Another criminal idiot in the National Parks

I don't know how I answered your post before you posted it. I must have powers that remained hidden even from me all these years.....heh.

As for this point: "What about the person who lives in the city and doesn't have access to rural land? Public land is the answer."

So you are saying someone living in Baltimore needs access to grazing land in Nevada? Why not one of the hundreds of national parks or thousands of state ones. There is no shortage of parkland in most of the country. Why you have the Shenandoah not too far from you.

agesilaus wrote:
Gold Butte NM is in Utah, strange it looks like it is east of Vegas to me. As usual liberals always resort to personal attacks.

You are so off base and refusing to listen to our arguments that it is ridiculous. First, you accused me of not being able to have an opinion on the issue becuase I live in MD - and yet you live in North Florida per your profile so the same logic should fit? You are entitled to your opinion but I'm not?

Then you make blanket statements about liberals to all of us who oppose you. I have never voted for a single Democrat in my life and I'm a staunch conservative but I have a brain for myself and the both parties have issues where they are right and where they are wrong.

Some conservatives are couching this as big government when it's protecting a natural resource and alllowing the public access to land. I grew up in Louisiana and I could hunt all I wanted because most land was owned by people I knew if not cousins and the timber companies let folks hunt on their land. Because of idiots like in the original post driving on the salt flats the timber companies restricted access and I don't blame them. What about the person who lives in the city and doesn't have access to rural land? Public land is the answer.

State control is the worst of both worlds because they restrict the public but it's still not in private hands. It's possible to allow access to gas and oil on public land to the benefit of the tax payer and the public.

You could sell off all BLM and other Federal land and still be in debt and yet the natural resources would be lost forever to future generations. The answer to the debt is to cut spending. I can sell everything in my garage and have a 50 percent down payment to that new toy hauler I want but as soon as I want to take a cross country vacation I need a new revenue source.

I'm on the side of the western states so you pointing out Florida is an eastern state makes no sense. Furthermore Florida has a number of NP and a good chunk of the panhandle is owned by the Feds (military). Just a guess but Everglades NP may be bigger than Maryland.

As for your other point, if you were a million dollars in debt, would it make sense to sell off excess property to pay the debt down $250,000? I think that would be the conservative path don't you?

Also I wasn't saying that you have no right to an opinion, I was pointing out that you may not appreciate the situation out west. Most people follow this:

"I've got an opinion on everything." T. Boone Pickens

My comment about acting like a liberal was directed at the ad hominem comment made by another, not you so I don't understand why you thought it did.

agesilaus wrote:
What percent of Maryland is owned by the Federal Government, darned little is my guess. You don't even have a major park, not that there is room for one. Some western states are over 80 percent Fed and they have a real cause for unhappiness.

I think you answered your own question.

How much room is left in any of the states east of the Mississippi?

Would you really want the land out west to be one giant suburb like my home state of NJ?

Or, are you really ok with a few select wealthy individuals owning what's left of Utah, and letting them do with it as they see fit since it would be "their" land?

Just think if the gov't had "sold" Yellowstone or the Grand Canyon.
There would probably be every fast food franchise in existence in them along with strip malls, etc.

I think it would be better to send them to 6 months or so of community service in the parks system

Searching_Ut wrote:
Fortunately, the damage from this incident should heal relatively quickly, but for a few years now it's going to detract from the enjoyment of many visitors.

I would be OK if the person or group could stay in prison until the salt was able to self cover the tracks.

OK, supervised community service in the parks until the salt heals itself.

Wow! Has this one really gotten off-track!!!

:R

Gold Butte NM is in Utah, strange it looks like it is east of Vegas to me. As usual liberals always resort to personal attacks.

agesilaus wrote:
BTW - if you think state ownership of public land works out well, take a look at Nevada's history of public land protection...
==================================

Well no one government entity is often no better than the other. Tho governments closer to the locals are at least more responsive since the locals know who to punish at the ballot box.

No these lands need to be sold to private hands. The money needs to go to retiring the national debt. There is no reason to withhold grazing land just because some people like to drive across it. There are plenty of parks in Nevada right now, especially with the creation of that huge new national monument.

The new monument is in Utah, not Nevada. You come across as so obviously uninformed about this issue that I'm now convinced you are trolling. Did you start the thread just to troll? Sorry I fell for it. Bye bye.