one wolf dead!

[idahohuntr]

I think you tell so many lies you are having a hard time keeping track of the truth...for example another lie is you saying I ever supported "blazing roads through private property to access public property".  Life is easier if you just stick to the truth...then you don't have to track your web of lies and misinformation.

[KFhunter]

I think you tell so many lies you are having a hard time keeping track of the truth...for example another lie is you saying I ever supported "blazing roads through private property to access public property".  Life is easier if you just stick to the truth...then you don't have to track your web of lies and misinformation.

yup you're correct, those were my words.


Here's your words:

I think we need serious revision to hunter access programs in this state and at the federal level we need to make sure every piece of public land is accessible to the public and not landlocked by some jerk with a 50,000 acre ranch.


Guess my memory hasn't failed me 

[idahohuntr]

Gee...quote that again, I missed where I said "blaze roads through private property".  Access and blazing roads are 2 different things KF...but its clear you don't understand the issue.  That doesn't really matter though, I would just appreciate if you quit posting lies about what I actually said. 

[timberfaller]

Wow, splitting hairs now are we??

Interesting debate!

So I'll ask a couple of questions, How do you suppose, to MAKE "access" to public land if land locked by some Legal land owner? if roads aren't available.

Private land owners(jerks as you call them) PAY taxes to the government for just OWNING it.  Their lively hood is attached to said land(which usually means MORE taxes to pay). LOTS of people don't "respect" private lands by how they treat it and leave it.

I am assuming by your post, idaho, you don't believe the "owner" of said land has a RIGHT to say what happens or who steps on his/her land??  Is that right?

Inquiring minds would like to know.

[idahohuntr]

Timber, please do not follow the lead of KF and twist what I say into these exaggerated lies.  Nowhere did I equate all landowners as "jerks"...its absurd for you to even suggest this.  I presume you are a landowner?

To answer your question, an access easement does not require a road.  Such an easement across private land can be for foot traffic only and requires no alteration or disturbance to the private land...folks like me that see 10-15,000 acres of public land with great elk and deer hunting on it think...gee...maybe the public should have access to their land just like if a private landowner has a chunk of ground surrounded on all sides by private land.  Not road/motorized/etc. access...just legal foot access would be fine with me.      

 

[VarmintVentilator]

Unfortnately because of the all the media attention, this whole situation is a lose, lose for everyone involved.  The rancher and WDFW.  But I'm not sure where the information came from that the state of Washingtion hired a hunter, aka sniper, aka sharpshooter when he is already there employee.     Hope this thing gets resolved soon, so things can quiet down, (at least until the next eruption.)

[wolfbait]

Unfortnately because of the all the media attention, this whole situation is a lose, lose for everyone involved.  The rancher and WDFW.  But I'm not sure where the information came from that the state of Washingtion hired a hunter, aka sniper, aka sharpshooter when he is already there employee.     Hope this thing gets resolved soon, so things can quiet down, (at least until the next eruption.)

About the only one who is and will have a loss is the rancher, environmentalists will wail about the poor wolves, begging money to save them, and WDFW will drag this out just like they did with the Wedge. Anyone who still thinks WDFW care about hunters etc. need only look at the wolf plan and uncontrolled predators.

WDFW like the media as their supporters are pro-wolf.

[Earshot]

No one is talking about the deer population in this area. I have hunted on and around this property for years and last year saw a dramatic drop in the deer population. It was so bad that We are looking for an alternative hunting location for this year. Only saw one legal buck in the time we were there and a hand full of does.

"Wolves we don't need no stinking wolves"

[timberfaller]

Wolves and Coyotes SHOULD have one thing in common!  Open season year around

Canada will always have enough to share.  Those who want to hunt them can and those who think the lovely and cuddly can go and take pictures too.

[demontang]

Untell the hunters unite and stop battling each other the pro wolf people will get there way. Knowledge and accurate knowledge at that needs to be spread before we can get anywhere.02.  The wolves we have are the wrong one for starting arguement bigger and more agressive.

[wolfbait]

Untell the hunters unite and stop battling each other the pro wolf people will get there way. Knowledge and accurate knowledge at that needs to be spread before we can get anywhere.02.  The wolves we have are the wrong one for starting arguement bigger and more agressive.

By now most hunters etc. have united as one over wolf management/control, those you see on W-H and elsewhere who fail to recognize the impact wolves have had on the game herds etc. after 18 years, are not your average hunters, if they are hunters at all. These people either have drank the greenie cool-aid and are basically brain-washed, or they are benefitting from wolves in one way or another.

The problem we as hunters etc. have is mainstream media will not report the other side of the wolf issue, so other then word of mouth we don't get too much coverage.

