Utah- what the hell?

[Hnthrdr]

It’s willful at this point. It’s literally in the press release about the lawsuit that they want property taxes and the only way to get property taxes is to privatize the ground.

Yeah always cracked me up that arguably the reason the west gets so many tourists is our massive public land holdings & tourists = revenue and jobs and taxes. Then you have people in Utah, who claim to be ultra conservatives bummed out they can’t have more taxes… I’m looking at you Mike Lee.

 

[NRA4LIFE]

Utards being Utards.

 

[TurkeyReaper69]

That’s the elephant in the room that it seems like everyone ignores, willfully or ignorantly : at least all the folks who are anti federal land

The counties receive PILT from the feds every year, which is a payment on federal land within the county in lieu of property taxes.

I was talking to an elected official in Oregon over the summer (I can't recall if it was in Grant or Harney county either way both counties have a lot of resentment for the Fed land managers). The forest service was acquiring a parcel of land, the county official told me the PILT payment would be higher than the current property tax was on the land due to some sort of agricultural tax exemption or discount. The official said they have to speak negatively on the acquisition to "keep their base happy" or whatever.

So in summary, that elected official rather than being a proponent for the acquisition and explaining the benefits of the acquisition to their constituency, would rather be ignorant and hate on the feds to rile up voters in the county.

 

[WRO]

Yeah always cracked me up that arguably the reason the west gets so many tourists is our massive public land holdings & tourists = revenue and jobs and taxes. Then you have people in Utah, who claim to be ultra conservatives bummed out they can’t have more taxes… I’m looking at you Mike Lee.

Not supporting Mike Lee, but the vast majority of it never sees a tourist or even many hunters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[realunlucky]

Not supporting Mike Lee, but the vast majority of it never sees a tourist or even many hunters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

First that's not where they are wanting to sell off the federal land.
Second vast wide open space is what makes public land an incredible experience. Pulling up to one of Utahs many lookouts and looking out over thousands of untouched acres is something everyone should experience. It's important to preserve that vast "nothingness".

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[HighUintas]

Not supporting Mike Lee, but the vast majority of it never sees a tourist or even many hunters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not true. Southern Utah is crawling with desert rats, ruin hunters, river runners, and canyoneers in as many months of the year as possible.

 

[WRO]

Not true. Southern Utah is crawling with desert rats, ruin hunters, river runners, and canyoneers in as many months of the year as possible.

There’s other states that have public land fyi..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HighUintas]

There’s other states that have public land fyi..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This thread is about Utah sueing the feds and you didn't specify

 

[HighVoltageHunter]

IdahoBeav,

I’m a tradesman and since you are so worried about equitable housing how about I move into your place and you can take my place down here in affordable housing land.

 

[TurkeyReaper69]

Merry Christmas to all, except Mike Lee, Spencer Cox, Harriet Hageman, and Sean Reyes.

 

[IdahoBeav]

IdahoBeav,

I’m a tradesman and since you are so worried about equitable housing how about I move into your place and you can take my place down here in affordable housing land.

Nah, I can rent it out for about $1k/mo more than the monthly mortgage. However, for $500+ cost, I’ll buy you a unit 38 deer tag at the nonres sale next December. Maybe you could do a filmed hunt with Tawney & Busse?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ODB]

An (apparently) unpopular idea: stop with the childish name and political party calling and just support good ideas and reject bad ones by calling/emailing those making the decisions - from all angles. And all the wink and nod insults (ala Halt the Heist), will garner no respect or support from me as I have grown weary of debate not moving past the first level of Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement.

 

[tdhanses]

There are a lot of guys on this site and the hunting community that will preach this until red in the face, turn around and lose their minds at the idea of the federal government losing ownership of some land.

These same people don’t want any nonresidents hunting that federal land as well, you know their state owns the wildlife.

I’m all for the fed gov shedding some public land.

 

[Mbogage]

The states can’t afford to maintain the public land. They will sell it and we will have nothing. Look at Texas!

 

[tdhanses]

The states can’t afford to maintain the public land. They will sell it and we will have nothing. Look at Texas!

Well the state will have to issues licenses to someone, if there was no public they would still have to manage the herds, so sell it off and let those that can pay to hunt pay to hunt, hunt leases would be available.

 

[mtwarden]

That’s a great idea, why didn’t I think of that???

 

[Billinsd]

These same people don’t want any nonresidents hunting that federal land as well, you know their state owns the wildlife.

I’m all for the fed gov shedding some public land.

“Many” of these same people I believe want to greatly restrict nonresidents hunting their state owned and managed wildlife that reside on Federal Public lands. They state that “their” state officials, elected to represent them, should and rightly do manage their wildlife as they see fit to the benefit of the residents, which I agree with. Then out of the other side of their mouth they don’t trust their state elected officials to manage Federal public land in their state, they prefer the Federal Government. Most people are like this, “whatever suits ME, I vigorously support, whatever greatly displeases ME, I vigorously work to prevent and I will try and justify my positions no matter how hypocritical, illogical, or ridiculous they may be. Cheers Bill

 

[Billinsd]

The states can’t afford to maintain the public land. They will sell it and we will have nothing. Look at Texas!

People would argue including me that the Fed can’t afford to maintain their public lands. A good question is why should someone in Connecticut pay to maintain Federal land in Utah? I googled that the majority of funds for BLM land comes from the federal budget from Congress. Why should bureaucrats in Washington manage land in rural Utah, especially when it restricts and conflicts with the elected officials representing Utah and to the detriment of Utahns? What if the elected majority of Utah want to mine, open up to petroleum exploration and develop the land for housing to create higher paying jobs and a better quality of life? Some would tell them they can’t, just get a job with the BLM or Forest Circus or in the tourism industry?

 

[Billinsd]

Personally I don’t like all the development anywhere. Not in San Diego, it’s unrecognizable since the 80s. Not Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, or Idaho which are unrecognizable from the 70s in a bad way. I hate it, but who am I to try and stop it. I am part of it. My ancestors helped clear out Indians and settle the East Coast, homestead the Midwest and then populate and develop, my dad and me and family Southern California. The elephant in the room is illegal immigration, the refuge joke, and wide open legal immigration, especially chain migration, and the bastardized interpretation of the 14th amendment and anchor babies. Fix all this, things will be better or less worse. Bill

 

[HighUintas]

People would argue including me that the Fed can’t afford to maintain their public lands. A good question is why should someone in Connecticut pay to maintain Federal land in Utah? I googled that the majority of funds for BLM land comes from the federal budget from Congress. Why should bureaucrats in Washington manage land in rural Utah, especially when it restricts and conflicts with the elected officials representing Utah and to the detriment of Utahns? What if the elected majority of Utah want to mine, open up to petroleum exploration and develop the land for housing to create higher paying jobs and a better quality of life? Some would tell them they can’t, just get a job with the BLM or Forest Circus or in the tourism industry?

I understand your points, but in my opinion, the vast swaths of public land that are available to EVERYONE to recreate on however they want, within boundaries, is one of our countries greatest assets.

Let the states own it, and I'd be willing to bet my life that all the above would change drastically for the worse.

Humans, especially Americans, have historically been fantastic at destroying wilderness through extraction or consumptive resource use, without anyone holding those parties' feet to the fire in restoration and damage mitigation. I believe that would be even worse under state and private ownership.