Today, just 100 Families own 42-million acres or 65,000 square miles of land in the USA

[KurtR]

I don’t think any of the land was formerly public. When was the last public land transfer to private? I know Utah wants the BLM land in that state converted, but I’m not aware of any that ‘has’ been converted.

These big land owning families are buying up small family ranches. Sometimes they buy hundreds at a time. When “hundreds” of small pieces of property that were previously owned by just as many individuals, access for hunting was easier. Those individuals all allowed family and friends to access their property. Now, all those people who previously had access are excluded.

The days of being able to knock on a door and ask permission to hunt or cross some acreage are coming to an end.

As and anecdotal example, my grandfather had permission from a rancher to hunt BLM and Forest land by access through a small family ranch here in SoCal. The rancher was friendly and allowed a bunch of people access through his canyon dirt road. That 300 acre ranch is now owned by a big trust and nobody is allowed access. There are no trailheads, roads or reasonable ways around the canyon access through the old ranch. I hunted there as a kid and saw dozens of other hunters there over the years, no more...

hundreds at a time? Nobody has been making it on a 300 acre ranch for many many years. Even the guys with small operations with a few hundred cattle are running way more than that. There are 640 acres in a section and farming a section is not that big.

 

[PMcGee]

I don’t think any of the land was formerly public. When was the last public land transfer to private? I know Utah wants the BLM land in that state converted, but I’m not aware of any that ‘has’ been converted.

These big land owning families are buying up small family ranches. Sometimes they buy hundreds at a time. When “hundreds” of small pieces of property that were previously owned by just as many individuals, access for hunting was easier. Those individuals all allowed family and friends to access their property. Now, all those people who previously had access are excluded.

The days of being able to knock on a door and ask permission to hunt or cross some acreage are coming to an end.

As and anecdotal example, my grandfather had permission from a rancher to hunt BLM and Forest land by access through a small family ranch here in SoCal. The rancher was friendly and allowed a bunch of people access through his canyon dirt road. That 300 acre ranch is now owned by a big trust and nobody is allowed access. There are no trailheads, roads or reasonable ways around the canyon access through the old ranch. I hunted there as a kid and saw dozens of other hunters there over the years, no more...

I lost a property I hunted for many years because it was sold. It sucks but that’s just the way it is. I’m not mad at the new property owner because I can’t hunt it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[tt_johnsclist]

I think it’s interesting that these 100 families increased their land holdings by 50% during the recession.

The administration in charge during the recession bashed capitalism and was supposedly “for the middle class”. Under their watch, the super wealthy got richer and the middle class and small family land/farm owner got poorer.

The administration in charge at the onset of the recession, well you see plenty of their members vacationing and hunting as guests on these large holdings.

If you look at the names on the list of families that benefited from the recession, you will see that a lot of them have direct ties to the very businesses and politicians who caused the recession.

I would have to assume that the 100 persons who gained land during this period paid fair market value for it, which means they did not get any richer by the purchase and also that the sellers were fairly compensated and thus did not get any poorer by the deal. I am also sure that most of the 100 families mentioned are in farming, mineral, and timber businesses which depend upon owning land, thus I am not sure why we should be either surprised or upset by this fact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cornfedkiller]

It’s funny in the other thread about corner crossing, all the rokslide “socialists” advocating the right to cross a corner. Here in this thread, roksliders take no issue with political corruption/influence enabling the uber wealthy to acquire more land, thus restricting more access.

I just find the double standard interesting.

I don't think whether or not you agree with corner crossing has anything to do with which side of the political spectrum you are on. I have no issue with wealthy people owning a lot of land, but I also think the fact that I'm not supposed to walk from 1 piece of public to another where they touch corners is dumb. Like someone else mentioned, if its like a checkerboard, you can go from one red space to another red space without disturbing the black (private) spaces at all.

I also think people aren't necessarily buying that the recession was caused via political corruption in order to help their friends.

 

[cornfedkiller]

These big land owning families are buying up small family ranches. Sometimes they buy hundreds at a time. When “hundreds” of small pieces of property that were previously owned by just as many individuals, access for hunting was easier. Those individuals all allowed family and friends to access their property. Now, all those people who previously had access are excluded.

Nobody forced them to sell their land.

 

[Middleofnowhere]

hundreds at a time?

Banks sold hundreds and sometimes even thousands of repossessed bundles of property at a time. These bundles were organized in many different ways, by area or type, etc.

 

[jmez]

Good for them.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[Middleofnowhere]

I am a landowner. I want to own more land.
This whole subject is interesting to me. I don’t have anything against being wealthy, I just want a fair shot at it myself. Sometimes it seems the system is a little rigged. No biggy, thank you for the thoughtful replies.

 

[sndmn11]

Banks sold hundreds and sometimes even thousands of repossessed bundles of property at a time. These bundles were organized in many different ways, by area or type, etc.

I am not understanding the issue of someone who owns something selling it to someone who wants to buy it?

 

[juan trueno]

I am a landowner. I want to own more land.
This whole subject is interesting to me. I don’t have anything against being wealthy, I just want a fair shot at it myself. Sometimes it seems the system is a little rigged. No biggy, thank you for the thoughtful replies.

So... you would actually like to amass some wealth but..

