|
Post by benmnwi on Dec 12, 2017 20:59:35 GMT -6
I think this is very interesting. Saying there is too much public land sounds so strange to me I still think you guys still might be joking. It is honestly as odd as if someone said their boss pays them too much money or their wife wants too much sex.
I'll agree completely that the habitat could be improved, but at least there's something we can hunt.
I think if you guys spent a week hunting public land it wouldn't be as bad as you think and you could see the value even though the hunting isn't perfect. It is far better than not hunting at all which would be the alternative for guys that don't own their own land.
|
|
|
Post by coop on Dec 12, 2017 21:05:10 GMT -6
In my opinion there is certainly such a thing as enough and maybe even too much public land. I certainly think Mn already has enough This is certainly a shocking statement coming from a hunter. I honestly am not sure how to respond to many of the anti public land comments being thrown about on here other than look back at our history. Many great people before us fought for every inch of public ground we have in this country. What would these places look like today if it wasn’t for their courage. I’m mainly talking at a federal level but land preserved for the people’s use is as important as it gets to hunters and future generations of hunters. State land is a trickier issue due to many factors including funds and state agency agendas but they are equally as important to the hunting community. Private land is private and can be manipulated to the owners will which doesn’t always benefit people or nature. I love my property and my goal first and foremost with it is conservation. Bringing it back to natural habitat that gives wildlife what they need while also providing my family with opportunities for hunting and recreation. If this forum isn’t about the conservation of land both private and public then I likely don’t belong here. Theodore Roosevelt saw something along time ago that really speaks to me and I hope everyone can look back in time to see how important conservation of both public and private land is. Riggs, Please don’t confuse my Nature Conservacy rant with an anti-public land ideology. I’ve been the beneficiary of public land hunting/fishing opportunities about as frequently as private experiences. I believe very strongly in conservation and preservation of undeveloped back country. Like I said earlier, it’s a complicated issue. I think a lot of the anti-sediment in this thread stems from a distrust of our government officials to manage our public lands in a fashion that resembles stewardship. I’m conflicted! I love spending time in the vast public lands of the West but I would hate having TNC as a neighbor.
|
|
|
Post by sd51555 on Dec 12, 2017 21:06:01 GMT -6
you guys honestly think having public land is bad? I can't tell if everyone Is joking or not. There is some great hunting and fishing available to everyone on public land. Could it be better? Absolutely, but it still can be good. A lot of my best hunts have been on public land. No. I love the idea. Along with world peace, free health care, gun bans, and open borders. It's people that screw it all up. I will never be comfortable with the Disney kids of the DNR and ignorant or corrupt politicians dictating land use. Those quacks are inching their way towards bumping us few fuds out of their public lands, to make way for whatever their version of natural and sustainable use is. Public lands mean the caretakers are booted out. Government is the caretaker now. Everyone else is just a taker, not even allowed to help.
|
|
|
Post by riggs on Dec 12, 2017 21:08:37 GMT -6
Every piece of property sold has an affect on neighboring properties. I have had an impact on my neighbors property once I started doing habitat projects and food plots. It would be a lie to say I want public next to me but it doesn’t change my feeling on public land as a whole. If land is bought and turned into a parking lot then it will never go back. I choose conservation every time. I’m getting off the original topic so I will back off and get off my soap box.
|
|
|
Post by benmnwi on Dec 12, 2017 21:16:52 GMT -6
you guys honestly think having public land is bad? I can't tell if everyone Is joking or not. There is some great hunting and fishing available to everyone on public land. Could it be better? Absolutely, but it still can be good. A lot of my best hunts have been on public land. No. I love the idea. Along with world peace, free health care, gun bans, and open borders. It's people that screw it all up. I will never be comfortable with the Disney kids of the DNR and ignorant or corrupt politicians dictating land use. Those quacks are inching their way towards bumping us few fuds out of their public lands, to make way for whatever their version of natural and sustainable use is. Public lands mean the caretakers are booted out. Government is the caretaker now. Everyone else is just a taker, not even allowed to help. [br Do you hunt public land often?
|
|
|
Post by benmnwi on Dec 12, 2017 21:22:50 GMT -6
I'm just curious how it is possible to view public land hunting so negatively.
|
|
|
Post by sd51555 on Dec 12, 2017 21:25:07 GMT -6
I think this is very interesting. Saying there is too much public land sounds so strange to me I still think you guys still might be joking. It is honestly as odd as if someone said their boss pays them too much money or their wife wants too much sex. I wouldn't expect my wife to be used by everyone for free and count on a good experience myself. In all seriousness, would land be as expensive as it is if there were more of it? Economics says absolutely not. Well 2/3 of the wooded lands in MN are off limits to private ownership. So we're left to battle each other with leverage for our own slice of what's left, and then initiate a habitat cold war against each other to try to enhance our "wild" experience. If the hunting were actually good up by me, I'd never be able to afford the $5,000/acre it'd take to get in the game to buy a piece. It's only affordable because nobody wants it. If you were to just go sit in the woods up by me, you'd never see a deer or a track. For me to get anything, I have to make it happen, "naturally."
