- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Privatizing public hunting land
Posted on 1/16/19 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 1/16/19 at 12:59 pm
Take for example at the State level...we’re broke. So we start selling WMAs. Cash in hand plus a permanent decrease in the portion of the budget that pays to maintain those lands.
We all know the government screws up almost everything they touch. Why not let that land be in the hands of private individuals so they are properly cared for and maintained?
We all know the government screws up almost everything they touch. Why not let that land be in the hands of private individuals so they are properly cared for and maintained?
25
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:02 pm to Mr Wonderful
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
Why on Earth would you want to relinquish public access for all to something that would only benefit the rich?
Why on Earth would you want to relinquish public access for all to something that would only benefit the rich?
quote:
"Defenders of the short-sighted men who in their greed and selfishness will, if permitted, rob our country of half its charm by their reckless extermination of all useful and beautiful wild things sometimes seek to champion them by saying the 'the game belongs to the people.' So it does; and not merely to the people now alive, but to the unborn people. The 'greatest good for the greatest number' applies to the number within the womb of time, compared to which those now alive form but an insignificant fraction. Our duty to the whole, including the unborn generations, bids us restrain an unprincipled present-day minority from wasting the heritage of these unborn generations. The movement for the conservation of wild life and the larger movement for the conservation of all our natural resources are essentially democratic in spirit, purpose, and method."
- Theodore Roosevelt c. 1916
This post was edited on 1/16/19 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:02 pm to Mr Wonderful
Kinda like Jackson Bienville right? LOL GTFO
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:06 pm to mylsuhat
quote:
Why on Earth would you want to relinquish public access
I’m just asking the question. I don’t hunt WMAs. So I don’t use them.
Why is the government in the land management business?
Eta: Ole Teddy loved the outdoors and loved to hunt. But he was a socialist. You know that right?
This post was edited on 1/16/19 at 1:08 pm
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:07 pm to Mr Wonderful
quote:
permanent decrease in the portion of the budget that pays to maintain those lands.
Sportsmen support LDWF, they get no money from the state.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:08 pm to Mr Wonderful
quote:
I’m just asking the question. I don’t hunt WMAs. So I don’t use them.
Why is the government in the land management business?
If you don't give Joe Public a cheap place to hunt, he is going to outlaw on your property.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:09 pm to Mr Wonderful
Here we go
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:09 pm to Mr Wonderful
By far the dumbest post I've seen on here. Its not necessarily for managing land, but to provide land for those to hunt who can't afford private land. Just because you don't use WMA,s doesn't mean majority of the state doesn't.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:10 pm to Mr Wonderful
quote:This is a very selfish way of looking at things
I don’t hunt WMAs. So I don’t use them.
quote:National Parks, National Forests, Wilderness Areas, and WMA's may be a form of socialism to some eyes but giving every day people the opportunity to go outside and enjoy nature is one of the great things America offers
Eta: Ole Teddy loved the outdoors and loved to hunt. But he was a socialist. You know that right?
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:10 pm to wickowick
quote:
Sportsmen support LDWF, they get no money from the state.
Same things goes in Alabama with the AWFF. Citizens of the state fund them
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:11 pm to Mr Wonderful
I want no part of the state or federal government selling what is mine - public land. The license sales pay for them to manage them not normal taxation, but they are and should be owned by the public, you me and everyone else. Selling them is very shortsighted and will result in further reduction of license sales. Selling them allows the state to use their immediate value on something else instead of managing them.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:12 pm to Boat Motor Bandit
quote:Was only public because the state leased the land from Weyerhauser. They quit paying, and the public could no longer use it freely.
Jackson Bienville
I for one am against privatizing any public land, but am definitely for allowing public land users to follow the same guidelines (seasons) as set by the state.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:14 pm to mylsuhat
quote:
National Parks, National Forests, Wilderness Areas, and WMA's may be a form of socialism to some eyes
No. Socialism is wealth redistribution by the goverment. Public lands are equally owned amongst all. Since no one person has a greater stake than the next, it is honestly the most democratic thing we have going and so uniquely American.
Selling public lands is akin to selling national monuments (some are both fwiw).
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:16 pm to Mr Wonderful
The timber companies have a ton of land already. Not sure the difference. They would probably just buy the WMA and add it to their holdings.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:16 pm to mylsuhat
quote:
I don’t hunt WMAs. So I don’t use them.
quote:
This is a very selfish way of looking at things
I agree, I hunt on private property mostly but I am still very thankful for the NWR's and WMA's that we are able to hunt on. I know several very poor families who main source of meat every year comes strictly from the deer that they kill on public land. I'll never get behind someone who advocates for taking that away from them, and I consider myself a very far right, fiscal conservative.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:17 pm to Mr Wonderful
They already do that. Recently did it with the Jackson/Bienville WMA
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:17 pm to wickowick
quote:
If you don't give Joe Public a cheap place to hunt, he is going to outlaw on your property.
You have a good point here.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:17 pm to Mr Wonderful
You realize that many state parks you can't hunt or have limited seasons right? There's a lot of reasons to have state and federal land outside of just for hunting and fishing.
Many of these lands are resting places for game for example. Many are breeding habitat, nesting habitat for birds. If you allowed it to be private it would be a disaster.
Lastly, many public lands get close to breaking even budget wise. Between license sales, passes whether it be yearly or daily, selling timber, etc.
Many of these lands are resting places for game for example. Many are breeding habitat, nesting habitat for birds. If you allowed it to be private it would be a disaster.
Lastly, many public lands get close to breaking even budget wise. Between license sales, passes whether it be yearly or daily, selling timber, etc.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:21 pm to Mr Wonderful
Go west of Texas and hunt public land sometime if you never have. Vast stretches of public land is an amazing thing and probably the greatest opportunity available as an American hunter.
Posted on 1/16/19 at 1:22 pm to Mr Wonderful
Does the state sell any of its timber on public lands? I have always thought the wildlife would be much better on WMAs if the timber had been managed better. I always see really big open woods. I admittedly have not been on a lot of WMAs so was hoping someone knew.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News