You’ve come into possession of knowledge that the system is rigged?

and it’s as a consequence of this (rigged game) that You just can’t seem to get ahead?

It sounds like You might be Up against some real injustice. Care to expand?

I know I wouldn’t want to find myself victimized that way.

 

[Antarctica]

I don’t think any of the land was formerly public. When was the last public land transfer to private? I know Utah wants the BLM land in that state converted, but I’m not aware of any that ‘has’ been converted.

These big land owning families are buying up small family ranches. Sometimes they buy hundreds at a time. When “hundreds” of small pieces of property that were previously owned by just as many individuals, access for hunting was easier. Those individuals all allowed family and friends to access their property. Now, all those people who previously had access are excluded.

The days of being able to knock on a door and ask permission to hunt or cross some acreage are coming to an end.

As and anecdotal example, my grandfather had permission from a rancher to hunt BLM and Forest land by access through a small family ranch here in SoCal. The rancher was friendly and allowed a bunch of people access through his canyon dirt road. That 300 acre ranch is now owned by a big trust and nobody is allowed access. There are no trailheads, roads or reasonable ways around the canyon access through the old ranch. I hunted there as a kid and saw dozens of other hunters there over the years, no more...

I get that you have (had) a dog in the fight and it stings. And your point that many small owners may provide a better chance at access to hunt may have some validity.

But that has nothing to do with ownership rights. This is America, and the only thing that allowed those people to acquire those large tracts was - money. That money was made by someone (not necessarily them), and that's the way it works. They bought the land and its their right to do what they want with it. If your neighbor pulls his car onto your lawn this weekend and drained the oil out, you restrict his access and then some. Because its your property.

I think lumping these owners into 'access' eliminating overlords is a bit of a stretch. Many large land owners work with the public to provide some level of hunting access - either privately or in cooperation with govt. And if they don't, that's their right.

Also, many of these large tracts will probably be better managed and aid in the habitat of surrounding properties -in contrast to the result if they were all managed in 100-300 acre increments like we have back east.

If you have a bone to pick with them buying up smaller ranches, that you have an equal bone to pick with those selling said smaller ranches. Both parties signed to a mutually beneficial deal.

 

[Sccritterkiller]

Thousands of people made money off the stock market during the recession by buying low during the recession and selling say in the last year or so are they part of the wealth transfer conspiracy you speak of?

 

[KurtR]

Banks sold hundreds and sometimes even thousands of repossessed bundles of property at a time. These bundles were organized in many different ways, by area or type, etc.

That must be a california thing because nothing like that happened here in South Dakota.

 

[Middleofnowhere]

I am not understanding the issue of someone who owns something selling it to someone who wants to buy it?

I was quoting another reply that was questioning the “hundreds” of property purchases at a time.

The great recession was triggered by a lot of factors. One of the big factors was Gov’t intervention in the housing market. Many of these top 100 land owners had a big influence on the failed gov’t policies through their political activism.

 

[Nick Muche]

I won’t say too much more because I don’t want to get political.

There goes that idea!

 

[Middleofnowhere]

It was a Colorado, Nevada, Idaho and Arizona thing too.

 

[PMcGee]

I was quoting another reply that was questioning the “hundreds” of property purchases at a time.

The great recession was triggered by a lot of factors. One of the big factors was Gov’t intervention in the housing market. Many of these top 100 land owners had a big influence on the failed gov’t policies through their political activism.

The government didn’t force people to take out loans they couldn’t repay.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Shrek]

“Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.” —Perth, Scotland, 28 May 1948, in Churchill, Europe Unite: Speeches 1947 & 1948 (London: Cassell
“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” —House of Commons, 22 October 1945.

Churchill sums up Middleofnowhere’s creed of envy quite well.
Oh , and God weighed in on this also 10. “You shall not covet”

 

[100percent]

I don't think whether or not you agree with corner crossing has anything to do with which side of the political spectrum you are on. I have no issue with wealthy people owning a lot of land, but I also think the fact that I'm not supposed to walk from 1 piece of public to another where they touch corners is dumb. Like someone else mentioned, if its like a checkerboard, you can go from one red space to another red space without disturbing the black (private) spaces at all.

I also think people aren't necessarily buying that the recession was caused via political corruption in order to help their friends.

There’s another thread going about the legalities of corner crossings and this is mentioned here. For perspective consider, Charles Goodnight, Texas Ranger and cattleman is credited with this checkerboard purchasing strategy to provide water availability for his cattle with limited funds to buy whole tracts. At the time he was protecting himself from govt annexation and free land programs that threatened his life and livelihood. He settled the staked plains of Texas and much more! As a ranger and rancher he and a few others provided the very opportunity that threatened his existence. Were his actions selfish or conspiring? Maybe but, he was doing what he could to protect himself from the government he helped create.
In this case, we are now dealing with repercussions and effects of bad government decisions from long ago. It cuts both ways!

 

[Middleofnowhere]

The government didn’t force people to take out loans they couldn’t repay.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The government “guaranteed” those loans. Private institutions loaned money that they never would have if not for the gov’t guarantee. When those loans defaulted, the gov’t bought them, bundled and sold them. You and I are still paying on the debt for those bad loan guarantees...