epa (uncle) in charge in wyoming...

where are the personal property rights... think you own your own land??? we are just all renters here... 

 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/14/wyoming-welder-faces-fine-for...

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03
A friend of mine had his booth right beside this measures booth at the KX sport show.
 
Good for you.  So your saying you have some second hand information?

 

Not once did the gals collecting signatures tell ND voters of the hundreds of thousands of dollars they accepted from out of state orgs.
 
Hardwaterman can I join you in the dumba$$ assessment?  That's what the advertisements are for.  Many of those people collecting signatures don't know everything about a measure.  Before you say they should the people you have doing the same thing don't all know the entire thing either.  What are they supposed to do get on a soapbox and give them a rundown of every penny and every signature over the past two years.  Get real and stop the little boy whine.

 

Not once did they tell the people they were asking to sign that 75% of millions of dollars HAD to be spent no matter what.
Your the only one who would expect such nonsense at the booth.  Information like that should come from the people who are spearheading the effort, not the volunteer at a booth.  Again, the money coming in pays for the advertisements.  I would guess the ag money coming in refuted the claims you wanted refuted in the measure you were speaking of.  Keep in mind that although you complain about us 90% of us on this site supported ag on that measure.  Stop spitting in the face of your allies simply because they will not give you the world and crown you king.

 

Not once did they tell ND voters that they would not be able to vote on this again for 25 years.
I'll bet many find these things out before they vote.  If they don't then use your money to tell the public.  Like I said before I want informed voters.  You want them informed in some instances, and ignorant if it benefits agriculture.  Lets face it your on an outdoor site not for the outdoor aspect, but just in the interests of agriculture. 

 

None of the materials they were handing out mentioned any of this either. Why not tell the people of ND what the measure actually will do and who is funding it's passage?

So what were they handing out gst.  Did they hand out information to support their side?  Did you expect them to hand out information to support your side? 

Why not tell the voters these orgs funding this measure are the same ones suing states over wolf management and other things and "collaborating" with the EPA?
 

I don't like groups like HSUS or PETA, but I oppose you on this thread, because your just the other side of a poison sandwich.  Either way we bite it were screwed.   As a matter of fact I voted against the animal cruelty.  I had to keep you out of mind as I voted because there was no better advocate for the measure than your mouth.  

Oh, guess what?  I am for wolf management too.  I especially would like to manage them with my 6.5 Creedmoor.  Actually I would like to mange them with any weapon I can get my hands on at the moment.  I would love to get into a pack with an AR15 with a suppressor and clipped together 30 round clips.  I would like to call that pack out lf the Lamar Valley in Yellowstone across the border and legally be able to wipe them out.  So I would think most on here would agree with you gst.  I also think it would be best to just be quiet before you change minds. 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Hardwaterman Said:

SO YES RON I DO NOT WANT ANYONE ACCEPTING OUT OF STATE DOLLARS TO IMPACT ND DECISIONS. I HAVE SAID THIS MULTIPLE TIMES BEFORE, I HAVE NEVER ONCE VARIED FROM THIS POSITION.

Not the question asked of you gst!

No.  I will not ask or expect the opposition to this measure to tie their hands behind their back. Nor do I expect them to bring a knife to a gun fight. No matter what you claim ron they did not start down this path.

It is time for a law preventing out of state interests from buying ND law.

yes I should be able to sell to anyone that I want to period. If the Fed Gov deems ownership of land by someone or a country hostile to the US so be it. Bigger scheme of things, but you are again clouding the issue. So now to be clear, YOU support the Federal govt telling the states who shouldbe able to buy land, I thought previously you had an absolute "anyone should be able to sell to anyone" policy??? ND law is not going to withstand the court review. So until such time that the ruling comes down you can ask about Iran, Iraq, Venezuela or Canada citizens and the answer does not change. YOU NOR STOCKMENS SHOULD HAVE ANY INPUT INTO WHOM I SELL TO!It  Clear enough for you?   Yes it is ro. IT IS NICE TO SEE HOW LITTLE YOU SUPPORT STATES RIGHTS WHEN THEY DO NOT SUIT YOUR PURPOSE RON.

  Again this has been answered. In regards to out of state money I said before that I prefer things in state, but that is not the way things work anymore. Out of state money is a direct result of the actions taken by you and others like you in preventing conservation efforts and like it or not conservation in ND affects and impacts wildlife especially migrating wild in other states and countries. SO they have a vested interest in it as well.

In regards to WY issue again powers granted to the Fed body cannot be trumped by the state. Control of waterways and drainage to them is a federal issue and like I pointed out our contractor knew this even though our local Gov said no permit was needed. So that argument holds no water pun intended. Ron this "power" is only allowed within the language granted the Feds, not to what ever they wish. BIG difference. Do a little research as to what was stated in the article regarding what the Clean Water act has juristiction over. Why do you think EPA is pushing for changes to the Clean Water Act?

So you got anymore stupid claims to make? Answer the question posed to you not your bs response. Put up or shut up again! IF you are not willing to publicly tell your groups and supporters to take no out of state money or from companies and organizations not domiciled in ND then get off it!
Once again you seem to reenforce your willingness to pummel your opponent while is hands are tied behind his back ron.

I will again state this, I do not know if I would vote for the amendment if it is successful in getting on the ballot, I do however feel that they have a right to pursue it and the people then get to decide. I am well aware of the costs of this venture and if not for the stupidity of others last time it would likely have made it.

Also if the your organizations contrary to what you claim would have supported a better funded and less ag controlled program I doubt this measure would have come back up. Bullshit, without the ability to use these dollars to buy land the sponsors said they would move forward. So when you wank about this look in the mirror and realize that much of what is bothering you is of your own making. I highly doubt you have the ablity to look within and see what and why your views are so out of touch but so be it.

