az prop 120

[Diamondbackaz]

I believe the whole thing would be unconstitutional so it would'nt stand up in the courts. This battle was already fought before as the sage brush rebellion. Sportsmans groups opposed that as a land grab by ranchers. This thing should be voted down.

[cmc]

An observation.

 

16 pages discussing baiting & trail cameras being banned.

2 pages discussing land we have access to hunt on changing hands.

 

It would appear that a majority are willing fight to save the 'how' we hunt but not for the 'where' we hunt?

 

Yes/no?

[JLW]

An observation.

 

16 pages discussing baiting & trail cameras being banned.

2 pages discussing land we have access to hunt on changing hands.

 

It would appear that a majority are willing fight to save the 'how' we hunt but not for the 'where' we hunt?

 

Yes/no?

yeah,

I thought this would have a bigger discussion....

I'm still trying to figure this out.

James

[coues krazy]

I am leaning to vote no. I am affraid the state would start selling off tracts of land. Tough one for sure. I also agree that more people should be concerned about this bill. As I said Iam leaning no, but could be swayed with more info. Just want to do the best thing for OUR land.

[cw4192]

You can find the Feds at the closest Starbucks for about their entire shift. Then when shoot hits the fan they call the state and locals. When are people gonna wake up? Right now the fed. govt. is hiring only college grat's and foreigner's that dont have have a Fu$king clue until they milk the system for 20-30 years.

[elpepe25]

You can find the Feds at the closest Starbucks for about their entire shift. Then when shoot hits the fan they call the state and locals. When are people gonna wake up? Right now the fed. govt. is hiring only college grat's and foreigner's that dont have have a Fu$king clue until they milk the system for 20-30 years.

 

I strongly disagree.

 

1st. With regards to the college statement: When you manage land for diversity, ecology, recreation, etc... you do not hire a plumber. You hire someone that has an education in such.

 

2nd. I have yet to run into a "foriegner" in the land managment occupation wether it be Federal, state, or local.

 

3rd. The organization of government is the exact opposite if what is stated above. The order is City, County, State, Federal. So if/when there is an issue that a level of government needs to handle it can attain assistance from the next HIGHER level of government.

 

 

p.s. no one can drink coffee for 8 hours.

[ForkHorn]

I'm not sure this will ever hold up. National forests, national parks, etc depending on who you ask belong to the entire country. I doubt the state of Arizona has the money to fund the current programs that are being done.

Would the federally employed forest service cease to exist in Arizona? Would an entire new state managed forest service be born?

 

I would support this if I saw an actual plan to manage our forests through an in state program like the Game and Fish. I have yet to find one.

 

In the end this may cost taxpayers a ton of money when it ends up in the court system if passed.

 

Not enough specific info is being given by Arizona as to what they plan on doing once they have the land they want.

[JLW]

I'm not sure this will ever hold up. National forests, national parks, etc depending on who you ask belong to the entire country. I doubt the state of Arizona has the money to fund the current programs that are being done.

Would the federally employed forest service cease to exist in Arizona? Would an entire new state managed forest service be born?

 

I would support this if I saw an actual plan to manage our forests through an in state program like the Game and Fish. I have yet to find one.

 

In the end this may cost taxpayers a ton of money when it ends up in the court system if passed.

 

Not enough specific info is being given by Arizona as to what they plan on doing once they have the land they want.

I agree.

I mean weren't they having trouble funding state parks not too long ago??

They had to get a bill passed so the state wouldn't sweep the funds that are allocated for the parks.

Isn't there fees for all the state parks???

won't be long before they charge us to USE the forest because they can't keep up with the costs.

No plan No way!

Just my opinion.

 

James

[cmc]

After all the state and federal lands are sold off to the highest bidder and the private property sighs go up everywhere, don't fret there is a widllife managment program for those owners to follow...

 

http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/texas-deer-association-endorses-new-texas-model-for-wildlife/?utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Outdoor+Hub+News&utm_content=October+25%2C+2012+Kentucky+Moves

 

The 21st Century Landowner Guide Texas Model identifies the important role private landowners have had and continue to have in enhancing the welfare of wildlife for future generations and in providing access to others for the enjoyment of wildlife. The Texas Model also calls for strengthening landowner rights — including trespass and liability laws — and states the rights and privileges of Texas landowners should not be weakened for any purpose.

 

Simply change out the state of texas and put in Arizona and how does that read to you then? Again I simply can't see how a sportsmen that ventures out to hunt and fish can endorse the sale of state and federal lands to private individuals.

 

cmc

[CouesWhitetail]

From what I see, the most abused government land in Arizona has been the state trust land. Plus access is an issue unless you actively hunting.

 

Also, I know most of you on this forum are for Romney, and that is fine, but you better be vocal when he tries to go thru with his plan to sell off public land to reduce the deficit.

 

 

I am surprised more people here are not worrried about Romney/Ryan selling off public land. I have brought this up before.

 

http://www.nwf.org/N...blic-Lands.aspx

 

quote from GOP platform website....sounds like selling off of our public lands to me:

In this context, Congress should reconsider whether parts of the federal government’s enormous landholdings and control of water in the West could be better used for ranching, mining, or forestry through private ownership.

http://www.gop.com/2...atform_America/

[Snapshot]

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/romney-energy-plan-empowers-states-drill-federal-lands-163935675.html

[Snapshot]

From what I see, the most abused government land in Arizona has been the state trust land. Plus access is an issue unless you actively hunting.

 

Also, I know most of you on this forum are for Romney, and that is fine, but you better be vocal when he tries to go thru with his plan to sell off public land to reduce the deficit.

 

 

I am surprised more people here are not worrried about Romney/Ryan selling off public land. I have brought this up before.

 

http://www.nwf.org/N...blic-Lands.aspx

 

quote from GOP platform website....sounds like selling off of our public lands to me:

In this context, Congress should reconsider whether parts of the federal government’s enormous landholdings and control of water in the West could be better used for ranching, mining, or forestry through private ownership.

http://www.gop.com/2...atform_America/

 

THe land issue is one of things I am concerned about with the Romney/Ryan ticket. However, another 4 years of Obama would be much worse,, in the grand scheme of things.

[Diamondbackaz]

From what I see, the most abused government land in Arizona has been the state trust land. Plus access is an issue unless you actively hunting.

 

Also, I know most of you on this forum are for Romney, and that is fine, but you better be vocal when he tries to go thru with his plan to sell off public land to reduce the deficit.

 

 

I am surprised more people here are not worrried about Romney/Ryan selling off public land. I have brought this up before.

 

http://www.nwf.org/N...blic-Lands.aspx

 

quote from GOP platform website....sounds like selling off of our public lands to me:

In this context, Congress should reconsider whether parts of the federal government’s enormous landholdings and control of water in the West could be better used for ranching, mining, or forestry through private ownership.

http://www.gop.com/2...atform_America/

 

 

It still would takes an act of Congress to sell off any public lands.

[Snapshot]

I am not so sure I am for Prop 120 anymore.? After reading about the money it would take Arizona to manage these lands, in a cash strapped state, it seems it could be a pitfall. It's hard enough to keep various department funds from being swept into the general budget, without adding greater expenses?

 

Between a rock and a hard place

[wetmule]

I doubt prop 120 would pass supreme court muster. It could be an attempt to head off at the pass what the left has planned for our state.... which is to use the endangered species act to dump boatloads of wolves and windmills north of the canyon and to create a whole bunch of new Natl. Monuments. If O is re-elected I see a whole bunch of new monuments coming. If he is not re-elected I see a whole bunch of new Natl. Monuments coming to AZ anyways. Katie bar the door as to the damage O will do with a stroke of a pen between election day and Romney's inauguration in Jan.