SUBSCRIBE | NEWSLETTERS | MAPS | VIDEOS | BLOGS | MARKETPLACE | CONTESTS
TRY BACKPACKER FREE!
SUBSCRIBE NOW and get
2 Free Issues and 3 Free Gifts!
Full Name:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email: (required)
If I like it and decide to continue, I'll pay just $12.00, and receive a full one-year subscription (9 issues in all), a 73% savings off the newsstand price! If for any reason I decide not to continue, I'll write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing.
Your subscription includes 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Or click here to pay now and get 2 extra issues
Offer valid in US only.


» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

 

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: Utah or the Feds...?  (public lands)< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 1
rangersven Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3543
Joined: Jul. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 2:33 am  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Can the state of Utah do a better jon than the Fed at managing public land...???

http://www.deseretnews.com/article....cy.html


--------------
"Backpacker.com's Original Provocateur"
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 2
tarol Search for posts by this member.
Well I never!
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 11041
Joined: Mar. 2003
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 9:21 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Utah wants to drill and mine

"Lands with less aesthetic or recreational qualities that contain resources will become more accessible for development and revenue production."


--------------
Got elevation? www.tarol.com
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 3
hbfa Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 8222
Joined: Feb. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 11:12 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I'm not buying what she's trying to sell in the article.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 4
tomas Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2953
Joined: Oct. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 11:31 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

So her argument boils down to this sentence about federal public lands.

"While land is rich in timber and mineral resources, production efforts are either precluded entirely or greatly limited by regulations, endless administrative red tape and lawsuits brought by interest groups that oppose any use of the land."

I ain't buying her argument either. those lands are for everybody to enjoy, not just to be exploited by the state.


--------------
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 5
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 42794
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 11:34 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

No.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 6
Lamebeaver Search for posts by this member.
trail? I don't need no stinkin trail!
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 19003
Joined: Aug. 2004
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 11:43 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Is this before or after they succeed from the unioni?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 7
Dave Senesac Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3404
Joined: Jun. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 11:45 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Clarke>>>"While land is rich in timber and mineral resources, production efforts are either precluded entirely or greatly limited by regulations, endless administrative red tape and lawsuits brought by interest groups that oppose any use of the land. "

Rather typical far right myopic spin statement that fails to acknowledge the historic systematic destruction of national resources by short sighted individuals interested in quickly extracting anything that makes them richer without bothering to considerately address negative environmental issues of their processes or long term resource sustainabililty.   Before some citizens starting in Johm Muir's generation rose up in protest, the history of such actions not only in the USA but throughout the world has been of course absolutely disgustingly appalling.  And of course there are still those even in this age that will fight, lie, and manipulate to continue to selfishly squeeze the last dollar out of the last tree, fish, animal, drop of water, breath of fresh air, and scenic landscape on the planet just as long as it is money in their pocket.

That is not to say there is a reasonable balance in all ways currently and that reasonable considerate resource development cannot occur, but we certainly do not want financially motivated interests historically proven to have unacceptable attitudes, back in charge.


Clarke >>>"Utahns have always been good stewards of the land. We have a long track record of both environmental protection and fiscal responsibility."

It is true that Utah natural resources are still in outstanding shape.  One can complain about projects like the Glen Canyon Dam but generally Utah still has some of our nations finest undeveloped lands.  But that is generally because the federal government has owned most of the land and inhibited at least in the last few decades exploitation interests.    The notion of giving those lands to the state is driven by  a simple interest for Clarke and like others.  That is do controversial things that are being currently blocked and that those interests have little hope of changing through available governmental processes.


--------------
...David

http://davidsenesac.com
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 8
double cabin Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16493
Joined: Nov. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 1:12 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

No IMO too.

