Ted Cruz

[Matt Cashell]

I am glad we are discussing this on this thread, as the Wilks brothers are Cruz' largest financial supporters, and it certainly pertains to the public lands issue.

MT has always had large tracts of land-locked public lands. That's why guys are renting helicopters to fly in and hunt them. The land around these public lands was most likely private already, so I wouldn't say that "holding the access hostage" is so accurate. More like exercising private property rights.

The landlocked land isn't the "hostage" part. The Wilks bought a totally separate ranch just to "trade" for the landlocked parcel. They opened the road (a road that had been open for many, many years before being closed a few years ago) through that purchased property so they could bribe the public into the trade. When the trade didn't happen, they put up armed guards, and closed the road.

There was a large tract north of the Missouri River like that with access through one piece of property. At least that's where the road and private ranch was. You could still access it from other spots, but you had to hump it a ways. That's life. I don't like trespassers either.

This is the hostage part. As in: "Give me this piece of your land, public, and I won't kill your access to your other land." I see it as a pretty egregious example of the super-rich coming down on common hunters. I suppose you see it as exercising private property rights. This is for certain:

1. The Wilks brothers do want the title to public lands.
2. They have no issue restricting public access.

I suspect their substantial support for Ted Cruz is for working toward that goal.

I do support private land rights. I ALSO support public land rights.

 

[airlocksniffer]

Texas ain't so bad. We have year round hunting opportunities. World class whitetail hunting, a severe hog problem, ducks, an extended snow goose season that is unlimited (all of which I cut my teeth on, on federal and state public land), exotics, Javelina, desert bighorns (another public land hunt) and almost any other game you can imagine short of elk.

Sure there are many cases when you "pay to play" but I have spent alot less money getting on a deer lease than I have buying all the necessary gear to backpack hunt, and then when you add on the out of state licenses that range from $6-800 for the privilege of hunting game on those public lands and the gas to get there its just about the same amount of $$ except instead of a season being 30 days or a week you get year round access and hunting. And then there are the day hunts...I can drive to numerous ranches within 30 minutes of me and dove hunt or hog hunt for less than $150.

The thing about this is those land-owners could at any time close access to hunting. I have world-class elk hunting on public land 20 minutes from my house for the price of gas. And I won't get locked out. Not knocking on Texas as I'm sure there is some great hunting and cool country but I don't think it's the model we should replicate in the west.

 

[gelton]

I am glad we are discussing this on this thread, as the Wilks brothers are Cruz' largest financial supporters, and it certainly pertains to the public lands issue.



The landlocked land isn't the "hostage" part. The Wilks bought a totally separate ranch just to "trade" for the landlocked parcel. They opened the road (a road that had been open for many, many years before being closed a few years ago) through that purchased property so they could bribe the public into the trade. When the trade didn't happen, they put up armed guards, and closed the road.



This is the hostage part. As in: "Give me this piece of your land, public, and I won't kill your access to your other land." I see it as a pretty egregious example of the super-rich coming down on common hunters. I suppose you see it as exercising private property rights. This is for certain:

1. The Wilks brothers do want the title to public lands.
2. They have no issue restricting public access.

I suspect their substantial support for Ted Cruz is for working toward that goal.

I do support private land rights. I ALSO support public land rights.

Matt - why was the road closed in the first place? I take a 700 mile motorcycle route in Texas and 600 miles of it are on old dirt roads maintained by the county. The reason being is that it is ranches within ranches within ranches and the only access to these ranches is via county maintained roads, if the county werent maintaining them then they could be shut down which would deny ranchers access to their own property.

This touches on "rewilding" and what others have mentioned Agenda 21. As some have said, the long term goal for those running these "sustainability" programs is to not allow any human access except by foot and road closures are their number one game plan. Just curious.

 

[Matt Cashell]

Matt - why was the road closed in the first place?

It was closed by the landowner. The County Attorney said there was a prescriptive easement for the public. The landowner sued, the District Court ruled for the landowner, and the county didn't appeal in time.

A bad court ruling for sure. There are lots of Montanans still working on it though.

Can't say it had anything to do with Agenda 21, as the public sector was working to open the road while the private sector was working on closing it.

Wait a minute ... Maybe the Wilks And Kochs are secret undercover agents for the UN! They are trying to buy up as much land as they can to force people into the cities!

 

[airlocksniffer]

Wait a minute ... Maybe the Wilks And Kochs are secret undercover agents for the UN! They are trying to buy up as much land as they can to force people into the cities!

Don't forget the chemtrails and FEMA death camps inside recently closed Walmarts.

 

[gelton]

Don't forget the chemtrails and FEMA death camps inside recently closed Walmarts.

Are you implying that Agenda 21 doesn't exist? Its an admitted program. Very well documented for those that care to have a look and yes its designed to move people into cities. Go to the source and study up - https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

 

[gelton]

It was closed by the landowner. The County Attorney said there was a prescriptive easement for the public. The landowner sued, the District Court ruled for the landowner, and the county didn't appeal in time.

A bad court ruling for sure. There are lots of Montanans still working on it though.

Can't say it had anything to do with Agenda 21, as the public sector was working to open the road while the private sector was working on closing it.

Wait a minute ... Maybe the Wilks And Kochs are secret undercover agents for the UN! They are trying to buy up as much land as they can to force people into the cities!

Perhaps they are...here is a flavor of research that you may agree with - http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/

 

[Matt Cashell]

Perhaps they are...here is a flavor of research that you may agree with - http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/

Haha,

Whoa, that is some wild "research" there, gelton.

I'm not a member of a political "team." I don't have much use for conspiracy theories on either end of the spectrum.

 

[airlocksniffer]

Are you implying that Agenda 21 doesn't exist? Its an admitted program. Very well documented for those that care to have a look and yes its designed to move people into cities. Go to the source and study up - https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

Not at all. I just think it's developed into a bogeyman for conspiracy theory types. Without reading all 350+ pages of the linked document, IMO sustainable development is necessary given the worlds population and future growth. So not sure why Agenda 21 is a bad idea. As far as closing roads, I prefer to use the quads that God gave me*.

*Stolen from a BHA bumper sticker.

 

[gelton]

Haha,

Whoa, that is some wild "research" there, gelton.

I'm not a member of a political "team." I don't have much use for conspiracy theories on either end of the spectrum.

Hillarious. So you are portending that Agenda 21, signed onto by the United States at the Rio Earth summit in 1992, is a conspiracy? Its the new strawman of todays age, if you dont agree with something just call it a conspiracy, forget that it is an undeniable fact, just call it a conspiracy.

Sorry fellas but it is a real program that the United States and many other nations really signed onto...simply calling it a conspiracy doesn't support your position when it is well documented and admitted. Simply saying something isnt true does not make it so.

 

[Matt Cashell]

Hillarious. So you are portending that Agenda 21, signed onto by the United States at the Rio Earth summit in 1992, is a conspiracy? Its the new strawman of todays age, if you dont agree with something just call it a conspiracy, forget that it is an undeniable fact, just call it a conspiracy.

Sorry fellas but it is a real program that the United States and many other nations really signed onto...simply calling it a conspiracy doesn't support your position when it is well documented and admitted. Simply saying something isnt true does not make it so.

Um, no. Agenda 21 is "real." It was a feel-good document promoting handholding between countries on environmental impacts, and holds no weight of law whatsoever. I remember when George H.W. Bush signed it.

The conspiracy is the idea that Agenda 21 is the subversive tool of the New World Order to take over the world and control our lives for the ruling elite. You know, that conspiracy.

 

[gelton]

You mean the new world order that George Bush called for on numerous occasions? Or was it because the Land given to the UN was donated by the Rockefellers in NY. Of course not, there are no such things as elites and they certainly don't want world domination. My apologies, carry on.