Proper conservation efforts are hampered and stonewalled by your org and others like it and this like the lawsuit challenging the law are a direct result of that behavior and short sighted shallow wants.

Ron you are aware of the enviromental stewardship programs one "ag org" has in conjunction with the NDG&F right? How about the conservation ideals the ND Grazing Lands Coalitions support? You seem to be dismissing the affects of the NWF lawsuits and other actions and policies of these "wildlfie/sportsmens orgs ron.

When was the last time any of the organizations supported the purchase of land for conservation? All we hear is the state and Fed and other org already own to much land. What position did some ag orgs take in the last  Natural Areas Aquisitions Committee meetings over land sales?

Not one acre not one penny or something close to it that one of the farm org stated. Good grief what arrogance and flaming stupidity that shows

Thanks though for not calling me a "dumbass" this time ron.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

wstnodak Said:

gst Said:

eyexer Said
I never said money doesn't buy votes.  especially on the national level.  I don't think it's near as bad at our state level.  But if y our concerned about that then you guys better open your wallets if that is the issue.  The ag community has very deep pockets.  They just don't want to spend the money.  They'd rather whine about it. 

eye, just last election we had a measure on the ballot regarding animal cruelty funded by the HSUS and other out of state animal rights groups. They had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertising early on. The polls were running 60% in favor, 40% against.

Livestock producers ponied up thousands but could not match dollar for dollar these out of state orgs. Only when another outside org funded by Lucas Oil, Protect the Harvest donated significant dollars late in the game were the lies being told able to be countered with the truth dollar for dollar.

The final result ended up reversing and it was defeated roughly 60% against 40% for.

Dollars DO play a large role her in state issues such as this. These orgs know this and that is why they are willing to invest millions to access billions.

Once one side starts down that road as the sponsors of this measure have done twice now, the other side has two choices follow or be SIGNIFICANTLY handicapped.

A friend of mine had his booth right beside this measures booth at the KX sport show.

Not once did the gals collecting signatures tell ND voters of the hundreds of thousands of dollars they accepted from out of state orgs.

Not once did they tell the people they were asking to sign that 75% of millions of dollars HAD to be spent no matter what.

Not once did they tell ND voters that they would not be able to vote on this again for 25 years.

None of the materials they were handing out mentioned any of this either. Why not tell the people of ND what the measure actually will do and who is funding it's passage?

Why not tell the voters these orgs funding this measure are the same ones suing states over wolf management and other things and "collaborating" with the EPA?

Maybe its because ND doesn't have a wolf problem?  Or maybe it doesn't really matter to the people who are interested in conserving some part of this state for future generations that the EPA is even mentioned?
Gabe you are just simply thinking about your self again.  No surprise though.

Try thinking a little bigger picture west than just the personal crap you always bring, do you like lawsuits from out side orgs telling a state how they have to manage what impacts their state west?

wstnodak's picture
wstnodak
Offline
Joined: 11/3/02

gst Said:

wstnodak Said:

gst Said:

eyexer Said
I never said money doesn't buy votes.  especially on the national level.  I don't think it's near as bad at our state level.  But if y our concerned about that then you guys better open your wallets if that is the issue.  The ag community has very deep pockets.  They just don't want to spend the money.  They'd rather whine about it. 

eye, just last election we had a measure on the ballot regarding animal cruelty funded by the HSUS and other out of state animal rights groups. They had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertising early on. The polls were running 60% in favor, 40% against.

Livestock producers ponied up thousands but could not match dollar for dollar these out of state orgs. Only when another outside org funded by Lucas Oil, Protect the Harvest donated significant dollars late in the game were the lies being told able to be countered with the truth dollar for dollar.

The final result ended up reversing and it was defeated roughly 60% against 40% for.

Dollars DO play a large role her in state issues such as this. These orgs know this and that is why they are willing to invest millions to access billions.

Once one side starts down that road as the sponsors of this measure have done twice now, the other side has two choices follow or be SIGNIFICANTLY handicapped.

A friend of mine had his booth right beside this measures booth at the KX sport show.

Not once did the gals collecting signatures tell ND voters of the hundreds of thousands of dollars they accepted from out of state orgs.

Not once did they tell the people they were asking to sign that 75% of millions of dollars HAD to be spent no matter what.

Not once did they tell ND voters that they would not be able to vote on this again for 25 years.

None of the materials they were handing out mentioned any of this either. Why not tell the people of ND what the measure actually will do and who is funding it's passage?

Why not tell the voters these orgs funding this measure are the same ones suing states over wolf management and other things and "collaborating" with the EPA?

Maybe its because ND doesn't have a wolf problem?  Or maybe it doesn't really matter to the people who are interested in conserving some part of this state for future generations that the EPA is even mentioned?
Gabe you are just simply thinking about your self again.  No surprise though.

Try thinking a little bigger picture west than just the personal crap you always bring, do you like lawsuits from out side orgs telling a state how they have to manage what impacts their state west?

What does that have to do with conserving some of ND gabe?  So because some group talked to another group, that means we are responsible for spanking them?  I think that's what you are saying.  Are you saying this just for your personal gain gabe?

You seem to have NO problem telling our state how to manage itself so what is your deal with others having their opinion? 

If god didn't want us to eat animals....he wouldn't have made them out of food.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Plainsman Said:

A friend of mine had his booth right beside this measures booth at the KX sport show.
 
Good for you.  So your saying you have some second hand information?

  Are you calling my friend a liar without any proof? Ask the people taking signatures yourself Bruce what they told the public.

Not once did the gals collecting signatures tell ND voters of the hundreds of thousands of dollars they accepted from out of state orgs.
 
Hardwaterman can I join you in the dumba$$ assessment?  That's what the advertisements are for.  Many of those people collecting signatures don't know everything about a measure.  Before you say they should the people you have doing the same thing don't all know the entire thing either.  What are they supposed to do get on a soapbox and give them a rundown of every penny and every signature over the past two years.  Get real and stop the little boy whine.
Plainsman the opposition to this are not the ones asking people to change our constituion. So you are saying those asking people for their votes should NOT understand the true language of the measure they are asking to be supported???
 
Not once did they tell the people they were asking to sign that 75% of millions of dollars HAD to be spent no matter what.
Your the only one who would expect such nonsense at the booth.  Information like that should come from the people who are spearheading the effort, not the volunteer at a booth.  Again, the money coming in pays for the advertisements.  I would guess the ag money coming in refuted the claims you wanted refuted in the measure you were speaking of.  Keep in mind that although you complain about us 90% of us on this site supported ag on that measure.  Stop spitting in the face of your allies simply because they will not give you the world and crown you king.
Once again Bruce you do not expect people asking the voter to sign to know the actual language of the measure and share that with the voters???  What "other" measure are you talking about Bruce?

 

Not once did they tell ND voters that they would not be able to vote on this again for 25 years.
I'll bet many find these things out before they vote.  If they don't then use your money to tell the public.  Like I said before I want informed voters. Bullshit. That must be why you REPEATEDLY denied HSUS involvement i previous measure right Bruce?  You want them informed in some instances, and ignorant if it benefits agriculture.  Lets face it your on an outdoor site not for the outdoor aspect, but just in the interests of agriculture. 

 

None of the materials they were handing out mentioned any of this either. Why not tell the people of ND what the measure actually will do and who is funding it's passage?

So what were they handing out gst.  Did they hand out information to support their side?  Did you expect them to hand out information to support your side?  I expect them to hand out information that factually explains completely what the measure they are asking voters to support does. Not just pick and choose what sounds good.

Why not tell the voters these orgs funding this measure are the same ones suing states over wolf management and other things and "collaborating" with the EPA?
 

I don't like groups like HSUS or PETA, but I oppose you on this thread, because your just the other side of a poison sandwich.  Either way we bite it were screwed.   As a matter of fact I voted against the animal cruelty.  I had to keep you out of mind as I voted because there was no better advocate for the measure than your mouth.  

Oh, guess what?  I am for wolf management too.  I especially would like to manage them with my 6.5 Creedmoor.  Actually I would like to mange them with any weapon I can get my hands on at the moment.  I would love to get into a pack with an AR15 with a suppressor and clipped together 30 round clips.  I would like to call that pack out lf the Lamar Valley in Yellowstone across the border and legally be able to wipe them out.  So I would think most on here would agree with you gst.  I also think it would be best to just be quiet before you change minds.  So then you agree out of state groups should not buy changes to our states constitution and you will be opposing this measure because it mandates spending in the constitution rather than statute thus preventing the ND voter from having a say for 25 years?

 
gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

wstnodak Said

What does that have to do with conserving some of ND gabe?  So because some group talked to another group, that means we are responsible for spanking them?  I think that's what you are saying.  Are you saying this just for your personal gain gabe?

You seem to have NO problem telling our state how to manage itself so what is your deal with others having their opinion? 

If you really can not see the possible negative consequences of inviting orgs like the ones filing these lawsuits and collaborating with th EPA on how our state should manage our state  into our state west I am not going to invest further time into explaining it to you.

And west I support BOTH yours and my ability to have a say in telling our state to manage itself, I simply do not think out of state orgs should. Pretty simple really.

Try dropping the personal crap EVERY post west and actually discuss an issue for once.

weedy1's picture
weedy1
Offline
Joined: 9/26/12

gst Said:
"The government says he violated the Clean Water Act by building a dam on a creek without a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. Further, the EPA claims that material from his pond is being discharged into other waterways. Johnson says he built a stock pond -- a man-made pond meant to attract wildlife -- which is exempt from Clean Water Act regulations.  

The property owner says he followed the state rules for a stock pond when he built it in 2012 and has an April 4-dated letter from the Wyoming State Engineer’s Office to prove it.

“Said permit is in good standing and is entitled to be exercised exactly as permitted,” the state agency letter to Johnson said.

But the EPA isn’t backing down and argues they have final say over the issue. They also say Johnson needs to restore the land or face the fines."

So to get back on track here because no one is going to answer those two questions with a yes or no answer, this above from the article is really the crux of the issue.

Apparently the guy went to the state and even got a real letter from a real engineer (weedy should like that) from the state of WY and did what the state says he is supposed to.

But the Federal Govt comes in and says that is not relevant because the Federal Govt knows what is best for Wy.

So the question is should we invite organizations that have these same high handed ideals into our state to change our constitution with their millions of dollars?

.

gst, please don't twist the information I provided to fit your agenda.  The state laws that govern the construction of dams vary from state to state.  The Corps of Engineers regulations under the Clean Water Act regulate impacts to wetlands on a national basis.  The problem the guy in Wyoming is facing is either that he constructed his "pond" in a wetland that falls under COE jurisdiction or his "pond" has reduced the hydrologic yield to downstream wetlands jeopardizing their function and existence.

As I said in an earlier post, the ND State Water Commission would normally warn a person they issue a construction permit that they should consult with the COE before proceeding with construction to avoid a problem just like this one.  So the state of Wyoming missed an opportunity to assist on of their constituents.  That does not mean that the guy in Wyoming should not have to comply with the federal regulations because his state agency forgot to tell him to. 

Someone earlier mentioned the "discharge" issue.  The COE calls fill placed in a wetland or waterway a "discharge".  If the fill built by the welder is eroding and the silt is filling downstream wetlands or entering a stream this would also be called a discharge.  Considering the watercourse has the volume of flow to fill the pond area shown in the picture, and that embankment was built by the welder and his wife,either one of these scenarios is possible.  The tract of land owned by the welder is 8 acres so it is quite possible any silt from the erosion process would impact a downstream landowner.  You notice the correspondence from the state agency stated the pond was built in compliance with state regulations.  They said absolutely nothing about complying with federal regulations.  The state agency is not going to admit any wrong doing, otherwise the state might be then on the hook for the cost of restoration.

In western states the feds and state agencies never seem to agree on water issues.  Sort of like democrats and republicans.  John Q. Public is not best served by this infighting but that is the way it goes.

I would like to address your quip about me being happy an engineer was involved in the state permit process.  If you have a medical issue, you consult a physician.  If you have a legal issue, you consult a lawyer.  The guidance you get from these individuals may not always be right but your are better off than consulting a farmer on either of these issues. Just saying!

Weedy

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

gabe your side had no problem altering our constitution to benefit you and yours, RIGHT? So now others are seeking to do the same thing! You just cannot grasp that if you and yours can others should be allowed to as well.

I will clarify one thing for you again, I defer to the Fed gov deciding if a non us entity has the ablity to purchase property in the US because it is going to be based on national security interests not some petty crap about farmer competition.Hense why I would defer to them and not the Stockmans Assn, or FU or FB!

Does FU,Stockmans disclose they are opposed to this petition in their advertising state that the reason is they do not want competition on purchases or that they want to continue to limit the rights of actually property owners from realizing gains and profits on there labors or prevent landowners who have land inundated with water making it unfit for use of cattle or crop from selling that property to someone who has an interest in improving that land for wildlife?

You talk out of both sides of your mouth without even realizing it. You have listened to yourself and others like you so much that you fail to see the hypocrisy of your claims.

That land I mentioned inundated is worthless now to any farmer or rancher, it has or holds no value for production but you want some farmer to be able to buy it at less than what others are willing to sell on the future value it has giving him a huge windfall but  depriving the existing landowner his right to salvage what he can. Good grief your organization is twisted in that view!

And do not parade out the so called conservation efforts of these orgs they are pitiful in reality because they oppose real efforts that are trying to be made. 3 acres here or there help but pale in comparision to 300-600 in a tract. Those little spots are much like gun free zones for predators, easy to identify and attack with little or no escape options for animals force to use them!

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

Lets face it gst is here in the interest of agriculture and could give a rats behind about conservation.  He wants to come off a super-rancher and everyone just take his word for everything.  If out of state provides money for his benefit great, but if he wants to dump on the average North Dakotan and some out of state interest helps support our agenda then oooooooh my gosh the world is coming to an end.  When all else fails it's HSUS and PETA plots.  When logic fails scare them with the boogyman.  Don't get me wrong I dislike HSUS and PETA, but lets face it they are not involved with everything.  If they happen to be accidently on the right side, well lets face it even a blind pig finds an occasional acorn. 

gst you want people collecting petitions to give a complete background to everyone coming to their table.  Get real.  It takes 30 people as sponsors for an initiative.  Do you think all 30 sponsors know what's going on?  I have had one experience and about three people were actually in charge and found people to sign on.  If anyone asked me what was going on I could not have told them.  I wasn't happy about that, but I didn't have the time to spend to find out either.  That's the real world.

wstnodak's picture
wstnodak
Offline
Joined: 11/3/02

gst Said:

wstnodak Said

What does that have to do with conserving some of ND gabe?  So because some group talked to another group, that means we are responsible for spanking them?  I think that's what you are saying.  Are you saying this just for your personal gain gabe?

You seem to have NO problem telling our state how to manage itself so what is your deal with others having their opinion? 

If you really can not see the possible negative consequences of inviting orgs like the ones filing these lawsuits and collaborating with th EPA on how our state should manage our state  into our state west I am not going to invest further time into explaining it to you.

And west I support BOTH yours and my ability to have a say in telling our state to manage itself, I simply do not think out of state orgs should. Pretty simple really.

Try dropping the personal crap EVERY post west and actually discuss an issue for once.

You will not allow it gabe with your self serving, arrogant, and condescending nature.  Many have tried.  I don't know why you even bother to ask people to "discuss" with you anymore?

If god didn't want us to eat animals....he wouldn't have made them out of food.

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

Neat

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

gst Said:

eyexer Said
I never said money doesn't buy votes.  especially on the national level.  I don't think it's near as bad at our state level.  But if y our concerned about that then you guys better open your wallets if that is the issue.  The ag community has very deep pockets.  They just don't want to spend the money.  They'd rather whine about it. 

eye, just last election we had a measure on the ballot regarding animal cruelty funded by the HSUS and other out of state animal rights groups. They had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertising early on. The polls were running 60% in favor, 40% against.

Livestock producers ponied up thousands but could not match dollar for dollar these out of state orgs. Only when another outside org funded by Lucas Oil, Protect the Harvest donated significant dollars late in the game were the lies being told able to be countered with the truth dollar for dollar.

The final result ended up reversing and it was defeated roughly 60% against 40% for.

Dollars DO play a large role her in state issues such as this. These orgs know this and that is why they are willing to invest millions to access billions.

Once one side starts down that road as the sponsors of this measure have done twice now, the other side has two choices follow or be SIGNIFICANTLY handicapped.

A friend of mine had his booth right beside this measures booth at the KX sport show.

Not once did the gals collecting signatures tell ND voters of the hundreds of thousands of dollars they accepted from out of state orgs.

Not once did they tell the people they were asking to sign that 75% of millions of dollars HAD to be spent no matter what.

Not once did they tell ND voters that they would not be able to vote on this again for 25 years.

None of the materials they were handing out mentioned any of this either. Why not tell the people of ND what the measure actually will do and who is funding it's passage?

Why not tell the voters these orgs funding this measure are the same ones suing states over wolf management and other things and "collaborating" with the EPA?

looks like exactly what I said had to happen happened.  those against bucked up and coughed up the cash.  But unlike you I don't put much faith in polls.  I don't believe the 60-40 for the measure figure.  especially when you see a 60-40 the other way as the result.  tells me the polls were like 90% of the polls, complete bs.

 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

weedy1 Said:

gst Said:
"The government says he violated the Clean Water Act by building a dam on a creek without a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. Further, the EPA claims that material from his pond is being discharged into other waterways. Johnson says he built a stock pond -- a man-made pond meant to attract wildlife -- which is exempt from Clean Water Act regulations.  

The property owner says he followed the state rules for a stock pond when he built it in 2012 and has an April 4-dated letter from the Wyoming State Engineer’s Office to prove it.

“Said permit is in good standing and is entitled to be exercised exactly as permitted,” the state agency letter to Johnson said.

But the EPA isn’t backing down and argues they have final say over the issue. They also say Johnson needs to restore the land or face the fines."

So to get back on track here because no one is going to answer those two questions with a yes or no answer, this above from the article is really the crux of the issue.

Apparently the guy went to the state and even got a real letter from a real engineer (weedy should like that) from the state of WY and did what the state says he is supposed to.

But the Federal Govt comes in and says that is not relevant because the Federal Govt knows what is best for Wy.

So the question is should we invite organizations that have these same high handed ideals into our state to change our constitution with their millions of dollars?

.

gst, please don't twist the information I provided to fit your agenda.  The state laws that govern the construction of dams vary from state to state.  The Corps of Engineers regulations under the Clean Water Act regulate impacts to wetlands on a national basis.  The problem the guy in Wyoming is facing is either that he constructed his "pond" in a wetland that falls under COE jurisdiction or his "pond" has reduced the hydrologic yield to downstream wetlands jeopardizing their function and existence.

As I said in an earlier post, the ND State Water Commission would normally warn a person they issue a construction permit that they should consult with the COE before proceeding with construction to avoid a problem just like this one.  So the state of Wyoming missed an opportunity to assist on of their constituents.  That does not mean that the guy in Wyoming should not have to comply with the federal regulations because his state agency forgot to tell him to. 

Someone earlier mentioned the "discharge" issue.  The COE calls fill placed in a wetland or waterway a "discharge".  If the fill built by the welder is eroding and the silt is filling downstream wetlands or entering a stream this would also be called a discharge.  Considering the watercourse has the volume of flow to fill the pond area shown in the picture, and that embankment was built by the welder and his wife,either one of these scenarios is possible.  The tract of land owned by the welder is 8 acres so it is quite possible any silt from the erosion process would impact a downstream landowner.  You notice the correspondence from the state agency stated the pond was built in compliance with state regulations.  They said absolutely nothing about complying with federal regulations.  The state agency is not going to admit any wrong doing, otherwise the state might be then on the hook for the cost of restoration.

In western states the feds and state agencies never seem to agree on water issues.  Sort of like democrats and republicans.  John Q. Public is not best served by this infighting but that is the way it goes.

I would like to address your quip about me being happy an engineer was involved in the state permit process.  If you have a medical issue, you consult a physician.  If you have a legal issue, you consult a lawyer.  The guidance you get from these individuals may not always be right but your are better off than consulting a farmer on either of these issues. Just saying!

Weedy, please show me where  or how I have "twisted" the information you provided to fit my agenda.

I did not compare Wy law to ND only pointed out that this individual DID infact go thru the proper state channels and got the appropriate permit and apparently built his dam in compliance and the Federal govt stepped in thru the EPA and over rode the state process.

If that is not factual please point out where it is not.

It appears the states elected representative who may very well know more about this than either you or I are of the opinion the EPA actions in this particular case were excessive and overstepping their bounds. (imagine that)

So the question is do we want organizations that support this heavy handed Federal approach and have "collaborated" with agencies like the EPA invited into our state to "help" change our constitution or not?

Some people are of the opinion we need MORE Federal govt controlling state and personal rights and issues, I happen to have the opinion we have plenty and could probably get along just fine with a little less.

I also believe quite strongly North Dakotans actually know what is best for North Dakota more so than any out of state interest does.

Crazy radical ideas I know.

Hell maybe we should invite the IRS into read a few posts on FBO too!

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Hardwaterman Said:
gabe your side had no problem altering our constitution to benefit you and yours, RIGHT? So now others are seeking to do the same thing! You just cannot grasp that if you and yours can others should be allowed to as well.Ron, did that constitutional amendment mandate the spending of billions of dollars???

As a supposed conservative, I would think you would have reservations about setting precedence regarding establishing funding mandates in your constitution which this measure does.

I will clarify one thing for you again, I defer to the Fed gov deciding if a non us entity has the ablity to purchase property in the US because it is going to be based on national security interests not some petty crap about farmer competition.Hense why I would defer to them and not the Stockmans Assn, or FU or FB!
  So now you are admitting your absolute claim of ANY land owner should be able to sell to ANYONE without restrictions is not true ? Youy did make that claim didn;t you ron? It seems you are now backpedalling away from that a bit? Hell I bet I could find some Iranian that likes duck hunting to sell a quarter to if the state would just allow it!
Does FU,Stockmans disclose they are opposed to this petition in their advertising state that the reason is they do not want competition on purchases or that they want to continue to limit the rights of actually property owners from realizing gains and profits on there labors or prevent landowners who have land inundated with water making it unfit for use of cattle or crop from selling that property to someone who has an interest in improving that land for wildlife?
Ron the NDSA has made it very public why they oppose this measure. If you do a bit of digging perhaps you can find them.

You talk out of both sides of your mouth without even realizing it. You have listened to yourself and others like you so much that you fail to see the hypocrisy of your claims.
Ron I have steadfastly maintained that property rights are not absolute, but any infringement on them must be done with careful consideration of consequences. If that is "talking out both side" of my mouth, I guess it so be it.
That land I mentioned inundated is worthless now to any farmer or rancher, it has or holds no value for production but you want some farmer to be able to buy it at less than what others are willing to sell on the future value it has giving him a huge windfall but  depriving the existing landowner his right to salvage what he can. Good grief your organization is twisted in that view!

Once again ron the NDSA supports private property rights including the right of sale, but yet holds the veiw that the state govt should reserve the rightto regulate sales to protect the interests of the state just as YOU bleieve the Federal govt should. You just seem to have an issue with it at the state level because it does not fit YOUR agenda. And regardless of your claims, it has stood as constitutional for several decades. Only now when the opposition to it beleives the setting is perhaps more supportive have they challenged it.

And do not parade out the so called conservation efforts of these orgs they are pitiful in reality because they oppose real efforts that are trying to be made. 3 acres here or there help but pale in comparision to 300-600 in a tract. Those little spots are much like gun free zones for predators, easy to identify and attack with little or no escape options for animals force to use them!Ron do you even know what these "pitiful" conservation efforts these orgs support are? I guarantee you by your "3 acres" comments you do not. Do you discount the award winners over the many years it has existed of the Enviromental Stewardship Programs efforts as "pitiful" without ever even knowing anything about them? I guarantee without looking you could not identify the last award recipients of the G&F program. And yet here you are spouting off calling proactive meaningful effective efforts by those in ag as "pitiful". And you wonder why people in ag tire of your bullshit.
Ron contact the NDG&F dept that cosponsors this program and see if they have the same "pitiful" veiw as you do.

Come on ron why don;t YOU list the conservation efforts YOU have engaged in so we can compared them to these efforts of others you deem as "pitiful". Really ron lets have a side by side comparison what YOU have done if you have the balls to do so.


gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Plainsman Said:
Lets face it gst is here in the interest of agriculture and could give a rats behind about conservation.  Plainsman as I suggest to you many times before and challenged ron to lets have a side by side comparison of what YOU have done to benefit conservation with our operation. Hell you and ron can even team up if you wish. I have invited you to come up and see firsthand our operations commitment to conservation and you seem to rather sit behind your computer screen and spout lies. Come on plainsman to steal a line from ron, it is time to "put up or shut up"!He wants to come off a super-rancher and everyone just take his word for everything.  If out of state provides money for his benefit great, but if he wants to dump on the average North Dakotan and some out of state interest helps support our agenda then oooooooh my gosh the world is coming to an end.  When all else fails it's HSUS and PETA plots.  When logic fails scare them with the boogyman.  Don't get me wrong I dislike HSUS and PETA, but lets face it they are not involved with everything. Except the last measure you were involved in and yet claim to know nothing about! If they happen to be accidently on the right side, well lets face it even a blind pig finds an occasional acorn. 

gst you want people collecting petitions to give a complete background to everyone coming to their table.  Just the truth would be nice. Get real.  It takes 30 people as sponsors for an initiative.  Do you think all 30 sponsors know what's going on? Really? You would sign on to something as a sponsor without "knowing what is going on"?????I have had one experience and about three people were actually in charge and found people to sign on.  If anyone asked me what was going on I could not have told them.  I really can;t beleive you would actually admit to that. Then you should not have agreed to sponsor it OR expect the voters to support it if YOU as a sponsor could not take the time and effort to "know what was going on"with your own measure!!! . It seems you do not expect the sponsors asking to change our constitution should have any accountability for the measure they wrote!!! I wasn't happy about that, but I didn't have the time to spend to find out either.  That's the real world.Perhaps the "real world" of a liberal who does not believe in accountability.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

wstnodak Said:

gst Said:

wstnodak Said

What does that have to do with conserving some of ND gabe?  So because some group talked to another group, that means we are responsible for spanking them?  I think that's what you are saying.  Are you saying this just for your personal gain gabe?

You seem to have NO problem telling our state how to manage itself so what is your deal with others having their opinion? 

If you really can not see the possible negative consequences of inviting orgs like the ones filing these lawsuits and collaborating with th EPA on how our state should manage our state  into our state west I am not going to invest further time into explaining it to you.

And west I support BOTH yours and my ability to have a say in telling our state to manage itself, I simply do not think out of state orgs should. Pretty simple really.

Try dropping the personal crap EVERY post west and actually discuss an issue for once.

You will not allow it gabe with your self serving, arrogant, and condescending nature.  Many have tried.  I don't know why you even bother to ask people to "discuss" with you anymore?

West, I have to break it to you, it really won;t "bother" me much if you don;t "bother" anymore!

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

eyexer Said:

gst Said:

eyexer Said
I never said money doesn't buy votes.  especially on the national level.  I don't think it's near as bad at our state level.  But if y our concerned about that then you guys better open your wallets if that is the issue.  The ag community has very deep pockets.  They just don't want to spend the money.  They'd rather whine about it. 

eye, just last election we had a measure on the ballot regarding animal cruelty funded by the HSUS and other out of state animal rights groups. They had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertising early on. The polls were running 60% in favor, 40% against.

Livestock producers ponied up thousands but could not match dollar for dollar these out of state orgs. Only when another outside org funded by Lucas Oil, Protect the Harvest donated significant dollars late in the game were the lies being told able to be countered with the truth dollar for dollar.

The final result ended up reversing and it was defeated roughly 60% against 40% for.

Dollars DO play a large role her in state issues such as this. These orgs know this and that is why they are willing to invest millions to access billions.

Once one side starts down that road as the sponsors of this measure have done twice now, the other side has two choices follow or be SIGNIFICANTLY handicapped.

A friend of mine had his booth right beside this measures booth at the KX sport show.

Not once did the gals collecting signatures tell ND voters of the hundreds of thousands of dollars they accepted from out of state orgs.

Not once did they tell the people they were asking to sign that 75% of millions of dollars HAD to be spent no matter what.

Not once did they tell ND voters that they would not be able to vote on this again for 25 years.

None of the materials they were handing out mentioned any of this either. Why not tell the people of ND what the measure actually will do and who is funding it's passage?

Why not tell the voters these orgs funding this measure are the same ones suing states over wolf management and other things and "collaborating" with the EPA?

looks like exactly what I said had to happen happened.  those against bucked up and coughed up the cash.  But unlike you I don't put much faith in polls.  I don't believe the 60-40 for the measure figure.  especially when you see a 60-40 the other way as the result.  tells me the polls were like 90% of the polls, complete bs.

So eye, for the record then you do not have an issue with out of state interests trying to manipulate changes to our states constitution or laws?

Meelosh's picture
Meelosh
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 5/26/06

This is nearing dumpster fire proportions.

Is it impious to weigh goose music and art in the same scales? I think not, because the true hunter is merely a noncreative artist. Who painted the first picture on a bone in the caves of France? A hunter. Who alone in our modern life so thrills to the sight of living beauty that he will endure hunger and thirst and cold to feed his eye upon it? The hunter. Who wrote the great hunter's poem about the sheer wonder of the wind, the hail, and the snow, the stars, the lightnings, and the clouds, the lion, the deer, and the wild goat, the raven, the hawk, and the eagle, and above all the eulogy to the horse? Job, one of the great dramatic artists of all time. Poets sing and hunters scale the mountains primarily for one and the same reason--the thrill of beauty. Critics write and hunters outwit their game primarily for one and the same reason--to reduce that beauty to possession. The differences are largely matters of degree, consciousness, and that sly arbiter of the classification of human activities, language. If, then, we can live without goose music, we may as well do away with stars, or sunsets, or Iliads. But the point is we would be fools to do away with any of them. 

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03
Plainsman as I suggest to you many times before and challenged ron to lets have a side by side comparison of what YOU have done to benefit conservation with our operation.

Just to help you with your ignorance about that:  I had 36 years in working for our wildlife and natural resources.  My first year I had no days of from March 2 to August 20.  Not week-ends, not Easter, not 4th of July, and most days I worked 10 to 12 hours.  I was happy to have a job and contribute to something of value to my fellow hunters.  I'm not complaining, just telling you the way it was.  I guess I'm old school.
I would guess at the same time you got government share cost for those conservation efforts.  Perhaps you were paid for it.  What is the percentage the pay for planting trees now?  If memory serves me in the past they even paid 80% for stock ponds, and I think helped pay for draining wetlands.  I'm guessing that's gone now.  So gst don't turn your nose up to far.

 I really can;t beleive you would actually admit to that.

What surprises you someone telling the truth?  You complain about others, and are surprised by honesty.  Since this appears to be turning into a brag fest I see no value.   

wstnodak's picture
wstnodak
Offline
Joined: 11/3/02

gst Said:

wstnodak Said:

gst Said:

wstnodak Said

What does that have to do with conserving some of ND gabe?  So because some group talked to another group, that means we are responsible for spanking them?  I think that's what you are saying.  Are you saying this just for your personal gain gabe?

You seem to have NO problem telling our state how to manage itself so what is your deal with others having their opinion? 

If you really can not see the possible negative consequences of inviting orgs like the ones filing these lawsuits and collaborating with th EPA on how our state should manage our state  into our state west I am not going to invest further time into explaining it to you.

And west I support BOTH yours and my ability to have a say in telling our state to manage itself, I simply do not think out of state orgs should. Pretty simple really.

Try dropping the personal crap EVERY post west and actually discuss an issue for once.

You will not allow it gabe with your self serving, arrogant, and condescending nature.  Many have tried.  I don't know why you even bother to ask people to "discuss" with you anymore?

West, I have to break it to you, it really won;t "bother" me much if you don;t "bother" anymore!

Yet you STILL can't help responding!hahahaha  Get over yourself there almighty and just one time realize that other people have interests that are not the same as yours and they just might want to protect those interests.  This really has become a case of you vs. the sportsman and I'm convinced that more and more are seeing it that way.  Like I have said before, thank god the majority of the farmers/ranchers in this state don't think like you!

If god didn't want us to eat animals....he wouldn't have made them out of food.

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

Meelosh Said:
This is nearing dumpster fire proportions.

Neat

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Meelosh Said:
This is nearing dumpster fire proportions.

Aw come on man,  outside of a few "dumbasses" and a few miscellaneous personal jabs here and there,  no one has even accused anyone of being "greedy" or "raping the land". 

Yet.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Plainsman Said:

Plainsman as I suggest to you many times before and challenged ron to lets have a side by side comparison of what YOU have done to benefit conservation with our operation.

Just to help you with your ignorance about that:  I had 36 years in working for our wildlife and natural resourcesMy first year I had no days of from March 2 to August 20.  Not week-ends, not Easter, not 4th of July, and most days I worked 10 to 12 hours.  I was happy to have a job and contribute to something of value to my fellow hunters.  I'm not complaining, just telling you the way it was.  I guess I'm old school.
I would guess at the same time you got government share cost for those conservation efforts.  Perhaps you were paid for it.  What is the percentage the pay for planting trees now?  If memory serves me in the past they even paid 80% for stock ponds, and I think helped pay for draining wetlands.  I'm guessing that's gone now.  So gst don't turn your nose up to far.

 I really can;t beleive you would actually admit to that.

What surprises you someone telling the truth?  You complain about others, and are surprised by honesty.  Since this appears to be turning into a brag fest I see no value.   

I couldn;t tell you how much cost share the govt paid for waterholes are I have never received cost share for one, as for tree rows I believe it is about 50 % if I remember right, Possibly a bit higher if the right things were met??? The last 200 trees we planted on our own with none. I guess we did get a break on the cost as they were trying to get rid of them. It is a pretty handy way to save a few dollars on trees bruce if you are a good customer the Soil Conservation is wiling to work with you at the end of the season.

