Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 151 to 169 of 169
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Hodale, Idaho
    Posts
    2,821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antlerradar View Post
    Would you be willing to pay a recreation fee to cover all the administration costs associated with recreation?
    Absolutely.
    I pay fees at campgrounds, boat ramps, state parks, national parks WMA's and refuge stamps I'm actually surprised we haven't be forced to take that route with the budget cuts these departments have seen

    [QUOTE]
    If you use public land you make an economic profit from public land.
    [QUOTE]

    So am l required to itemize my taxes or should I inquire about a w2 at the local BLM office?
    I wonder if I itemize, can I deduct my expenses relating to my "profit"?

    Ok come on, let's not be silly and act like me going hunting is the same as running hundreds or thousands of cattle as my family's income.
    “LET ME TELL YOU WHY PEOPLE LIVE IN IDAHO…THEY LIVE IN IDAHO BECAUSE THEY LOVE THEIR PUBLIC LANDS. THEY LIKE ACCESS TO THEM FOR RECREATION, FOR HUNTING AND FISHING, OR ALL THE ACTIVITIES THEY DO ON PUBLIC LANDS.”
    -U.S. Representative Mike Simpson

  2. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elkmagnet View Post
    I personally feel that's not the same thing as running a for profit highly consumptive industry without paying enough to cover the cost of administration. While paying organizations to lobby Congress and keep fees artificially low.
    Are you suggesting it's the same?

    I buy Christmas tree/firewood permits without batting an eye.
    I believe most game license fees should be higher

    Let's put it this way
    If the us department of agriculture stopped all grazing and all associated programs/costs today. I as a hunter would be happy to cover the budget surplus it would create
    I appreciate your response and after looking at what I wrote it appears that I came off somewhat argumentative
    , sorry that was not my intent.
    My point was that all Americans have the ability to access millions of acres for the virtually nothing. Incredible country that there is no way as the common man I could every hope to own as a private individual.
    I am a Range Manager for the Forest Service. Are there problems ? Absolutely. However the situation is not as bad as many think. The total number of AUMs has been cut in half since 1964, season long grazing has been replaced with rotations everywhere that I know about. Generally speaking when someone talks about a nuked out area usually that is a moment in time , not representative of the entire growing season.
    The grazing fee should be raised but for a myriad of reason trying to match private grazing fees is unrealistic., not the least of which is politics but also because comparing the two is apples to oranges.
    The best information that I have indicates that the grazing programs for BLM and FS run about 142 million in the hole, as a point of reference I have seen but not verified that recreation on the public runs around 350 million deficit.

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Handlebar View Post
    The best information that I have indicates that the grazing programs for BLM and FS run about 142 million in the hole, as a point of reference I have seen but not verified that recreation on the public runs around 350 million deficit.
    It would be interesting to see what actually makes up these numbers. Is road maintenance part of the $350 million, fire suppression, facilities maintenance, etc....

  4. Default

    Right now cattle are kind of needed to help control fuels and graze fire breaks. I'm all for reintroducing bison. It has never made sense to me that we shoot and kill off thousnds of bison coming out of Yellowstone which could be a cheap, good, healthy meat source so we can allow grazing for beef we have to pay $5.99-$10.99 a pound for in the store.
    Last edited by Firedude; 06-13-2018 at 09:59 AM.

  5. #155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Handlebar View Post
    I appreciate your response and after looking at what I wrote it appears that I came off somewhat argumentative
    , sorry that was not my intent.
    My point was that all Americans have the ability to access millions of acres for the virtually nothing. Incredible country that there is no way as the common man I could every hope to own as a private individual.
    I am a Range Manager for the Forest Service. Are there problems ? Absolutely. However the situation is not as bad as many think. The total number of AUMs has been cut in half since 1964, season long grazing has been replaced with rotations everywhere that I know about. Generally speaking when someone talks about a nuked out area usually that is a moment in time , not representative of the entire growing season.
    The grazing fee should be raised but for a myriad of reason trying to match private grazing fees is unrealistic., not the least of which is politics but also because comparing the two is apples to oranges.
    The best information that I have indicates that the grazing programs for BLM and FS run about 142 million in the hole, as a point of reference I have seen but not verified that recreation on the public runs around 350 million deficit.
    Good info. Thanks for sharing.
    Live to work or work to live... Your choice

    Rockin' HT's 2017 MLB Champion - Hall of Famer. Giving Pete Rose a run for his $$$

  6. #156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigHornRam View Post
    Because cows taste better. Nothing is stopping you from putting a couple bison on your spread and showing us all how its done.
    Would argue that cows don't taste better than bison, but that corn fed tastes better (to some) than grass fed. We have done the Pepsi challenge with a big group of non hunter friends; elk, grass fed beef, corn fed beef, and bear (all the same prep, except the bear) . The unanimous results were corn fed, bear, elk, grass fed.