 

[dotman]

Texas isn't that bad, but numbnuts that don't understand history, and how Texas became a State in the Union don't understand why there isn't public land there. Just a heads up fellas, Im sure most folks in Texas would love more public land (you know since the many state and national parks in texas are enjoyed) but since the land was settle way back in the 1840's there isn't much modern day Texans can do about that.

But Im sure you don't care, keep hating....

P.S. there are public land hunting opportunities, including drawn hunts...but don't apply Yankees.

There's photograph from Texas....public land no less....

Hey where are all the armed guards from MT in that picture of Texas country?

 

[Clarktar]

It was closed by the landowner. The County Attorney said there was a prescriptive easement for the public. The landowner sued, the District Court ruled for the landowner, and the county didn't appeal in time.

A bad court ruling for sure. There are lots of Montanans still working on it though.

Can't say it had anything to do with Agenda 21, as the public sector was working to open the road while the private sector was working on closing it.

Wait a minute ... Maybe the Wilks And Kochs are secret undercover agents for the UN! They are trying to buy up as much land as they can to force people into the cities!

If I'm thinking about the same piece of land, the access was opened back up late summer 2015. I hunted that area during 2015 season....

 

[JWP58]

The point wasn't to hate on Texas, .

Actually it was, since Texas has absolutely nothing to with Cruz's stance on public land. The booger eating heathen isn't even a damn Texan, so he can take his booger chowing, preachy, anti public land agenda and go screw himself.

How's that for a stance of Ted Cruz?

 

[Rabbit Ranger]

Texas isn't that bad, but numbnuts that don't understand history, and how Texas became a State in the Union don't understand why there isn't public land there. Just a heads up fellas, Im sure most folks in Texas would love more public land (you know since the many state and national parks in texas are enjoyed) but since the land was settle way back in the 1840's there isn't much modern day Texans can do about that.

But Im sure you don't care, keep hating....

P.S. there are public land hunting opportunities, including drawn hunts...but don't apply Yankees.

There's photograph from Texas....public land no less....

While this may be public land, it likely does not have much hunting access the way most people view public land out West. My guess is this is Guadalupe National Park, the Christmas Mountains, or somewhere in the Big Bend/Alpine area, all of which have either no or very little "public hunting access." If it does have hunting access, like some of the Wildlife Management Areas out in West Texas, it is extremely limited and tightly controlled by TPWD; the chances of getting drawn for those areas is probably equal to me getting drawn in the hybrid draw for some of the primo CO units.

I am by no means trying to be argumentative, but in my opinion it's not really comparing apples to apples. Public hunting, and especially backcountry hunting like many on this forum do, for big game species in Texas is very, very, limited.

 

[Trial153]

I disagree. Texas is the antithesis of the North American Hunting Model, IMO.


it.

I spent a lot of time hunting and fishing in Texas as my father lives there. It has plenty to offer. However
I have to agree with the above statement.
Texas as the nations model would be about as bad as I can imagine.

 

[BroodBuster]

My daughter had to do a civics assignment by going to "www.isidewith.com" and answering the questions to see who they most are similar to as to the folks running for President. Check it out and see what comes up.

Damn. I always knew I was a political basket case. But damn............

80% Gary Johnson (libertarian)
79% Bernie Sanders
78% Donald Trump

I guess rating most of the questions in the "I don't give a rats ass" category makes me agreeable??

 

[gelton]

I think there are alot of folks who are Libertarian and just dont know it. I remember back in 04-05 doing a similar quiz that told me I was a full fledged libertarian and I had to ask someone what exactly is a libertarian. Then I donated and voted for Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012 because his was the only message that really spoke to my beliefs. He is the only politician to ever receive a dime from me.

 

[jm1607]

Texas is an awful place to hunt.. The public land is tragedy of the commons and heavily overcrowded.. Pretty much have to know someone with land, own land, or spend way too much money on a lease. I'll take any state in the West over TX for hunting, even CA