--------------
We have nothing to fear but an industry of fear...and man skirts.

http://www.facebook.com/media/albums/?id=129511480442251
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 9
hbfa Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 8222
Joined: Feb. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 2:11 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Lamebeaver @ Nov. 15 2012, 8:43 am)
QUOTE
Is this before or after they succeed from the unioni?

unioni?
are they trying to secede to Italy?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 10
buzzards Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1993
Joined: Apr. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 3:39 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I am not on Utah's side, if the lands became state property, I have no doubt that the ORV interests would see it as open season to go wherever they want, and while the Feds have been thick-headed about reasonable mineral exploitation, I could see that pendulum swinging back in the opposite direction if the state got a hold of the rights.
But I do understand why the locals are so upset.
In states back east, wild lands are controlled by the states to a greater extent. Western states chafe under that double standard. And a lot of land decisions are made from thousands of miles away without ever seeking local input. I know that the land belongs to all Americans, but a little common courtesy-like a phone call or two to local officials to work something out-would go a long way towards diffusing the tension.
One anecdote might serve as illustrative. I don't know this person well, but have met him. He is a cattle rancher in central Utah, as was his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather, all on the same land. He related that his father would get a call from the BLM office from time to time telling him if the cattle had broken down a fence and were getting too close to the creek. So he would hop on his horse, get the cows back through the fence, and fix the fence. It probably helped that he had gone to high school with the local BLM ranger.
Well, the previous summer, some of his cows had gotten through the fence. No phone calls, but he received a citation in the mail, along with a notice that due to riparian damage, his grazing permit for that area would not be renewed, though he could appeal to the regional office. By the time he received the notice, his cows had been tearing up the creekbed for five days, so yeah, there was some damage. The local BLM guy was no longer a local guy, but had been transferred in from Florida(I think), and actually lived in Cedar City, a two hour drive from the office he worked at, and was openly hostile to the citizens he was supposed to serve.
You might agree with the current rangers stance, but I think that is illustrative of why the relationship has broken down between the feds and local/state government.


--------------
Now shall I walk or shall I ride?
Ride, said pleasure,
Walk, Joy replied,
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 11
wildlifenate Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 5856
Joined: Jul. 2004
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 5:08 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(tomas @ Nov. 15 2012, 10:31 am)
QUOTE
So her argument boils down to this sentence about federal public lands.

"While land is rich in timber and mineral resources, production efforts are either precluded entirely or greatly limited by regulations, endless administrative red tape and lawsuits brought by interest groups that oppose any use of the land."

I ain't buying her argument either. those lands are for everybody to enjoy, not just to be exploited by the state.

That sentence is not untrue.  I worked for the USFS in Utah for a summer and saw some of this exact stuff occurring.  Namely the lawsuits.

Transferring the land to state control would note exempt it from complying with federal regulations regarding EIS and such prior to issuing a permit for resource extraction, so nothing would change regarding regulations and red tape.

About the only thing that would change would be the fact that those state legislators could pressure the land management staff more.  Right now, they have no influence over the federal employees and it probably chaps them pretty bad that they can't threaten their jobs if they come down a certain way on a permit decision after an EIS.


--------------
The GPS Geek
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 12
ol-zeke Search for posts by this member.
Clear Creek
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 12389
Joined: Sep. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 5:15 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I do not think it is a BLM employee's job to check fences. If the rancher wants a grazing right, he needs to insure his cattle stay where they belong.  Damage to a riparian zone is not acceptable, so he needs to be fined.  If he tended his cattle better, this sort of thing would not happen multiple times.  Seems like they had several chances to get it right, and the feds just tired of babysitting them.  

--------------
Everything I know, I learned by doing it wrong at least twice.

"I would rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on earth."  Steve McQueen
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 13
buzzards Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1993
Joined: Apr. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 5:57 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(ol-zeke @ Nov. 15 2012, 3:15 pm)
QUOTE
I do not think it is a BLM employee's job to check fences. If the rancher wants a grazing right, he needs to insure his cattle stay where they belong.  Damage to a riparian zone is not acceptable, so he needs to be fined.  If he tended his cattle better, this sort of thing would not happen multiple times.  Seems like they had several chances to get it right, and the feds just tired of babysitting them.  

You kind of miss the point. A generation ago, the issue would be handled informally. If the ranger saw a problem, he knew the locals, and would let them know about the problem before any damage occurred. Might have even helped him fix his fence.
Now an official who not only doesn't know the locals but has no desire to get to know them just fills out a citation and mails it. Not to mention telling him he can no longer graze his cows where his family has done so for generations.  Doesn't even notify the rancher.  More damage to the environment, more cost to the rancher (fines and the hassle/time/cost of an appeal), more cost to the government (processing the citation and the cost of dealing with an appeal).
I agree that ranchers should keep their cattle where they are supposed to be. But life and people are not perfect. A little attitude adjustment and courtesy would go a long way to avoiding a situation where an entire state wants to kick the feds off it's lands.
And yes, I am very aware there is a political component to this state vs. federal control hubub as well.


--------------
Now shall I walk or shall I ride?
Ride, said pleasure,
Walk, Joy replied,
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 14
ol-zeke Search for posts by this member.
Clear Creek
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 12389
Joined: Sep. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 6:04 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

It is Federal land.  If they want to use it, they have to play nice and abide by the rules.  If they choose to allow their cattle to misbehave, they get to take the cattle off the Federal land.

As for the slow notification, I agree.  I would have preferred the call be made instantly, and the citation handed out in person.  The environmental damage needed to be addressed more quickly.  Generations of use doesn't entitle abuse.  This was not a one time offense, as each generation had been guilty of the same behavior.  I have no sympathy for the archers in general.  

The grazing fees need to go up, and we need to get out of the cattle business in states like Utah, Wy, and Mt, where it takes more assistance from the taxpayers to grow cattle than it would to grow oranges on the same land.  


--------------
Everything I know, I learned by doing it wrong at least twice.

"I would rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on earth."  Steve McQueen
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 15
Dave Senesac Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3404
Joined: Jun. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 6:33 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Much of this confrontational standoff is essentially the same long running battle between those who want to bring motorized vehicles into public lands and those that point to a long history of abuses when that used to be allowed.

Although it is true there are considerable numbers that may be considerate of their backcountry vehicle use, there are also those we have all seen that see public lands as their terrain park to rip up and down without care for damage done as long as no one sees them.   And in wilderness, there will never be enough backcountry enforcement to ensure that does not happen because those areas are vast.   Here in California desert areas OHV users have been beaten back to containment in at a number of large off highway road vehicular parks.    In Utah there are also vast areas where such vehicles are allowed.

http://www.utah.com/offroad/

However just as is the case on the environmental side, more extreme elements are usually also the most vocal and politically active, pushing their agendas and continuing to rile up discord instead of compromise.


--------------
...David

http://davidsenesac.com
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 16
SW Mtn backpacker Search for posts by this member.
Born to hike, forced to work ...
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 7107
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 9:41 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

There's been a parade of politicians - supported in pretty much the open by real estate developers, drillers, and ORV-types - which have started pushing this in the western states.  It's basically an attempted land grab as the well-connected will buy these isolated places (there's "for sale" signs on all sorts of residences I've seen, so Joe and Jane Average need not apply). Depends on which chunk of which state you are talking about.  The remedy should be more federal lands back east like the C&O trail, etc..

--------------
Usually Southwest and then some.

In wildness is the preservation of the world. - Henry Thoreau
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 17
City Man Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6495
Joined: Dec. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 15 2012, 10:40 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE

People can put what ever spin they want to on this issue, but the bottom line is I hope that most people can see greed in motion and an attempt by the few to grab land that belongs to all of us. Just say No.

--------------
It never hurts to do good – Eek the Cat

The quest for adventure is a never ending pursuit, an all consuming way to live life, it is a deep feeling that will never go away, embrace that feeling and have fun with your adventures.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
16 replies since Nov. 15 2012, 2:33 am < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


 
reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply Utah or the Feds...?  (public lands)
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code



Get 2 FREE Trial Issues and 3 FREE GIFTS
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
The Best Trails in America
YES! Please send me my FREE trial issues of Backpacker
and my 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Full Name:
City:
Address 1:
Zip Code:
State:
Address 2:
Email (required):
Free trial offer valid for US subscribers only. Canadian subscriptions | International subscriptions