|
|
|
Post by coop on Dec 12, 2017 21:36:04 GMT -6
Every piece of property sold has an affect on neighboring properties. I have had an impact on my neighbors property once I started doing habitat projects and food plots. It would be a lie to say I want public next to me but it doesn’t change my feeling on public land as a whole. If land is bought and turned into a parking lot then it will never go back. I choose conservation every time. I’m getting off the original topic so I will back off and get off my soap box. Some of my favorite places in New Mexico are public lands that are nearly land locked by private land. Those private land owners are all 60 to 100 year folks living humble lives on land worth millions. As they pass from this life, their lands are sub-divided, developed into housing, and the magic of the sanctuary and sanctity of the wilds is lost. I think this is tragic and would stop it if I could. The above story seems far different from TNC buying small parcels in MN because it has a spring. Followed by the DNR dozing in a parking lot. Accompanied by unfriendly game management practices.
|
|
|
Post by riggs on Dec 12, 2017 21:39:49 GMT -6
“Well 2/3 of the wooded lands in MN are off limits to private ownership. So we're left to battle each other with leverage for our own slice of what's left, and then initiate a habitat cold war against each other to try to enhance our "wild" experience.”
So you rather the 2/3 be sold off? I can assure you that the percentage of guys trying to fight for the best habitat is very small. I find that statement very contradicting.
|
|
|
Post by batman on Dec 12, 2017 21:45:08 GMT -6
“Well 2/3 of the wooded lands in MN are off limits to private ownership. So we're left to battle each other with leverage for our own slice of what's left, and then initiate a habitat cold war against each other to try to enhance our "wild" experience.” So you rather the 2/3 be sold off? I can assure you that the percentage of guys trying to fight for the best habitat is very small. I find that statement very contradicting. What would be bad about selling the 2/3rds off?
|
|
|
Post by Satchmo on Dec 12, 2017 21:49:20 GMT -6
It seems to me that some of the opinions here are from folks who have not spent much time on the vast tracks of public land in northern MN, and are coming from the point of wanting to save their own "privacy". I will take every inch of public ground that can be set aside. I don't care if it's only good for Bluebirds or rabbits. I grew up in town and hunting public ground. If not for those opportunities, I would not be building habitat today. These places give a lot of chances for a new generation of young hunters to gain an appreciation for the outdoors. Without new hunter recruitment, we will all face tougher challenges ahead. Those public lands are not about "us" guys.
|
|
|
Post by coop on Dec 12, 2017 21:50:20 GMT -6
“Well 2/3 of the wooded lands in MN are off limits to private ownership. So we're left to battle each other with leverage for our own slice of what's left, and then initiate a habitat cold war against each other to try to enhance our "wild" experience.” So you rather the 2/3 be sold off? I can assure you that the percentage of guys trying to fight for the best habitat is very small. I find that statement very contradicting. What would be bad about selling the 2/3rds off? Humans would occupy all of it leaving little to no wide open spaces.
|
|
|
Post by benmnwi on Dec 12, 2017 21:52:26 GMT -6
“Well 2/3 of the wooded lands in MN are off limits to private ownership. So we're left to battle each other with leverage for our own slice of what's left, and then initiate a habitat cold war against each other to try to enhance our "wild" experience.” So you rather the 2/3 be sold off? I can assure you that the percentage of guys trying to fight for the best habitat is very small. I find that statement very contradicting. What would be bad about selling the 2/3rds off? It would be a really bad day for the guys without the means to own land. Do you think we should privatize public water as well? The fishing in mn would get a lot better if only the lakeshore owners got to wet a line.
|
|
|
Post by sd51555 on Dec 12, 2017 21:54:51 GMT -6
Do you hunt public land often? Every year, hunting and fishing. Every year same conclusion. Why bother? My land butts up against thousands of acres of federal land, and there is nothing back there. I always end up wondering why I ever left my property. I'm not really interested in going to the mat on this. I know you guys have heard this from me countless times already. I'm just warning about blind faith in government owning all the land, and believing they're focused on doing public land hunters a favor. Once they have it, that shit is gone, and your butt is relegated to town where everyone hates ya. I truly believe public land hurts access to hunting for the non-land-owning public. I deer hunted for 15 years before I or any family member ever owned any hunting land. I/we went out and made it on relationships with neighbors, not leases or guided hunts. Never had the money, and never hunted public. It wasn't safe. If a public hunting parcel has gotten so bad that expectations are at zero, is it really public hunting land anymore, or just government property?
|
|
|
Post by Satchmo on Dec 12, 2017 21:56:40 GMT -6
“Well 2/3 of the wooded lands in MN are off limits to private ownership. So we're left to battle each other with leverage for our own slice of what's left, and then initiate a habitat cold war against each other to try to enhance our "wild" experience.” So you rather the 2/3 be sold off? I can assure you that the percentage of guys trying to fight for the best habitat is very small. I find that statement very contradicting. What would be bad about selling the 2/3rds off? The majority of that 2/3rds doesn't belong to the state. It is in the hands of paper companies and timber companies, or are federal and county tax forfeit lands. I for one, hope those large tracts never disappear.
|
|