The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

Post by corpMaverick » Wed, Oct 25, 2017, 8:39 PM UTC

drewnick wrote: post #4

dredmorbius wrote: post #2

By coincidence, "Freedom to Roam" came up in a recent HN thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam the general public's right to access certain public or privately owned land for recreation and exercise. The right is sometimes called the right of public access to the wilderness or the "right to roam". In Scotland, the Nordic countries of Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, the Baltic countries of Estonia…

New Hampshire also has a pretty unique culture regarding hunting on others' and public land: "Based on long-standing tradition, nearly all lands in the state of New Hampshire are open to hunting. The "rule of thumb" in New Hampshire is: all state, federal, municipal, county and private land is open to hunting unless it is posted against hunting." http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/hunting/where-hunt.html

Post by barsonme » Wed, Oct 25, 2017, 8:40 PM UTC

clumsysmurf wrote: post #21

barsonme wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other than using the federal lands more _and_ contacting your representatives (via phone!!) to express your support for keeping public federal lands, yes, donate. While your money probably won't be ill-spent with your run-of-the-mill environmental groups, I'd really recommend searching out right-leaning groups that support public federal lands, like the American Conservation Coalition ( https://acc.eco ). Sadly, the…

They have a different definition of environmentalism “True environmentalism, from my perspective, is using natural resources that God has blessed us with,” Pruitt told the Heritage Foundation last week.

    In order to protect America’s natural resources and wildlife, the federal
    government ought to retain ownership of the majority of its federal lands.
    Preventing the sale of federal lands to interests contrary to their
    preservation requires citizens to hold officials accountable at every level
    of government.

Post by jakhead » Wed, Oct 25, 2017, 8:41 PM UTC

Post by dbcurtis » Wed, Oct 25, 2017, 8:43 PM UTC

cbcoutinho wrote: post #24

kharms wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you recommend seeking out right-leaning groups?

I would recommend right-leaning groups as well, but that's mostly because of the hunting communities are usually associated with the actual 'use' of public lands, and have been supporting most of the ecological/wildlife research. There's recently been a big push towards historically sustainable wildlife systems, and that's a topic that resonates with most of the more conservative hunting communities.

Post by takk309 » Wed, Oct 25, 2017, 8:45 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #36

takk309 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it should be illegal. At the same time, it would be nice if the Forest Service would place signs on these trails clarifying that access is allowed and list the contact information for the proper authorities. That would, however, be expensive and the land owners would no doubt remove the signs.

Removing the signs would be theft of government property, and is punishable by up to one year in jail. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/641 Edit: I'm happy to hang out in an old pickup truck with a coffee and a shotgun and wait for someone to steal the signs. Just point me in the right direction and give me a number to call with the forestry service, national parks, or the bureau of land management when som…