Re: Federal Land acquisitions / bad idea?
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:20 pm
Mottlett, I was not attacking any particular past or ongoing federal conservation program with respect to wildlife ( particularly game animals and birds). You and Wingman have eloquently stated and reminded us all of the benefits of such programs, both past and present. And I think we likely can all agree that we have benefitted.
The issue I have raised is one of federal government ownership of land, particularly taking our duck stamp monies or tax dollars to purchase/take even more land out of the private sector and placing it into the ownership of the federal government. At what point does the federal government have enough land? For instance, how much more of Nevada should it own?
You and others may be comfortable with such federal government ownership of land and a future where even more land is obtained by the federal government. And that comfort level is no doubt rooted in trust --- your trust in the rule of law --- your trust that our government will follow its own laws and rules --- your trust that the federal government will be accountable to the people and serve the interests of the people.
Well, I no longer have such trust. And I would suggest looking at things from a perspective outside of Washingtin DC. Perhaps I used a bad example of government lawlessness, since there has no doubt been some lawlessness on both sides of the Nevada situation. So, how about the Administration's changing of Obamacare numerous times without Congressional action. Or the Administration's failure to enforce many of our immigration laws that were passed by Congress and signed into law by previous Presidents, and adopting new immigration laws by executive order. Or the DOJ's failure to enforce the criminal laws against IRS officials, who at the very least have committed felonies by disclosing confidential taxpayer information to outside third parties. Or the failure to enforce our existing gun crime laws that would take those abusing their gun rights and committting such crimes off of our streets. Or the failure of the DOJ to prosecute givernment officials who have blatently lied to Congress, including our US AG. I could go on, and on, and on with examples of the lawlessness of the current Administration. And guess what, in many of their wrongful actions and inactions, they aren't following federal agency protocol or rules. They are bypassing such and just doing what they want to do, without any serious accountability or any real consequences.
So, lets just say that I am getting very uncomfortable with trusting our federal government to follow the rule of law. And that bleeds into my ever-growing distrust of the federal government's future ability to properly manage federal lands for the benefit of all of the public, including those of us who like to hunt and fish. The Feds demonstrate daily a " pick and choose" mindset with respect to enforcement of laws and regulations, as well as picking and choosing winners and losers. How much longer will it take the Feds to start picking allowable uses other than hunting on all federal land? What if a rare swamp tortoise shows up in the Tallahatchie NWR, or your favorite refuge to hunt? Will they shut it down or charge outrageous user fees or implement even more restrictions, while planning to install Chinese solar panels on a nearby NWR tract where the very same rare swamp turtle resides, or after euthanizing many of the very same swamp turtles due to claimed lack of management funding?
Again, for many reasons, I think we need to re-think the idea of further expanding the amount of private land being acquired by the federal government. Perhaps they should focus on managing what they currently have, and we should focus on new ideas for wildfowl conservation that do not involve expanding the federal givenment's land holdings.
The issue I have raised is one of federal government ownership of land, particularly taking our duck stamp monies or tax dollars to purchase/take even more land out of the private sector and placing it into the ownership of the federal government. At what point does the federal government have enough land? For instance, how much more of Nevada should it own?
You and others may be comfortable with such federal government ownership of land and a future where even more land is obtained by the federal government. And that comfort level is no doubt rooted in trust --- your trust in the rule of law --- your trust that our government will follow its own laws and rules --- your trust that the federal government will be accountable to the people and serve the interests of the people.
Well, I no longer have such trust. And I would suggest looking at things from a perspective outside of Washingtin DC. Perhaps I used a bad example of government lawlessness, since there has no doubt been some lawlessness on both sides of the Nevada situation. So, how about the Administration's changing of Obamacare numerous times without Congressional action. Or the Administration's failure to enforce many of our immigration laws that were passed by Congress and signed into law by previous Presidents, and adopting new immigration laws by executive order. Or the DOJ's failure to enforce the criminal laws against IRS officials, who at the very least have committed felonies by disclosing confidential taxpayer information to outside third parties. Or the failure to enforce our existing gun crime laws that would take those abusing their gun rights and committting such crimes off of our streets. Or the failure of the DOJ to prosecute givernment officials who have blatently lied to Congress, including our US AG. I could go on, and on, and on with examples of the lawlessness of the current Administration. And guess what, in many of their wrongful actions and inactions, they aren't following federal agency protocol or rules. They are bypassing such and just doing what they want to do, without any serious accountability or any real consequences.
So, lets just say that I am getting very uncomfortable with trusting our federal government to follow the rule of law. And that bleeds into my ever-growing distrust of the federal government's future ability to properly manage federal lands for the benefit of all of the public, including those of us who like to hunt and fish. The Feds demonstrate daily a " pick and choose" mindset with respect to enforcement of laws and regulations, as well as picking and choosing winners and losers. How much longer will it take the Feds to start picking allowable uses other than hunting on all federal land? What if a rare swamp tortoise shows up in the Tallahatchie NWR, or your favorite refuge to hunt? Will they shut it down or charge outrageous user fees or implement even more restrictions, while planning to install Chinese solar panels on a nearby NWR tract where the very same rare swamp turtle resides, or after euthanizing many of the very same swamp turtles due to claimed lack of management funding?
Again, for many reasons, I think we need to re-think the idea of further expanding the amount of private land being acquired by the federal government. Perhaps they should focus on managing what they currently have, and we should focus on new ideas for wildfowl conservation that do not involve expanding the federal givenment's land holdings.