Yellowstone is Dead  Yellowstone is Dead
Yellowstone is Dead Theatrical Trailer  Yellowstone is Dead Theatrical Trailer

 

[nwwanderer]

One legally taken wolf gets more press than all of the dozens of privately owned, valuable, cattle, sheep, guard dogs, and pets combined.  Timberfaller has it right, 365 and 24/7 wolf take on private land.  If the feds and DNR can garner public support for different management on there land, more power to them.  Grazing on millions of acres of public land is a tool that has benefit if used properly.  State owned wildlife on private land is becoming more and more a risk and cost that the state talks about but does little.  Ask the land owners in the Skagit Valley about elk, private land grazers in Stevens county about predators, grain farmers about deer, elk and turkey losses and the performance of the agencies involved rarely gets a passing grade.  The solutions require communication and understanding of complicated systems and issues not control mentalities.

[buglebrush]

Timber, please do not follow the lead of KF and twist what I say into these exaggerated lies.  Nowhere did I equate all landowners as "jerks"...its absurd for you to even suggest this.  I presume you are a landowner?

To answer your question, an access easement does not require a road.  Such an easement across private land can be for foot traffic only and requires no alteration or disturbance to the private land...folks like me that see 10-15,000 acres of public land with great elk and deer hunting on it think...gee...maybe the public should have access to their land just like if a private landowner has a chunk of ground surrounded on all sides by private land.  Not road/motorized/etc. access...just legal foot access would be fine with me.   

Big time slippery slope to mandate that a private landowner has to give access of any kind.  BAD IDEA!   My family owned several hundred acres backed up to NF growing up, and it was a constant battle keeping people out.   I am a huge proponent of property rights.  They are already screwing landowners enough with building permits, property taxes, etc....  However, if you have some property you have worked your butt off and poured your money into for the past forty years, and want to allow public access be my guest.  Just don't try to force your view on those of us who have worked our butts off building what we've got.   

[idahohuntr]

Timber, please do not follow the lead of KF and twist what I say into these exaggerated lies.  Nowhere did I equate all landowners as "jerks"...its absurd for you to even suggest this.  I presume you are a landowner?

To answer your question, an access easement does not require a road.  Such an easement across private land can be for foot traffic only and requires no alteration or disturbance to the private land...folks like me that see 10-15,000 acres of public land with great elk and deer hunting on it think...gee...maybe the public should have access to their land just like if a private landowner has a chunk of ground surrounded on all sides by private land.  Not road/motorized/etc. access...just legal foot access would be fine with me.   

Big time slippery slope to mandate that a private landowner has to give access of any kind.  BAD IDEA!   My family owned several hundred acres backed up to NF growing up, and it was a constant battle keeping people out.   I am a huge proponent of property rights.  They are already screwing landowners enough with building permits, property taxes, etc....  However, if you have some property you have worked your butt off and poured your money into for the past forty years, and want to allow public access be my guest.  Just don't try to force your view on those of us who have worked our butts off building what we've got.   

If you buy/own a chunk of private land you must have legal access to your property...that is, your neighbors can not landlock you out of your property.  So in a private/private land ownership situation, a private landowner does have to give access...that is law...so there is no slippery slope...its already mandated.  All I would like is for that same right to extend to publicly owned lands.   

[KFhunter]

Timber, please do not follow the lead of KF and twist what I say into these exaggerated lies.  Nowhere did I equate all landowners as "jerks"...its absurd for you to even suggest this.  I presume you are a landowner?

To answer your question, an access easement does not require a road.  Such an easement across private land can be for foot traffic only and requires no alteration or disturbance to the private land...folks like me that see 10-15,000 acres of public land with great elk and deer hunting on it think...gee...maybe the public should have access to their land just like if a private landowner has a chunk of ground surrounded on all sides by private land.  Not road/motorized/etc. access...just legal foot access would be fine with me.   

Big time slippery slope to mandate that a private landowner has to give access of any kind.  BAD IDEA!   My family owned several hundred acres backed up to NF growing up, and it was a constant battle keeping people out.   I am a huge proponent of property rights.  They are already screwing landowners enough with building permits, property taxes, etc....  However, if you have some property you have worked your butt off and poured your money into for the past forty years, and want to allow public access be my guest.  Just don't try to force your view on those of us who have worked our butts off building what we've got.   

If you buy/own a chunk of private land you must have legal access to your property...that is, your neighbors can not landlock you out of your property.  So in a private/private land ownership situation, a private landowner does have to give access...that is law...so there is no slippery slope...its already mandated.  All I would like is for that same right to extend to publicly owned lands.

IE: blaze roads through private property.  (I'll let the readers decide if I'm the liar here)


We should get back to talking about the sheep farmer and his wolf problem.