Free: Contests & Raffles.
If the rich can keep the public lands for them selves in your republic then you can keep your republic.I hope they get all the support needed to knock these land barons down a notch.
The rich can't keep you out. You can go in through the air if you so chose to. I'm just glad what you are hoping for won't happen in my lifetime. Some easements may be purchased for willing seller which would be great. But property owners will not be forced to give out easements.
Quote from: Gringo31 on March 18, 2015, 04:57:19 PMQuoteIt's not a cry for socialism, but public access to public property. Saying that life isn't fair is a cop out. People have access to public property. Some might require a helicopter. You can't blame the guy for not wanting to create a road through his property. We have property rights in this country. I can't cut across your yard to get to mine. It is what it is. I understand people wanting it, but I respect our rights over some peoples wants.I agree. Private property is private. Though I'm sure they're happy to let law enforcement on there when they want something fixed on their private preserve. If a landowner doesn't want a road on their land, they shouldn't be forced to have one. They should be forced to pay exorbitant taxes through the nose if they prevent access to public lands though. I'd also have no problem with them being given an offer to buy said public land, pay the land taxes on it, and manage it themselves. I'll team up with socialists and wolf huggers before seeing it the other way.
QuoteIt's not a cry for socialism, but public access to public property. Saying that life isn't fair is a cop out. People have access to public property. Some might require a helicopter. You can't blame the guy for not wanting to create a road through his property. We have property rights in this country. I can't cut across your yard to get to mine. It is what it is. I understand people wanting it, but I respect our rights over some peoples wants.
It's not a cry for socialism, but public access to public property. Saying that life isn't fair is a cop out.
Quote from: idahohuntr on March 17, 2015, 09:36:28 PMSome states have proposed bills doing what you guys suggest...they proposed closing landlocked lands to hunting for everyone. Those state bills and federal bills like what I posted are becoming an increasingly regular occurrence in legislative chambers. Things don't change overnight but the trend is very encouraging. I think the days of a select few keeping public resources to themselves are numbered. Probably one of the biggest developments that will advance this kind of legislation is the advance in GPS technologies...particularly all those OnX maps. The masses are becoming educated about just how many millions of acres are locked up for a privileged few...and as access and crowding on public lands continues to dominate the challenges of recruiting and retaining hunters the political appetite for doing nothing to address these millions of landlocked public acres will dwindle rapidly. translation: We want to blaze a road through your private land contrary to the founding principals of this nation. I'm all for mutual agreement, I'm for spending money to see a mutual agreement is made but I must draw the line at forced easements or eminent domain anything. I know you're going to say a trail or footpath will suffice but that's disinformation of a political nature. Existing roads will be transferred from limited access to open access in most cases, some might be trails or footpaths - but the majority will be as described, a road open to all. thankfully the tree hugger crowd isn't for increased access so no I don't see this gaining traction on a big scale. The current leadership wants less people on less land.
Some states have proposed bills doing what you guys suggest...they proposed closing landlocked lands to hunting for everyone. Those state bills and federal bills like what I posted are becoming an increasingly regular occurrence in legislative chambers. Things don't change overnight but the trend is very encouraging. I think the days of a select few keeping public resources to themselves are numbered. Probably one of the biggest developments that will advance this kind of legislation is the advance in GPS technologies...particularly all those OnX maps. The masses are becoming educated about just how many millions of acres are locked up for a privileged few...and as access and crowding on public lands continues to dominate the challenges of recruiting and retaining hunters the political appetite for doing nothing to address these millions of landlocked public acres will dwindle rapidly.
Quote from: KFhunter on March 18, 2015, 05:41:56 PMQuote from: idahohuntr on March 17, 2015, 09:36:28 PMSome states have proposed bills doing what you guys suggest...they proposed closing landlocked lands to hunting for everyone. Those state bills and federal bills like what I posted are becoming an increasingly regular occurrence in legislative chambers. Things don't change overnight but the trend is very encouraging. I think the days of a select few keeping public resources to themselves are numbered. Probably one of the biggest developments that will advance this kind of legislation is the advance in GPS technologies...particularly all those OnX maps. The masses are becoming educated about just how many millions of acres are locked up for a privileged few...and as access and crowding on public lands continues to dominate the challenges of recruiting and retaining hunters the political appetite for doing nothing to address these millions of landlocked public acres will dwindle rapidly. translation: We want to blaze a road through your private land contrary to the founding principals of this nation. I'm all for mutual agreement, I'm for spending money to see a mutual agreement is made but I must draw the line at forced easements or eminent domain anything. I know you're going to say a trail or footpath will suffice but that's disinformation of a political nature. Existing roads will be transferred from limited access to open access in most cases, some might be trails or footpaths - but the majority will be as described, a road open to all. thankfully the tree hugger crowd isn't for increased access so no I don't see this gaining traction on a big scale. The current leadership wants less people on less land.
So just because a guy owns land that happens to border public land you think he should be taxed more if he doesn't want a bunch of strangers on his property? That is one of the most un-American things I have ever read on here. How the heck should it be the land owners problem that the government ended up with landlocked land?
Im done with this thread,You feel how you feel I feel how I feel it wont change.I have no pitty on the land barons that have taken large tracks of land from people 100 years ago for rail roads,farms,cattle or whatever.It was mostly by force.Thats how some select few ended up with so much land.You all talk about saving the planet for our grandchildren,Well how are we gonna make sure they have land to enjoy it on?
Wow. How quickly you shed your conservative skin and hop in bed with the socialists...
There's NO need to force easements. None. Just close federal lands that are land locked and no general access can be found. No one has to give up an inch of dirt, they just can't use those blocks of land either. Their home is still their castle and the landlocked blocks treat all the public the same too, no access for anyone.
Quote from: cboom on March 18, 2015, 06:16:21 PMSo just because a guy owns land that happens to border public land you think he should be taxed more if he doesn't want a bunch of strangers on his property? That is one of the most un-American things I have ever read on here. How the heck should it be the land owners problem that the government ended up with landlocked land? Nobody said that landowners should be punished extra just for being landowners. I personally am advocating punitive taxes for landowners whose property landlocks public land who don't grant a public easement. It's not about remaining on their land, it's about passing though. "Trample all over their land" is likewise disingenuous. I don't think any of the hunters here who are advocating for an easement would object to a road that is lined on big sides by a 15 foot high fence with razor wire at the top.
