I'm heading down to Kansas to visit a state park in a few weeks, they allow hunting. I actually think I told you about that place on HT, holds some great mulies. In fact it's not far from where Guy shot his 200+ inch mulie with a muzzleloader many years ago.

    You are correct that I did not know about the state statute that prohibits selling of land. To be clear I never said that they would sell it either. Wyoming spends a lot of money leasing private land to increase public access. There is no reason to believe they want to sell all the public land in the state IMO as it has never happened in the past, there are laws that prohibit it from happening now, and it is not in the states best interest to sell off the land.

    I agree and hope that Wyoming would never sell off it's public land. Hopefully they will never do that as it would have so many negative effects on the state.

  6. #156
    Eastmans' Staff / Moderator
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    910
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked 474 Times in 184 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 9 Times in 5 Posts
    Glad you two made up, I was about to play referee.

  7. #157
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    NW Nebraska
    Posts
    140
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 20 Times in 18 Posts
    Congratulations
    13
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by highplainsdrifter View Post
    okielite, I never said there are no rules/laws governing the disposal of state land. W.S. 36-9-101 grants authority to the State Land Board to sell land: "The board of land commissioners may at any time direct the sale of state lands subject to any lease thereof. Subject to criteria established by the board, any person may request that a parcel of state land be considered for sale by the board, but such lands shall only be nominated for sale by a majority vote of the board." Please see the statute for further details.

    My point is that the laws/rules do not provide the protection against sale that is provided by federal ownership.

    I ask you again to provide information about your apparent extensive knowledge of Wyoming government. Information about my background is provided in my profile. No more BS, let's hear why you are more qualified to say what is best for Wyoming than many of the Wyoming people that have posted on this form. Without some background information, your credibility is lacking.
    So you claim to have 30 years of experience in Wyoming and know the state laws well but then you turn around and tell us that if the land was transferred to Wyoming that they would sell it all? Makes no sense as laws prohibit what you describe from happening in the first place.

    Basically in a transfer there would need to be some rules like the land can't be sold and the use can't change drastically.

    You still never answered my question in post 129. At this point you keep telling me I am wrong and you want to compare our background/resume but you can't even provide 1 example of a state selling off a large piece of recreational property like you claimed would happen. Yet I've provided specific examples of everything I discussed and you have not even provided 1 example for your side of the argument.

    There is a credibility issue but it's not with me. Try proving your point with examples instead of simply telling me I'm wrong and waving your resume around. You will be taken much more seriously if you do so.

  8. #158
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    576
    Thanks
    111
    Thanked 160 Times in 128 Posts
    Congratulations
    21
    Congratulated 1 Time in 1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by okielite View Post
    The ranch is listed as state land but I dont' know if there are some other considerations.

    As far as the other stuff in your post please try to be realistic. toll booths every 5 miles? C-mon man.

    The money would come from the same place it comes from now, the difference is that we would use less of it to manage the same land. Dont' you think its possible that there are ways to operate more efficiently than the federal government?

    I watch the USFS office and employees in my area pretty closely and its' amazing how many people they have and how little they actually do to manage a couple hundred thousand acres in this area. I could walk in and cut half the jobs and the person doing the recreating on the land would never know the difference.
    Realistically, the money isn't there now to manage these lands that are the point of discussion, and with all of the stipulations that the Feds would most likely set forth if any such transaction were to be made could quite possibly end up being more of a financial burden than when the Feds controlled the land. Sure, there are more efficient ways to do all things when it comes to government, but when you walk in and terminate half of the workforce in the FS and they can't find any jobs and file for unemployment, you and I are still paying for their meals through taxes, same as before. Additionally, the Feds would most certainly not allocate the same amount of funding towards these lands since the root of the problem is financial burdening the State further.

  9. #159
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Allegan, MI
    Posts
    1,076
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 242 Times in 198 Posts
    Congratulations
    2
    Congratulated 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottR View Post
    Glad you two made up, I was about to play referee.
    LOL! Get that dang delete button on here so I can make correction, as it's all your fault, LOL!!!

  10. #160
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    576
    Thanks
    111
    Thanked 160 Times in 128 Posts
    Congratulations
    21
    Congratulated 1 Time in 1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by okielite View Post
    So you claim to have 30 years of experience in Wyoming and know the state laws well but then you turn around and tell us that if the land was transferred to Wyoming that they would sell it all? Makes no sense as laws prohibit what you describe from happening in the first place.

    Basically in a transfer there would need to be some rules like the land can't be sold and the use can't change drastically.

    You still never answered my question in post 129. At this point you keep telling me I am wrong and you want to compare our background/resume but you can't even provide 1 example of a state selling off a large piece of recreational property like you claimed would happen. Yet I've provided specific examples of everything I discussed and you have not even provided 1 example for your side of the argument.

    There is a credibility issue but it's not with me. Try proving your point with examples instead of simply telling me I'm wrong and waving your resume around. You will be taken much more seriously if you do so.
    Easy now, let's keep it civil. You were provided with examples of state's selling land, but you chose that they didn't count for whatever reason.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •