Largest Private Western Land Owners Controlling Huge Amounts Of Public Land

[sndmn11]

Is it time for memes yet?

Only promotional content for The Crisis Movement

 

[Terrapin]

“Landowner James Cox Kennedy (Cox Enterprises chairman) shut down recreational access to Montana's Ruby River for years, installing fences and challenging public use from bridges, leading to long-running disputes and court cases affirming public access. The controversy involved historical access points and Montana's Stream Access Law.”

I think this one demands some attention from sportsmen… since his company just bought Kuiu.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ThorM465]

I don't know who needs to hear this, but we haven't been a capitalist nation since the 16th Amendment.

I'm a huge proponent of capitalism. However, capitalism isn't compatible with the vast majority of societies. It is only compatible, it will only work long term in a virtuous society. We haven't been a virtuous society for a long time, which is why we've seen our capitalist system eroded drastically over the last century.

This, I have to disagree with entirely - if for no other reason than the ease with which it could be worked around. Instead of 1 owner, it would end up being multiple family members owning chunks, and then multiple shell-companies with opaque ownership.

It could be if not done correctly with appropriate penalties. The one fortunate part of our federal tax system is that it is ready made to handle overseeing such a limit. We have to add a line or two to a few filings. A line on your tax filings. A line in your brokerage statement for acres owned per holding, etc.
Every entity has individual(s)s owner(s) at some point. If you own 1% of an entity that owns 1,000,000 acres, then you own 10,000 acres that go directly towards your limit. If you're part of a 4 member family trust that owns 100,000 acres, then you own 25,000 that goes towards your limit.
Keep reporting requirements simple and penalties steep.

 

[MontyMontana]

I don't know who needs to hear this, but we haven't been a capitalist nation since the 16th Amendment.

I'm a huge proponent of capitalism. However, capitalism isn't compatible with the vast majority of societies. It is only compatible, it will only work long term in a virtuous society. We haven't been a virtuous society for a long time, which is why we've seen our capitalist system eroded drastically over the last century.



It could be if not done correctly with appropriate penalties. The one fortunate part of our federal tax system is that it is ready made to handle overseeing such a limit. We have to add a line or two to a few filings. A line on your tax filings. A line in your brokerage statement for acres owned per holding, etc.
Every entity has individual(s)s owner(s) at some point. If you own 1% of an entity that owns 1,000,000 acres, then you own 10,000 acres that go directly towards your limit. If you're part of a 4 member family trust that owns 100,000 acres, then you own 25,000 that goes towards your limit.
Keep reporting requirements simple and penalties steep.

You can take that land limit BS and shove it. The ONLY reason you have that point of view is because you have nothing of consequence in terms of land. The only people who want more government are the people relying on it. There is a reason lower class stays lower class, its sheep mentality like yours.

 

[HunterGatherer]

 

[ThorM465]

You can take that land limit BS and shove it. The ONLY reason you have that point of view is because you have nothing of consequence in terms of land. The only people who want more government are the people relying on it. There is a reason lower class stays lower class, its sheep mentality like yours.

No sir. I want the limit because I hate government and want future farmers and ranchers.

1. Corporate conglomerates are modern states and should be limited in power for the same reasons we limit the power of our government. They have become as or more dangerous to the individual American than most layers of governments.
2. I don't want the Bill Gates of the world owning all of our farm and ranch land. If that prospect doesn't terrify you then you're not paying enough attention. Nothing good will come from billionaires with openly stated antihuman intentions owning the majority of our land
3. At current prices you can not make enough money farming or ranching to pay the mortgage on the land required. This is leading to a handful of corporate conglomerates completely monopolizing our food supply. Many are antimeat or at least antimeat for the peasants. You can still get around this by creating a relationship with your local farmers. They will close this loophole if we don't do something to insure small local farmers can exist.

I'm not suggesting anything as absurd as a 1,000 acre limit, but it probably needs to be less than 1,000,000 acres. Otherwise our children could live in a world where the King's game is off limits to them. They'll live off of grain, sugar, insects, and lab grown "meat." And they'll be "happy."

 

[jmez]

As to your #3. I grew up in, and currently live in midwest agricultural areas. True you can't "pay for the land" anymore. As with all industries farms and ranches just keep getting larger. There aren't a lot of large corps buying the Ag land areound here or in my hometown. The larger farmers and ranchers buy most of it and they can cost basis it over their entire operation. In Western SD, Jack Links, for example, does buy a lot of the larger, continuous tracts. They buy them for hunting. They do a lifetime, or 100 year leaseback to the families that owned them. The lease agreements are conducive to continuing with production agriculture.

