Author Topic: Selling National Forests  (Read 3091 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 88754
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Selling National Forests
« on: April 10, 2015, 10:46:31 AM »
So a bunch of people apparently just voted to do this or allow people to do this or something. Knowing nothing about it it sounds like a bad thing to do. Explain to me why it would be a good thing to do.


(Want to get rid of the ad? Register now for free!)

Offline Dr Rick Daris

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 23381
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forest Land
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2015, 10:47:26 AM »
i know nothing about it either but agree that it's a bad thing.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 59853
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2015, 10:50:20 AM »
Without more dets, leaning towards bad.




Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53998
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2015, 11:06:55 AM »
gE is buying one of these fellas.  Which should buy?

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2015, 11:07:55 AM »
I don't have the details. But have any of you visited a national forest? They're ok, I guess, but they really suck in comparison to national parks.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53998
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2015, 11:10:05 AM »
I don't have the details. But have any of you visited a national forest? They're ok, I guess, but they really suck in comparison to national parks.

Crap, I already put in a stalking horse bid.

Offline LickNeckey

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7107
  • #fakeposts
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2015, 11:15:05 AM »

Just e-mailed Jerry.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2015, 11:40:19 AM by LickNeckey »

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #8 on: April 10, 2015, 11:18:41 AM »
Can anybody cite me some details on this that don't come from a libtard blog? I'm not finding much, except the forest service's own website which says that the sale of national forest land has been going on for decades, and this latest proposal would sell the land to the states. That doesn't seem so bad.

I totally support the national parks, but the federal government also controls much larger (huge) swaths of land under more minor designations that it would seem to be best left to state control. The people of those states can decide what portions to allow for private development.

But I totally understand why the envirotards are going hysterical over this.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2015, 11:21:27 AM »
http://indefinitelywild.gizmodo.com/republican-senators-just-voted-to-sell-off-your-nationa-1696862450/+megneal

But how will Cliven Bundy make a dollar!!!

I like that the article leads with a silhouette of Yosemite, which is a national park - not a national forest. National forests can't carry the NP's jockstraps.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53998
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2015, 11:24:35 AM »
http://indefinitelywild.gizmodo.com/republican-senators-just-voted-to-sell-off-your-nationa-1696862450/+megneal

But how will Cliven Bundy make a dollar!!!

I like that the article leads with a silhouette of Yosemite, which is a national park - not a national forest. National forests can't carry the NP's jockstraps.

Something I wish I knew 15 minutes ago.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #11 on: April 10, 2015, 11:26:24 AM »
Time out. So it turns out the federal government already sells timber rights on national forests, so this bill really doesn't seem to do much at all except maybe sell more land currently managed by the federal government to the states.

Ok - resume envirotard hissyfit.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Online john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7834
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2015, 11:56:56 AM »
The text says they are selling or transferring to the state or local government some land that isn't within a national park, preserve, or monument. The states will probably be better stewards of this land than the feds.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 67583
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2015, 12:10:54 PM »
Great job here sd
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline GregKSU1027

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4169
  • Cats, man
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2015, 12:14:07 PM »
If we were to invest in a forest what would we name it?
“He plays for Kansas State. He doesn't play for Will Howard University." -Chris Klieman 10/14/2023

Offline Tobias

  • Fattyfest Champion
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29373
  • hypoclique lieutenant
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #15 on: April 10, 2015, 12:38:24 PM »
nothing from my guy rush yet

Offline massofcatfan

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 782
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #16 on: April 10, 2015, 12:48:22 PM »
maybe they should just make all land "our" land. oh wait, it's been tried.  :facepalm:
I want to wake up in a city that never sleeps, etc.

Offline wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 32587
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #17 on: April 10, 2015, 01:32:06 PM »
Thneed making time !
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline Paul Moscow

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1844
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #18 on: April 10, 2015, 03:42:25 PM »
this is more about industrial development than it is fiscal "responsibility". if you're a conservationist of any stripe you shouldn't be too excited

Online john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7834
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #19 on: April 10, 2015, 04:08:02 PM »
this is more about industrial development than it is fiscal "responsibility". if you're a conservationist of any stripe you shouldn't be too excited

I'm sure this is true in many respects, but some states have been unfairly annexed by the federal gov and have lost the ability to decide what should be done, and not done, on their land.


Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 88754
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #20 on: April 10, 2015, 04:28:21 PM »
So it's a good thing?

Offline Paul Moscow

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1844
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #21 on: April 10, 2015, 04:39:01 PM »
I prefer that public lands be protected from mining and drilling. If the republicans were interested in that at all, or in garnering public support, they would include it in the bill.

Online john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7834
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #22 on: April 10, 2015, 04:44:46 PM »
I think they're interested in giving control of some federal land back to the states. Most of the land they're talking about is plain old desert. They call it forest but it's sage brush and cactus.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 67583
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #23 on: April 10, 2015, 05:16:17 PM »
Sad display of power grabbage by the resident statists
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Selling National Forests
« Reply #24 on: April 10, 2015, 06:03:02 PM »
I prefer that public lands be protected from mining and drilling.

Why? Take a look at the map. You really think all that land needs to be restricted from mineral rights? Actually, not even the federal government thinks that, which leases timber and mineral rights on lots of its land already.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.