Fishing Forum
Skip to Content


Fishing Forum > Utah Fishing Forum : Off Topic Board >

State Land or Fed Land ???

Fishing Lure
fishing Flaming Gorge Fishing fishing
(Page 1 of 2)
> >
Report Post | Register to Reply
State Land or Fed Land ???
Wanted to get your thoughts and opinions if you guys think if the Utah gov can better manage Wild Lands better than the Feds.

Right now there are 4 bills in the senate HJR3, HCR1, HB148 and HB91 these bills purpose that federal government surrender more than 30 million acres of land within Utahs borders.


National Parks would be returned to the federal government, but the state could first set conditions allowing oil and gas drilling, mining, grazing, logging and travel on the land.

These bills also effect Anglers & Hunters in the fact that Utah gov its trying to take over Federal Land that surrounds Utah's waters and recreation areas. This could mean tighter restrictions like HB141 ( The law that prohibits anglers from fishing waters that flow over private land )

But on the flip side could be a good thing Utah would gain revenue from the resources those lands hold. ( oil and gas drilling, mining, grazing, logging and travel on the land. ) That the feds currently profit from.


What do you guys think ?







(This post was edited by sinergy on Mar 5, 2012, 11:12 AM)

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
The first thing the Great State of Utah will do is sell the land. Can anybody tell me the last time anyone was able to hunt on any of Ted Turner's land holdings? If you like to hunt or fish, you'd better pray that this one doesn't fly.


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Fishrmn] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
oil and mining companies moving in and fencing off large portions of formerly "public" land, making it off limits to public recreation?

No thanks. I like all the "federal" land that I currently have access to.



I couldn't help it. It just popped in there.
Dr. Raymond Stantz


Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
The Feds are the lesser of the two evils.


Jim
http://www.fishflaminggorge.com
www.lakersaver.com


Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
Hate to say it but I have to go with the Feds too. The state will get it, sell, lease or anything else to make a buck and then it will be gone. No money ever seems to make it back to the schools and if I ever want to use it I'll have to pay for some special permit. This permit money will be well looked after and have high goals that never seem to make it back to the public.

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [tlspyder13] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
The biggest question here is: who are these legislators representing??

They claim to represent "their constituency", but from what i can see they only represent high-dollar groups such as the oil companies, farm bureau, real estate, etc..

I don't think they listen one bit to the individuals that live in their districts.

Worst of all, we get comments like this one (from my own representative!!):
= Evan Vickers wrote:
"I suspect it will take the Supreme Court less time to throw this out than it takes us to debate it tonight," said Rep. Evan Vickers, R-Cedar City, "but Im going to enthusiastically support it because we have to keep trying."

So, you don't think this has much chance, but you're willing to waste your time, my time, the courts time and our money for this? I thought this was all in the name of helping fund our schools?



I'm very tired of seeing my state taxes fighting against my federal taxes. We see articles concerning the State Hatchery system's inefficiencies -- and we scream bloody murder over it. Yet our legislature can waste funding left and right and it's "OK"? Nice system we have going here...



I couldn't help it. It just popped in there.
Dr. Raymond Stantz


Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
I think it would be found unconstitutional. The Utah Legislature seems to like to take on message bills that they know won't fly......

I am frustrated by SOME Federal Regulations, like most Utahns are. Some regulations make it very oppressive. IMO we need people that can represent us and get things done, not draw lines in the sand over issues they know don't have a chance in working
Quote:
"Sparky, what are you looking at? Oh, the silent majesty of a winter's morn... the clean, cool chill of the holiday air... an a****** in his bathrobe, emptying a chemical toilet into my sewer..." - Clark Griswold (Chevy Chase)

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
I'll take federal over state.
The fed is to big and broad to have much change take place in any short period of time. This leaves the media time to inform us of waht is going on and to protest it.

On our state level they could introduce a bill with no text at all, then make a back room deal with other state lawmakers and push it through in the final days as a matter of procedure with a "Public be damned attitude".

It has happened before concerning public access to public property.

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Troll] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
The Feds are the lesser of two evils in this case. The problem with the Feds is that the radical environmentalists have control of the Feds and their agenda is as bad as what we'll get if the State takes over. They will continue to make it harder and harder to use "public' lands and to access the resources. The
State on the other hand, as stated, will sell it off to private concerns who in turn will put it off limits to the public. The only difference is that the private concerns will utilize the resources while making it off limits to us. Somehow we have to unlock the resources on these lands for the benefit of the public while maintaining the access for the public. Anyone have any ideas on that ???

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
First I can't believe this is on the fishing forum. Second possession and control is the name of the game. The Federal gov won't give that up. Neither of them, really have your back as sportsmen .
I love fishing.........

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [reelfast] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
reelfast wrote:
Neither of them, really have your back as sportsmen .

Really?

I can hunt deer on the Grand Staircase National Monument. What happens when that comes under State control, and is sold off to the highest bidder (China?). Guess what? no more access.

The sad thing is that even with the "environmental whackos", we still get beneficial use of our public lands. I hate to admit this, but as time goes on I find myself siding with the "let's protect our resources" group more than the "let's rape and pillage our resources -- to hell with the environment" group...