    Ever had elk at restaurants, doesn't taste a thing like wild elk as they often finish those elk with corn.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    "Land of Giant Rams"
    Posts
    5,016

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wllm1313 View Post
    Would argue that cows don't taste better than bison, but that corn fed tastes better (to some) than grass fed. We have done the Pepsi challenge with a big group of non hunter friends; elk, grass fed beef, corn fed beef, and bear (all the same prep, except the bear) . The unanimous results were corn fed, bear, elk, grass fed.

    Ever had elk at restaurants, doesn't taste a thing like wild elk as they often finish those elk with corn.
    Go back and read my post again. I was saying cows taste better than woofs. Bison meat is fine. Woofs not really.

    I then went on to challenge Tony to raise some bison and show us how its done. Probably would make a good tax write off for him. Guess I should have started a new paragraph to make it more clear.
    Wood is Good treefarmsystem.org

  8. #158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigHornRam View Post
    Go back and read my post again. I was saying cows taste better than woofs. Bison meat is fine. Woofs not really.

    I then went on to challenge Tony to raise some bison and show us how its done. Probably would make a good tax write off for him. Guess I should have started a new paragraph to make it more clear.

    Ya and leave me out of your stupidity Paul.
    Last edited by tjones; 06-13-2018 at 11:58 AM.
    “In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is freedom, in water there is bacteria.”

    ― Benjamin Franklin

  9. #159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigHornRam View Post
    Go back and read my post again. I was saying cows taste better than woofs. Bison meat is fine. Woofs not really.
    Nope I re-read it twice, you are clearly a shill for the beef lobby.


    Would if be the internet if you didn't quickly read a post, misconstrue the position and then make a comment?

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Hodale, Idaho
    Posts
    2,821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Handlebar View Post
    I appreciate your response and after looking at what I wrote it appears that I came off somewhat argumentative
    , sorry that was not my intent.
    My point was that all Americans have the ability to access millions of acres for the virtually nothing. Incredible country that there is no way as the common man I could every hope to own as a private individual.
    I am a Range Manager for the Forest Service. Are there problems ? Absolutely. However the situation is not as bad as many think. The total number of AUMs has been cut in half since 1964, season long grazing has been replaced with rotations everywhere that I know about. Generally speaking when someone talks about a nuked out area usually that is a moment in time , not representative of the entire growing season.
    The grazing fee should be raised but for a myriad of reason trying to match private grazing fees is unrealistic., not the least of which is politics but also because comparing the two is apples to oranges.
    I agree 100%
    I am also very aware of the glass house.
    The best information that I have indicates that the grazing programs for BLM and FS run about 142 million in the hole, as a point of reference I have seen but not verified that recreation on the public runs around 350 million deficit.
    I too would like to see the numbers broke down a little if at all possible. The first thing that comes to mind is what side does invasive weed control fall under? Why?

    But for the sake of discussion I'll use those numbers
    Part of the problem with throwing 142 and 350 out is you loose context.
    Ranching is a paid for profit on public ground. It's also very limited in participation you basically have to be born into it.
    What is the cost per rancher owner?
    Why are these ranches not sustainable at a higher cost per aum yet permits are in such high demand and valed at a higher cost when sold by anyone other that the us government?
    The average American has very little or no chance of participation but still pays the bill.
    Recreation on the other hand is open to a plethora of Americans and participation is infinitely diverse.
    I can't even imagine how many people recreate on public ground in a year.
    So.
    How many Americans were able to recreate for 350mill in cost?
    What was the total cost per user?

    What I'm asking is if [325 million Americans pay $1 each to pay for the recreation of say 100million people. While having the option to recreate themselves.]
    Isn't that easier to swallow than
    [325million people paying $.50 each to support say around 19,000 ranchers. While being excluded from participation.]
    And we are still ignoring the bison.
    “LET ME TELL YOU WHY PEOPLE LIVE IN IDAHO…THEY LIVE IN IDAHO BECAUSE THEY LOVE THEIR PUBLIC LANDS. THEY LIKE ACCESS TO THEM FOR RECREATION, FOR HUNTING AND FISHING, OR ALL THE ACTIVITIES THEY DO ON PUBLIC LANDS.”
    -U.S. Representative Mike Simpson

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Hodale, Idaho
    Posts
    2,821

    Default

    Also I hope I'm not coming off in a obtuse manner I am just trying to convey my thoughts with very limited writing skills
    “LET ME TELL YOU WHY PEOPLE LIVE IN IDAHO…THEY LIVE IN IDAHO BECAUSE THEY LOVE THEIR PUBLIC LANDS. THEY LIKE ACCESS TO THEM FOR RECREATION, FOR HUNTING AND FISHING, OR ALL THE ACTIVITIES THEY DO ON PUBLIC LANDS.”
    -U.S. Representative Mike Simpson

  12. Default

    Invasive weeds generally come out of the range budget. Although there is a funding source that comes from timber sales but must only be used in the timber sale area.
    There are many activities that is paid for profit on public lands, timber, minerals, outfitter and guiding etc. virtually al of these are limited participation, and yes you have to be born into it or make millions of dollars to get into , however there iis less than 2% of the population in agriculture to begin with.

    I am fine with bison in fact I have an allotment on my district that is bison, but if you think that I fyou replace cows with bison and you won't have overgrazing or degraded water/riparian areas , I'm sorry but you are deluding yourself.

  13. #163

    Default

    Handlebar, do you have a reference for the $350 million deficit? I am really curious as I have always heard there are studies that show economic gain from public land rather than a deficit. I don't have them at my fingertips or I would post them.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Hodale, Idaho
    Posts
    2,821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Handlebar View Post
    .
    There are many activities that is paid for profit on public lands, timber, minerals, outfitter and guiding etc. virtually al of these are limited participation, and yes you have to be born into it or make millions of dollars to get into , however there iis less than 2% of the population in agriculture to begin with.
    That's why im saying there is no reason for any industry to operate at a cost to the taxpayer while they are profiting.
    I feel the same about shed's (which I pick up more than my fair share of) and personally think should be illegal to sale.
    Also morel's? I hear there is a market?
    The bison should be reintroduced no matter the impact it's one of the greatest crimes against nature that we have been responsible for. The kicker is that we are still in a position to minimize the damages but a hand full of citizens have the power to stop it.
    Of course my personal idea of how things should be is a utopian dream stated just for discussion and not my expected reality.
    “LET ME TELL YOU WHY PEOPLE LIVE IN IDAHO…THEY LIVE IN IDAHO BECAUSE THEY LOVE THEIR PUBLIC LANDS. THEY LIKE ACCESS TO THEM FOR RECREATION, FOR HUNTING AND FISHING, OR ALL THE ACTIVITIES THEY DO ON PUBLIC LANDS.”
    -U.S. Representative Mike Simpson

  15. Default

    I don't have that reference handy, so I am on shakey ground there, if I remember correctly it was study done by a University of Virginia professor. I will look to see if I can find. I am certain that you are right that there is economic gain to the economy as a whole from outdoor recreation, however there is a cost to the agencies to run those programs. the same argument could be made about grazing programs or any.
    For example where I work, 65 permittees run cattle on summer grass, what would be the impact if those were eliminated. Not just to the individuals but to the supporting cast not just local but within 200 miles of us. Again I am not disputing the price of the AUM fee itself. Granted this does not rise to national in scope but rather local.

    elkmagnet, your point about no industry operating at a cost to the taxpayer while they are profiting is a valid one. We could look beyond natural resources and see that government has privileged many industries not just ag.

    As far as reintroduction of bison.. that idea was put out there many years ago with a book called the Buffalo Commons by a husband and wife by the name Popper (?) The idea has appeal to many but in a country of 325 million I just don't see how you would do it with out forced resettlement of populations in the prairie states. Ironic that we would do that all over again. Although there are bison in Yellowstone and other areas it really is a prairie animal not a mountain one.
    On a side note while I agree with you that the destruction of the vast buffalo herds was a crime. I would argue that the decimation of the millions of beaver had as much if not more impact to western landscapes than any other single thing.

  16. #166

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Handlebar View Post
    Invasive weeds generally come out of the range budget. Although there is a funding source that comes from timber sales but must only be used in the timber sale area.
    There are many activities that is paid for profit on public lands, timber, minerals, outfitter and guiding etc. virtually al of these are limited participation, and yes you have to be born into it or make millions of dollars to get into , however there iis less than 2% of the population in agriculture to begin with.

    I am fine with bison in fact I have an allotment on my district that is bison, but if you think that I fyou replace cows with bison and you won't have overgrazing or degraded water/riparian areas , I'm sorry but you are deluding yourself.
    I agree 100% on the bison comment regarding overgrazing/degraded water. I hunt an area that has a bison allotment and it's an absolute disaster. I used to see many elk in there, and it was consistently a great bow hunting spot. 3 years ago the bison ranch got a new manager and he started to use the allotment....it's gone downhill and the overgrazing is absolutely awful. I've been in support of rotational grazing and responsible grazing, but that Bison allotment is the worst chunk of the mountain range.

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    "Land of Giant Rams"
    Posts
    5,016

    Default

    Bad news for the O P. The president is "all cattle, and no hat" according to Chuck.

    https://youtu.be/FNaoQldeuJA.

    Chuck, you're a meatstick!
    Wood is Good treefarmsystem.org

  18. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elkmagnet View Post
    Also morel's? I hear there is a market?
    A big market around here. Usually sell between $25 - $50 a pound.

  19. #169

    Default

    All in moderation, remember that public lands are managed for all and multiple uses.... Some time cattle are used to reach management goals. I've been hunting in a National Wilderness Area in Colorado once an there was cattle in a portion of the wilderness.... That was a little annoying to me but that's it
    To what avail are forty freedoms without a blank spot on the map?

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •