Bill to Open inaccessible, landlocked federal lands

[grundy53]

KFHunter, you keep talking about small parcels of DNR land. That's not what this bill is about. It's about large blocks of FEDERAL land, not state.

Land ownership, easements, real estate in general...not really KF's strong suit.

I disagree, you've got one instance your basing your entire judgement on.  I can identify dozens of people just like myself, small property owners with a DNR road through their land and small chunk of state land at the end no one can access but the adjacent owners and DNR. 

It is very untrue that most of these folks are "welfare" anything.  Idahohntr and folks of his ilk like to take the 1% and use that to politicize an issue, it's bait and switch,  it's politi' speak.  It's a lie.

I've got one instance of a landowner I requested permission from and whose "no" I respected.

I have hundreds if not thousands of hours of looking at maps and seeing one single strip of private land blocking huge swaths of public land as running into the locked gate plus posting signs on said gate. Very rarely do I see a multitude of small landowners blocking any material amount of public land. Yes there's a square mile here and there but not what most of us are complaining about.

Bean - You live in Arizona if I recall?  I think the issue is in part (certainly not all) that folks like KF and Grundy don't understand the magnitude of this issue in large western states with significant public lands.  This is not about a multitude of landowners surrounding a small chunk of state ground which is probably the extent of the problem in Wa.  The core of the issue is large, single landowners, surrounding square miles of public land, using it for themselves for free.  Of the estimated millions of acres that are landlocked, what Bean and I are describing is not just a small slice of the issue...its the vast majority.  It is not the 1% as KF describes it...again, it is pretty apparent to me that a few folks just are not up to speed on this issue based on their statements.  I would probably be more in line with their thinking if this issue was about finding access to a 500 acre block of land that has 15 landowners surrounding it.

I don't care as much about the 500 or 1000 acre pieces that have a myriad of landowners surrounding the property...I am concerned about the millions of acres in several square mile blocks that are completely surrounded by 1 or 2 landowners.  My experience...when you have a dozen landowners that have access to the public property...access is pretty easy.  When you only have 1 guy that controls access...he can get a premium.

You're right. I'm just a simpleton that has never left this state or researched other states.... How condescending can you possibly get? I support property rights for all land owners. No matter their size. I've also discussed various solutions including ones that would put a stop to these large land owners using these vast public lands to their benefit.

[grundy53]

I wouldn't have a problem with a bill that prevented monetary gain off federal lands by preventing access without a trespass fee.
Don't prevent monetary gain off the private land, but if the hunter crosses into federal land then no money can exchange hands.

Perhaps then that owning that long strip of scrub land wouldn't be so lucrative and access can be gained in an ethical legal manner.


 

[KFhunter]

I wouldn't have a problem with a bill that prevented monetary gain off federal lands by preventing access without a trespass fee.
Don't prevent monetary gain off the private land, but if the hunter crosses into federal land then no money can exchange hands.

Perhaps then that owning that long strip of scrub land wouldn't be so lucrative and access can be gained in an ethical legal manner.
 

That is somewhat in line with folks who have suggested closing lands to everyone if there is not public access.  It may provide the leverage to incentivize more cooperation from all sides  ...if the kids can't play nice the toys all get put away 

Thanks for being honest,  I was under no delusions this was only a federal issue nor that it would stay there.  DNR will be involved, then the 1% comment I made would be validated. 

Even if DNR land was involved, your 1% comment is still way off base.  All the landlocked DNR land in all of WA state would not amount to a pimple on the backside of the monstrosity of federal lands off limits.

nice try to twist it again. 

The few 1% of people blocking those massive chunks of federal lands aren't even a pimple on the amount of private land holders blocking many smaller chunks of government held lands.

[Bean Counter]

The welfare thing has been usually applied to ranchers with public land grazing leases.  "welfare rancher" is a term used by the pro-wolf and/or eco warrior crowd a lot.

Idk all the minutiae of the wolf debates so I'll take your word for it. I don't think such a denotation is off base. If I inherited 15 acres that has three head of cattle, a water tank, and a road + locked gate on it and I get paid $200,000 annually by Doyle Moss' crew to let only his hunters though so they can get their "100% public land elk" what would you call that?

[bobcat]

The few 1% of people blocking those massive chunks of federal lands aren't even a pimple on the amount of private land holders blocking many smaller chunks of government held lands.

But see, the ones we want access to are those huge chunks of public land, mostly in states other than Washington- Arizona, Wyoming, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Utah. Where the adjacent landowners are getting rich by charging trespass fees and/or leasing hunting rights to outfitters, to hunt PUBLIC LAND!

[idahohuntr]

I don't believe for a second you'd be wholly satisfied with your egregious example,  and if it's true then so be it..
Plenty of other people would be interested in obtaining access to a whole patchwork of state and other federal lands.  This opens the floodgates.

Yes, that is certainly possible I guess.  I mean who wants to live in a world where guys like bobcat can access a chunk of state ground next to his house?  For crying out loud - next thing you now he will probably want to take one of his kids out on that land to hunt with him    I can see exactly why we need to stop this non-sense.  The audacity of people wanting to access public lands. 

[Bean Counter]

My ugly mug is glued to the maps so much that I can think of 3 or 4 really good examples right off the top of my head  I'm about to post up when I can find my map. Id like to see some of your examples, KF. Having a hard time believing your claim. 

[KFhunter]

The welfare thing has been usually applied to ranchers with public land grazing leases.  "welfare rancher" is a term used by the pro-wolf and/or eco warrior crowd a lot.

Idk all the minutiae of the wolf debates so I'll take your word for it. I don't think such a denotation is off base. If I inherited 15 acres that has three head of cattle, a water tank, and a road + locked gate on it and I get paid $200,000 annually by Doyle Moss' crew to let only his hunters though so they can get their "100% public land elk" what would you call that?

Unfair business practice, and that's how it should be handled.  No one wants to talk about that yet I don't see any other ideas floated by people in favor of seizing private property.

[KFhunter]

My ugly mug is glued to the maps so much that I can think of 3 or 4 really good examples right off the top of my head  I'm about to post up when I can find my map. Id like to see some of your examples, KF. Having a hard time believing your claim.

Honesty and integrity is extremely important to me, that said, I'm not going to help you out.  Now that I really start thinking on it the landowners possibly affected should DNR lands come to play far exceed the dozen I originally stated.  I may have to move my figures up.

[KFhunter]

I don't believe for a second you'd be wholly satisfied with your egregious example,  and if it's true then so be it..
Plenty of other people would be interested in obtaining access to a whole patchwork of state and other federal lands.  This opens the floodgates.

Yes, that is certainly possible I guess.  I mean who wants to live in a world where guys like bobcat can access a chunk of state ground next to his house?  For crying out loud - next thing you now he will probably want to take one of his kids out on that land to hunt with him    I can see exactly why we need to stop this non-sense.  The audacity of people wanting to access public lands. 

I love exposing fraud

[idahohuntr]

I don't believe for a second you'd be wholly satisfied with your egregious example,  and if it's true then so be it..
Plenty of other people would be interested in obtaining access to a whole patchwork of state and other federal lands.  This opens the floodgates.

Yes, that is certainly possible I guess.  I mean who wants to live in a world where guys like bobcat can access a chunk of state ground next to his house?  For crying out loud - next thing you now he will probably want to take one of his kids out on that land to hunt with him    I can see exactly why we need to stop this non-sense.  The audacity of people wanting to access public lands. 

I love exposing fraud

What fraud did you expose?  I merely agreed that someone could possibly build on the success of the current bill and extend it to state lands via state legislative process.  Looks like your understanding of fraud is up there with your knowledge of easements 

[Bean Counter]

I'll need to look through another map later, but here's one so you get the idea. A size of the pencil shown against the scale so you get the idea the amount of land one piddly "rancher" can control. I honestly don't give a damn whether they're selling the access or not. Or even if they hunt or not. If its public land, they should not be able to restrict access like they can. I'll team up with liberals, anti hunters, or anybody to destroy property rights before nodding in conformity to this kind of crap.

Not sure how anyone can sleep at night and call anything other than looking at this. 

[grundy53]

I don't believe for a second you'd be wholly satisfied with your egregious example,  and if it's true then so be it..
Plenty of other people would be interested in obtaining access to a whole patchwork of state and other federal lands.  This opens the floodgates.

Yes, that is certainly possible I guess.  I mean who wants to live in a world where guys like bobcat can access a chunk of state ground next to his house?  For crying out loud - next thing you now he will probably want to take one of his kids out on that land to hunt with him    I can see exactly why we need to stop this non-sense.  The audacity of people wanting to access public lands. 

I love exposing fraud

What fraud did you expose?  I merely agreed that someone could possibly build on the success of the current bill and extend it to state lands via state legislative process.  Looks like your understanding of fraud is up there with your knowledge of easements 

The breadth of your condescension is impressive. Have you ever thought of having a conversation with people instead of talking down to them?

[grundy53]

I'll need to look through another map later, but here's one so you get the idea. A size of the pencil shown against the scale so you get the idea the amount of land one piddly "rancher" can control. I honestly don't give a damn whether they're selling the access or not. Or even if they hunt or not. If its public land, they should not be able to restrict access like they can. I'll team up with liberals, anti hunters, or anybody to destroy property rights before nodding in conformity to this kind of crap.

Not sure how anyone can sleep at night and call anything other than looking at this. 

Why don't we just get rid of all privately held property? Let the government own everything. Add a sickle and hammer to the stars and stripes....

[logger]

Having been on the other end of this issue, I tried to get easment through federal land once and it never happened, 3 years of negotiation and was told they are not in the easement business and it was never going to happen. 376 ft worth, needless to say I am for the landowners rights, the f.s had the right to tell me to hit the road, they did thats how it is so that deal runs both ways people.