Noel will restrict his own access more than any anti-ATV group ever will!



I couldn't help it. It just popped in there.
Dr. Raymond Stantz


Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
I have to agree I am less afraid of the Feds ownership since it is a known commoditiy than I am the state. Our state doesnt have a great record on land management. I am sure there would be for sale signs going up

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [reelfast] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
reelfast wrote:
First I can't believe this is on the fishing forum.


Whys it hard to believe ? Anglers & Hunters are the most passionate about conservation and sustaining the waters they love. Look at Trout Unlimited they have done huge projects to restore rivers and ecosystems.

BFT and many forums like this one have members who are knowledgeable and could provide first hand experiences.

Any how I got to agree with the feds Im not a big fan but I think its the better way to go. I think Utah would sell off any land it could to the yuppies who want a private ranch and close the land and water off to the locals.

Then setup deals with the oil & mining companies who in turn will fence it all off and destroy what ever habit was once there.
(This post was edited by sinergy on Mar 6, 2012, 2:35 PM)

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
There is several areas where non fishing info is placed. Really this one could end up in the rough and rowdy room. Have fun debating this one. State VS Fed control is one of those things that will stir it up.
You have more access to your local representatives. More of a grass roots approach I figure is better than a dictator like national control. I would agree today that the Fed control looks more favorable. The state is just looking for money. I don't think they will win this. But I am going to find out who the players are from my district. Because they have some really big things coming up. Like a new power plant. Some water rights issues. Oh and a boating safety bill is in the works too. Something about leaving the scene of and accident and increasing the penalty. Lots of laws being crafted there that would actually pass. So the best thing about this is more folks are going to take a look hopefully at what their legislators are doing this week and get involved.
I love fishing.........

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [reelfast] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
reelfast -- just our of curiosity, do you enjoy fishing on rivers in Utah? If so, who own's the land that the river/stream flows across?

that's why this is on a fishing forum.



I couldn't help it. It just popped in there.
Dr. Raymond Stantz


Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [PBH] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
Yea the state really shafted the fishermen on that one. I like Idahos rule on the rivers. It is in their proclamation. The fisherman just couldnt seem to win on that one.
I love fishing.........

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
Even worse is the total waste of money. The State's own lawyers tell the legislature it's unconstitutional - then the legislature appropriates $3 million to fight it in 2014 when it takes effect. So, we have an extra $3 million to essentially give away? Really? Really??

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Lettsfish] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
Lettsfish wrote:
Even worse is the total waste of money. The State's own lawyers tell the legislature it's unconstitutional - then the legislature appropriates $3 million to fight it in 2014 when it takes effect. So, we have an extra $3 million to essentially give away? Really? Really??

and they do it in the name of our school children!

Why not take the $3 million and hand it over to the schools vs. litigation in a battle they cannot win?



I couldn't help it. It just popped in there.
Dr. Raymond Stantz


Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [PBH] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
Yep, we got 3 mil to spend on this, but we are going to shut down several juvenile facilities and lay off about 100 people that work with juveniles because there is a short fall of about 4 mil !!! Guess the money is better spent tilting at windmills rather than working with kids and keeping the public safe !!! Makes sense to me !!

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [PBH] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
I wonder when energy solutions will be looking for another piece of state land to dump toxic waste on. That might be one type of use the state is looking at. The state will certainly use it for money making purposes and we will be locked out. The outdoors community is far better of if the lands are under federal control. gshorthair

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
Sometimes it boggles the mind. Utah can't even run a liquer store and make a profit. Of course the Feds went bankrupt running the mustang ranch in reno. I don't see how either can be trusted with the taxpayers money. I really find it hard to believe that you can float across private land, but dare not put your feet down and touch the bottom.DUH, who thought that one up. Leave the feds in it, It takes them longer to screw up than the state. In the end neither is any good. Unsure

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [PBH] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
PBH wrote:
Lettsfish wrote:
Even worse is the total waste of money. The State's own lawyers tell the legislature it's unconstitutional - then the legislature appropriates $3 million to fight it in 2014 when it takes effect. So, we have an extra $3 million to essentially give away? Really? Really??


and they do it in the name of our school children!

Why not take the $3 million and hand it over to the schools vs. litigation in a battle they cannot win?
Because then they couldn't run their sticky little fingers through it.....
Just one more brookie........

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [sinergy] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
Anything Herbert and his cronies have anything to do with will be a total disaster for anglers. That has been proven already don't ya think/

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [reelfast] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
Of course this should be on the fishing forum. It is important to most anglers. We all know what will happen if Hebert gets control. If you think this is not the correct place
then you sure don't have to read it don't ya see. Not trying to stir any drama, just offering my opinion.
pa

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [pa] State Land or Fed Land ??? In reply to
pa wrote:
Anything Herbert and his cronies have anything to do with will be a total disaster for anglers. That has been proven already don't ya think/

haha i love this post its right on point!





Have you read my Blog? I hear it's getting better!

http://redneckflyfishing.blogspot.com/


> >