Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

earthhope.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 199 posts

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#171

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

potato3732842 wrote: post #83
placardloop wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The public land situation in the western US is vastly, vastly different from the situation in the east. Just like you’re saying comparing the US to the UK are two different situations, you also have to treat parts of the US separately. Almost all of the US’s public lands are west of the Rockies. If you live in Colorado, California, Oregon, Washington then you can basically throw a rock and hit some public lands. East…

That's not quite true. There are huge in number, small in overall size, amounts of public land east of the Mississippi. They're mostly all state forests, nature preserves, etc, etc and 99.9% of them are wholly unremarkable and barely utilized because you can only hike in so many identical forests or walk to the top of comparable hills before you get bored. 50+yr ago they were far more utilized (per capita) because th…

Ironically this makes the lands in the east more wild, because nobody goes into them, because they're so boring. There's also some quite large areas of Eastern state land that're really far from most people, and they're not tourists destinations, so they only get a few locals.

But the comparison between West and East gets crazier. In the West, people'll drive for an entire day just to get to one specific remote area. Whereas in the East, some untouched forest could be an hour and a half away and "that's too far." You could walk through a forest which is actually 3 different forests in a half hour, whereas out West it's just miles and miles of the same desert or mountain.

We don't really know how to appreciate nature unless it's a majestic overlook.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#172

Post by [deleted] »

JadeNB wrote: post #141
jandrese wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but the government would have to prove it in court, which is hard and takes a long time. As long as there are a bunch of other people doing it chances are you will die of old age before law enforcement does anything about it. Lots of rich people crime works this way. Make it hard enough to prosecute and you can get away with it, especially when you can afford to hire good lawyers.

> Yeah, but the government would have to prove it in court, which is hard and takes a long time. Isn't this "undeveloped in perpetuity" status an application, so that you have to request an agreement to your valuation and the government has to approve it, meaning that the burden of proof goes the other way from your comment? At least, for my personal residence where I have the opposite incentive, it's not that I can…

[deleted]

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#173

Post by hatthew »

cogman10 wrote: post #139
rafram wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two very, very different situations. The UK is a small, densely populated country without large areas of true wilderness. Over 90% of the country's land is private. The one area of the UK where there are large expanses of land without many inhabitants is Scotland (due to the Clearances), but the land there is still mostly owned by large land barons, and so Scotland has a more permissive law that allows non-destructiv…

> without large areas of true wilderness Depends on your definition of large. You'd probably be shocked at just how much wilderness is in the UK. Don't get me wrong, just about every farmable piece of land is growing food. However, you might be shocked at the presence of forests and camping grounds still to this day. Either way, the right to roam in the UK is something I wish we had in the US. There are more than a f…

I was watching a video of someone walking through rural england, and he kept talking about the "great forest" up ahead that was a unique and massive landmark. When he eventually got to it, it was the sort of bog-standard woods that everybody on the US east coast visits to walk their dog.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#174

Post by DennisP »

pests wrote: post #149
DennisP wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Boxing out the next generation" is exactly what the law is for. I guess we have to decide whether we want more natural wilderness or more luxury homes with nice views. The only way I can think of to preserve the wilderness without any isolated homes for the wealthy is for the government to buy up the land. I'd probably support that, if we could get it done, but it does mean that if the money for it comes out of the…

I love how we are trying to make decisions for our descendants. Just like historical buildings.

Another way of looking at it is that we're preserving things for our descendants.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#175

Post by burkaman »

BeetleB wrote: post #129
burkaman wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This segment is not as niche as it used to be and is frequently abused for enormous tax benefits now. There doesn't need to be any real economic or environmental value to the land, you can just pay someone to do a fake survey/appraisal and assign an astronomical value, and then not pay any taxes because you're now forgoing all that fake value with your conservation easement. > One example: the former Millstone Golf C…

Well, this may explain why the presenter said it is one of the most litigious parts of Real Estate :-) Yes, I do know about the potential for fraud. Ultimately, this sounds more like a problem with the government not doing their due diligence as opposed to a problem with the idea itself. And yes, this is fundamentally something only rich people can make use of. The average Joe doesn't have over $100K sitting around t…

I'm not an expert, but from the article:

> To be eligible for a deduction, land needs to meet at least one of four broadly defined “conservation purposes.” These include protecting “relatively natural” habitats; historic sites or buildings; land for public recreation or education; and open space (including farms, ranches and forests).

My guess is that since the golf course was primarily for public recreation (or could be), and was mostly "natural" open space (grass), they argued it qualified. Probably not hard it claim it as historic as well.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#176

Post by JdeBP »

cogman10 wrote: post #139
rafram wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two very, very different situations. The UK is a small, densely populated country without large areas of true wilderness. Over 90% of the country's land is private. The one area of the UK where there are large expanses of land without many inhabitants is Scotland (due to the Clearances), but the land there is still mostly owned by large land barons, and so Scotland has a more permissive law that allows non-destructiv…

> without large areas of true wilderness Depends on your definition of large. You'd probably be shocked at just how much wilderness is in the UK. Don't get me wrong, just about every farmable piece of land is growing food. However, you might be shocked at the presence of forests and camping grounds still to this day. Either way, the right to roam in the UK is something I wish we had in the US. There are more than a f…

The U.K. does not have a right to roam. It's a sore point for ramblers et al.. The legal situation differs between England and Wales, and Scotland; and campaigners would like the Scottish right to be also available in England and Wales, which largely only has what is tantamount to a codification of what the common law situation used to be back in the 20th century.

And indeed in Northern Ireland, which has the most restrictive laws in the U.K. in this respect, even more restrictive than the current situation in England and Wales.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#177

Post by phil21 »

bix6 wrote: post #97
BeetleB wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the early 80's, Congress passed some laws that allow people to buy undeveloped land, and declare it to be undeveloped for perpetuity (no one can develop on it even if sold). The owner gets some tax benefits from doing so. It became a niche segment in the real estate. The idea is you find land that is cheap, but you have a feeling it has mineral wealth. You buy it cheap, get the survey done, and show that it was re…

I go back and forth on this. I love the idea of preserving land but this also seems to be a way for the wealthy to insulate their home eg buy 10 acres next to your house and declare it undeveloped. Now you get an amazing property in a pristine zone that nobody can touch all while getting a tax break you don’t need and boxing out the next generation.

I mean, this is the entire intent. It lowers your resale value quite a lot too though, since it's not open for development.

I was moderately interested in a property in the middle of nowhere that had about 8 acres buildable (with two structures on it already) and about 220 acres of forest and a lake under a very strict conservation easement. It would have been the only property of that size and type I could even dream of affording. It was still expensive, but less than a million dollars where if that 230 acres had not been under conservation easement in the same area it'd have sold for over 10.

And it's not like indefinite means forever forever. If the next generation 4 generations from now decides these easements are not in their best interest they will be repealed. It's just a piece of paper in the end.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#178

Post by Razengan »

lovich wrote: post #133
Razengan wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people create new accounts for posting contrary opinions?

I’m fairly contrarian so I’m not surprised to get banned on occasion but I’ve noticed in the past few months completely innocuous statements are triggering the “you’re posting too fast ban”

Just own it and steamroll with it. No need to try to appease anyone. F HN and dang etc for knowing about downvote abuse and being OK with it.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#179

Post by wood_spirit »

ericmay wrote: post #151
bdamm wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to roam in Yosemite. I want to roam starting from my house.

I don't want people roaming through my yard and stepping on my plants and stuff or god forbid they bring their stinky dogs and their urine and feces so I have a fence put up to keep them out.

Sweden has the right to roam on privately owned nature property but it is trumped by exceptions for crops and the right to privacy at home. So it’s not ok - and not done - to walk in peoples yards etc. The rules are well taught at schools and well explained for tourists and it just works nicely.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#180

Post by legitster »

anthomtb wrote: post #167
legitster wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case it sounds like the land was used for cattle grazing, so it wasn't really a preserve. Really we should designate more areas as wilderness. i.e. no machinery. Humans can still enjoy the land without roaring across them in 4x4s.

> Humans can still enjoy the land without roaring across them in 4x4s. To clarify: In your view, someone using a vehicle to access a remote area is not "enjoying the land"? Perhaps you mean that the presence of a motorized vehicle reduces your own enjoyment. (Personal bias: I am an avid mountain biker, occasional dirt bike rider, and feel the wilderness designation is harsh and used excessively).

Under the Wilderness Act in the US, it breaks federal law to bring a motor into a designated wilderness. The idea is on protecting places where nature can actually be wild. Us humans getting to use them on foot ( or perhaps bike - though it's hard to maintain a bike trail without powered equipment) is a secondary benefit.
Post reply on HN