Idahos new look

[TAK]

There is some irony in this and the other Idaho thread. On the one hand you have landowners (and their friends) saying how victimized they have been by tresspassers which, among other things, don't respect how much work they have done to create these private islands of wildlife bliss. And have rightfully said they would be on the phone to the sheriff the very second I cut the fence and started doing doughnuts in their CRP. Ok, I get that. On the other hand, when the government tries to protect some (precious little I might add) of the land that it owns (yes it owns the land) by imposing restrictions on types of use, all the sudden its "red alert, the antis are conspiring to take away our rights as 'mericans." The irony is, don't step on my piece, but don't tell me what I can and can't do on the other stuff. Wilderness is good. Conservation is good. Hunting is fun.

Well I guess I don't see the irony in the post? No, I don't think it is right that a feller can go and do "dognuts" in someones fields! I also don't believe that it is right that the same feller can do it in this area we are calling Wilderness, BLM, Forest or State land.
What I do find irony in is you being a lawyer and you can not see further than just Wilderness, or know that when ever you in-act something into law how hard it is to have that changed, for good or bad.
Again this should not be read as I want to go and Wheeler all over the place, and I am happy that some places are "Roadless".

And by the way I have my piece of Heaven already! Your are more than welcome to come out and do some "Dognuts on it" The snow has it protected!

SO with that said you can come and hunt my land! Just don't close OUR land off completely!

[perro gordo]

[quote="TAK SO with that said you can come and hunt my land! Just don't close OUR land off completely![/quote]


Well said Tak! I withdraw my claim of irony. I do understand what you are saying and you make legitimate points. I think Ryfly hit the nail on the head. Oh man, I gotta get back to work or I won't be able to put money in the gas tank to get out to chukarland, man.
peace out
PG

[Red-Grouse]

I understand the desire for places off limits to vehicles but what other restrictions come with wilderness designation? Will you be allowed to build guzzlers? What about habitat improvements like clearing Junipers or overgrown stands of pine? I know back East there are places where the grouse are going extinct because of the lack of logging. People want to keep the land "wild" and don't care if a few hunters complain about the lack of birds. I also like places where I don't have to hear the whine of an ATV engine but how is that any different than someone who wants to enjoy nature without hunters running around shooting and disturbing the wildlife? I think it's human nature to want to bend the rules in our favor but when we get in the business of limiting the rights of others it gets tricky as to where to draw the line.

Just some food for thought.

Good point Ryfly, Management does become more difficult on Wilderness areas, but it is a far cry better than 40 acre well pad spacing! Roadless would be a better designation but the same folks that are crying foul now would cry foul then.....

[Sir Buckwheat]

Good point Ryfly, Management does become more difficult on Wilderness areas, but it is a far cry better than 40 acre well pad spacing! Roadless would be a better designation but the same folks that are crying foul now would cry foul then.....

So wouldn't it be better for the management of wildlife, as well as those of us wanting to use the land, if it was designated as Roadless instead of Wilderness. From what I've seen and read Wilderness is, well like I said before, the land of NO USE... Roadless you can still hunt in, manage wildlife in, camp, fish and everything else without having to have a law degree to figure out if you need to pack your own sh!t out in a ziplock bag, pack your horses and/or dogs sh!t out in a garbage bag, or pay a fine. I'm fine with Roadless areas but Wilderness areas I'm totally against.

[cccanale]

SB- What am I missing? How do you think that wilderness = "no use?" I was raised hunting wilderness land. I camp, fish, backpack, and horse pack in wilderness land every fall and summer. Wilderness lands hold the best stashes of game, wild trout and peace to be found anywhere and they are unspoiled and available for all. Are you afraid that lands designated wilderness will someday be more tightly restricted and regulated? Do you read or just post?

[chukarorbust]

O.k. here go's.

Heres the deal IMO. Idaho needs out of staters to hunt here. They come here for a reason.(We have some excellent hunting oppertunities on public land for everyone) Which I think is great. They produce.

1. lower the bag limit??? Why the number of birds you encounter usually determins your bag limit..(right)

2. Wilderness areas??? They already are wilderness.. ( Trust me not many people over 50 will ever get to enjoy the beauty of these places.) The cowboys out there hall there horses in the back of there pickups. Horse trailers won't go there promise.. So the family outing is out with the nice 4 hole... I'm fine I have at least another 10 to fifteen years in me... (Thanks simpson)= goverment.

3. Hunting?? Sure it makes it better for me. (not for you) It is all public land that we all own not just idahoans....

So to think that shutting some of this stuff down and designating wilderness is good?? I say know way!!! We need to tap our natural resources in this country and anytime they designate something wilderness?? (it will never happen) I do think we need to be good stuarts of the land but??? Come on america what made us great??? We have the natural resources now lets use them!!! Its time..... ( are we blind)...

Thats just a start. Its alot deeper than hunting and dogs. I'm not very well written but well read. Hope i did'nt offend anyone to much....

Ryan.

Sorry about the double post.

[GCKid]

Roadless, YES. Wilderness, NO!

A wilderness area in your neck of the chukar woods is about the best thing a hunting man can hope fer.

You wouldn't be able to install any guzzlers are make any other Habitat Improvements. If you looked at the last land grab the SUWA group tried to put through as wilderness you would be surprised at how much land there was and where it was located.

Is is a slippery slope? You tell me. They are pushing pretty hard to prevent grazing cattle on public land. If you don't think hunting will be next, I think you are a little naive (or from Idaho).

[cccanale]

Ryan- You have valid points. If you believe that we should not prevent any land from being mined for oil, gold, uranium, harvested for trees, etc... then you have a sound argument. Designating land as wilderness should, per the letter of the law, prevent it from mining, oil drilling and logging. If you are opposed to setting aside lands in an attempt to protect them form the potential harm from mining and logging, and favor the belief that all American lands should be available for development, while we disagree on this point, your opinion and argument is just as valid as mine. If you feel that designating land as wilderness will, in anyway, hurt your ability of hunt, horseback, fish, camp and enjoy the land, then you are misinformed. I thought the point raised in this post was that designating land as wilderness may potentially limit hunting access? A wilderness designation will not affect one's right to hunt the land. I respect the opinions on this post, and while I may philosophically disagree with some, I still respect the validity of a well constructed counterargument. -christopher

[TAK]

O.k. here go's.

Heres the deal IMO. Idaho needs out of staters to hunt here. They come here for a reason.(We have some excellent hunting oppertunities on public land for everyone) Which I think is great. They produce.

1. lower the bag limit??? Why the number of birds you encounter usually determins your bag limit..(right)

2. Wilderness areas??? They already are wilderness.. ( Trust me not many people over 50 will ever get to enjoy the beauty of these places.) The cowboys out there hall there horses in the back of there pickups. Horse trailers won't go there promise.. So the family outing is out with the nice 4 hole... I'm fine I have at least another 10 to fifteen years in me... (Thanks simpson)= goverment.

3. Hunting?? Sure it makes it better for me. (not for you) It is all public land that we all own not just idahoans....

So to think that shutting some of this stuff down and designating wilderness is good?? I say know way!!! We need to tap our natural resources in this country and anytime they designate something wilderness?? (it will never happen) I do think we need to be good stuarts of the land but??? Come on america what made us great??? We have the natural resources now lets use them!!! Its time..... ( are we blind)...

Thats just a start. Its alot deeper than hunting and dogs. I'm not very well written but well read. Hope i did'nt offend anyone to much....

Ryan.

Sorry about the double post.

OMG... I think you brought a tear to my eye! Post like this from this point on!

[TAK]

Ryan- You have valid points. If you believe that we should not prevent any land from being mined for oil, gold, uranium, harvested for trees, etc... then you have a sound argument. Designating land as wilderness should, per the letter of the law, prevent it from mining, oil drilling and logging. If you are opposed to setting aside lands in an attempt to protect them form the potential harm from mining and logging, and favor the belief that all American lands should be available for development, while we disagree on this point, your opinion and argument is just as valid as mine. If you feel that designating land as wilderness will, in anyway, hurt your ability of hunt, horseback, fish, camp and enjoy the land, then you are misinformed. I thought the point raised in this post was that designating land as wilderness may potentially limit hunting access? A wilderness designation will not affect one's right to hunt the land. I respect the opinions on this post, and while I may philosophically disagree with some, I still respect the validity of a well constructed counterargument. -christopher

It was me that said that it won't be long before they shut ya down from hunting in the Wilderness... I know I am a doom and gloom... But I just see goverment at it's finest every freakin day!

[blt4spd]

This is when the Utah Bird Dog Forum is at its best. Wednesday night there will be a one hour special on KUED about the Wilderness Debate. It's supposed to be fair and show both sides of the argument. Maybe we should all watch it and bone up on our information.



PS As far as grazing being restricted, there are cows in some of the Wilderness Areas I hunt.

[seniorsetterguy]

I admit I don't know enough about the content here to make a good argument, but I agree with CCC - I've learned from the posts made by guys who, though they disagree, have made tenable arguments...and (trumpet fanfare and drumroll please) with a civil, collegial tone! Well done, gents!

[Rictanica]

!!!No roads!!! Are you kidding me!!! how the hell am I gunna get my old tv's and computer screens up there to shoot at em...damn them!

[TAK]

This is when the Utah Bird Dog Forum is at its best. Wednesday night there will be a one hour special on KUED about the Wilderness Debate. It's supposed to be fair and show both sides of the argument. Maybe we should all watch it and bone up on our information.



PS As far as grazing being restricted, there are cows in some of the Wilderness Areas I hunt.

KUED....? Is that channel 7? Same as KBYU... hardly something fair!

I do believe that you do have cows in your wilderness, but they are not to be there.

[Utah Pointerman]

KUED....? Is that channel 7? Same as KBYU... hardly something fair!

That would be the UofU channel 7 Tak.