 

[BlackTail]

Also on the "New Truck" thing. Good ol uncle sam has a new program where if you get rid of/ destroy older diesel equipment you can replace it with brand new "environmental" versions for as low as 10 cents on the dollar in some situations. So basically I traded some hunk of shit tractors and trucks in that I had to work on all the time for brand new equipment all for the price of 1 new tractor....

The only people who want more government are the people relying on it. There is a reason lower class stays lower class,

You can’t make this stuff up.

 

[MontyMontana]

You can’t make this stuff up.

I never said don't take advantage of what's there. I said anyone that's wants more is relying on it. I don't want more taxes (or any at all) but I'm not going to just pay in at full value and not take advantage of the "loop holes" that legally allow me to pay pennies on the dollar or use write offs.. By all means game the system, just don't rely on the system.

 

[grfox92]

It's kind of weird that a thread thats explicit purpose is to Dox a certain group of people is still up and active on this forum.

Sent from my SM-S931U using Tapatalk

 

[Rich M]

It's kind of weird that a thread thats explicit purpose is to Dox a certain group of people is still up and active on this forum.

Sent from my SM-S931U using Tapatalk

No Shit.

 

[Marble]

I've hunted mule deer on Sierra Pacific Industries timberlands in Northern California - they're definitely one of the largest landowners in the West, esp in NorCal, and it's not just one large swath of land. An immense number of relatively small acre holdings as well. The only time I'm aware of them closing their lands to public hunting/access is during extreme fire danger. But they seem to have a pretty good record of treating their private property as a public hunting resource, which is smart, IMO.

I do the same thing as you with SPI land. They are pretty good with keeping access to their stuff. I wish some of their gates weren't there, but, at least I can hop on a bike and keep going if I want to.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[Radford]

Sent from my moto g power - 2025 using Tapatalk

Save some women for the rest of us.

 

[omicron1792]

Its real easy to solve this problem. All that needs to be done is enough support be gathered by the public for the govt to take whatever land necessary to create a right of way for the public access to the public land, and do it legal by eminent domain. The govt just pays the landowner whatever the going and reasonable rate is per acre and it's done. The landowner has zero recourse no matter how rich they are. The only requirement needed is that it is for the public benefit. Thats how they take land for roads, schools, parks, etc etc. and it's done and done often in every single state. The state of Pa took my dads best friends 40 acre farm for a vo-tech school. Nothing he could do about it. They paid him the going rate for the land, but did allow him to keep the farmhouse and 2 acres for a garden. Get enough support, get this widely known to the public across the entire country and watch shit happen. Grass Roots movement has changed a lot of things for the better in America. Public land is just that...PUBLIC. Don't allow the rich to take or control what isn't theirs, EVER.

Uh. A road is a looooot different reason for eminent domain than hunting a parcel of land.

Second, these large land owners supply jobs, taxes, and political donations. Probably more than your friends 40 acre parcel. They actually know personally the governors and senators of the state.

 

[mtnbiker208]

A friend of mine is going to lose on of his business locations due to eminent domain for a road project. Talking to him, it is not a fun process and he doubts he will come out ok. The road project does need to be done.

So it is easy to say take there stuff, but not so easy when it is your stuff to be taken.

 

[100percent]

He does not need to feel charitable to make changes, only that the govt get enough support/cause to utilize eminent domain to place a ROW to allow public access to public land. The govt uses this procedure every day in America. They do it fair and square too...they pay the going and reasonable rate for every acre they need. If they decide on it, there is not a thing you can do to stop it regardless of how wealthy you are.

Ok, Good luck with convincing our non-hunting society that they need to do this for hunters!

 

[IdahoBeav]

Ok, Good luck with convincing our non-hunting society that they need to do this for hunters!

The entitlement of a significant portion of western hunters is unbelievable.

- The federal government shall not sell a single acre.
- The entire tax paying populace must pay for the "management" of the land I hunt.
- The land cannot be used for any industrial or agricultural purpose. It is strictly for my hunting use.
- I should be allowed to trespass as necessary to reach public land. Otherwise, landowners should be forced to dedicate property to me so that I may access.

 

[insanelupus]

Wow, and here I was happy and content with the millions of acres of public land I can access to hunt!

 

[ThorM465]

The entitlement of a significant portion of western hunters is unbelievable.

- The federal government shall not sell a single acre!
- The entire tax paying populace must pay for the "management" of the land I hunt public land all Americans should be able to access to enjoy.
- The land cannot be used for any industrial or agricultural purpose. It is strictly for my hunting use.
- I should be allowed to trespass as necessary to reach access public land. Otherwise, landowners should be forced to dedicate property to me so that I may access right of ways should be established.

Fixed it for you.