But if you wish to talk govt tax dollars cost share percentages Bruce, what percentage "cost share" did the govt pay for the things you listed above I emboldened? Must have been somewhere in the 100% range eh?

Not a bragfest bruce just a bit of fact to offset the bullshit you constantly like to accuse me and fritz of.

Come on up some time and I 'll show you around abit and perhaps you can put this tired old accusation/lie to rest.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

wstnodak Said:

gst Said:

wstnodak Said:

gst Said:

wstnodak Said

What does that have to do with conserving some of ND gabe?  So because some group talked to another group, that means we are responsible for spanking them?  I think that's what you are saying.  Are you saying this just for your personal gain gabe?

You seem to have NO problem telling our state how to manage itself so what is your deal with others having their opinion? 

If you really can not see the possible negative consequences of inviting orgs like the ones filing these lawsuits and collaborating with th EPA on how our state should manage our state  into our state west I am not going to invest further time into explaining it to you.

And west I support BOTH yours and my ability to have a say in telling our state to manage itself, I simply do not think out of state orgs should. Pretty simple really.

Try dropping the personal crap EVERY post west and actually discuss an issue for once.

You will not allow it gabe with your self serving, arrogant, and condescending nature.  Many have tried.  I don't know why you even bother to ask people to "discuss" with you anymore?

West, I have to break it to you, it really won;t "bother" me much if you don;t "bother" anymore!

Yet you STILL can't help responding!hahahaha  Get over yourself there almighty and just one time realize that other people have interests that are not the same as yours and they just might want to protect those interests.  This really has become a case of you vs. the sportsman and I'm convinced that more and more are seeing it that way.  Like I have said before, thank god the majority of the farmers/ranchers in this state don't think like you!

west, I have no problem with people engaging in truthful honest discussion to advocate for their ideals and interests.

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

gst one more time pull your head out of your butt!

You want to play word games instead of being issue driven, my position is still correct and everyone knows this. MY right to sell to whomever I deem fit is infringed upon by the like of you and the organizations you support.

Enough of the BS about duly elected representation, the issue is does it violate my constitutional rights as a landowner and I do believe the courts are going to say yes!

In regards to conservation, I want a landowner to have the right to enter into any conservation easement they deem fit for there situation and the property. THERE IS NO RIGHT OF A FUTURE OWNER TO HAVE A FRIGGING SAY IN IT AND ANYONE BUYING LAND WITH  THAT EASEMENT DOES SO KNOWING IT AHEAD OF TIME!

Thus they lose nothing because they never owned that use.

On that same note I wish that no separation on property ever existed but if one is allowed others should as well and should be treated like mineral rights!

So that is the issues where I stand not where you claim I stand, in regards to my statement regarding conservation I will again state that the programs supported your group alone is pitiful and it is a G&F program that you piggy back off of!

GET IT!!!!!!!

So go back to checking the calves and cows, hope your year goes well with that and weather holds for good calving conditions etc... BUT on these issues your greed and hypocricy keeps beaming brighter and brighter!!!

One thing is clear, the stranglehold on conservation that the ag groups of this state needs to be broken and if the petition and lawsuit by Cook are the hammers to do it, then so be it.

One thing that will not change is your constant bull crap about things being something that they are not. The defense of who gets to buy land without Gov and board approval is nothing but greed driven just as the issue over easement lengths. Treat all property as they do mineral rights and stop hiding behind the barn door admit why you oppose them because it is competition, I and others would at least give you some respect for being honest instead of the smoke up our collective butts you and your keep pushing.

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Meelosh Said:
This is nearing dumpster fire proportions.

More like:


Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03
Must have been somewhere in the 100% range eh?

I guess I didn't tell you I had no comp time and no overtime for that.  That's why I used the word contribute.  I wouldn't use that for things I am paid for. It's also why I said I was just glad to have a job.   I'm not complaining, it's just the way things were.  So gst that would be 0%. 

I had put that in my first post, then hit some button that deleted everything.  My old absent mind forgot it the second time.  I can't tell you how many times I have done that.  Lucky I have not bought some expensive junk I don't want. 

Anyway, I hope I wasn't so blunt I hurt anyone's feminine side.   Good night everyone I'm headed for the easy chair and tv.  This has already gone to far.

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

 

gst Said:

eyexer Said:

gst Said:

eyexer Said
I never said money doesn't buy votes.  especially on the national level.  I don't think it's near as bad at our state level.  But if y our concerned about that then you guys better open your wallets if that is the issue.  The ag community has very deep pockets.  They just don't want to spend the money.  They'd rather whine about it. 

eye, just last election we had a measure on the ballot regarding animal cruelty funded by the HSUS and other out of state animal rights groups. They had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertising early on. The polls were running 60% in favor, 40% against.

Livestock producers ponied up thousands but could not match dollar for dollar these out of state orgs. Only when another outside org funded by Lucas Oil, Protect the Harvest donated significant dollars late in the game were the lies being told able to be countered with the truth dollar for dollar.

The final result ended up reversing and it was defeated roughly 60% against 40% for.

Dollars DO play a large role her in state issues such as this. These orgs know this and that is why they are willing to invest millions to access billions.

Once one side starts down that road as the sponsors of this measure have done twice now, the other side has two choices follow or be SIGNIFICANTLY handicapped.

A friend of mine had his booth right beside this measures booth at the KX sport show.

Not once did the gals collecting signatures tell ND voters of the hundreds of thousands of dollars they accepted from out of state orgs.

Not once did they tell the people they were asking to sign that 75% of millions of dollars HAD to be spent no matter what.

Not once did they tell ND voters that they would not be able to vote on this again for 25 years.

None of the materials they were handing out mentioned any of this either. Why not tell the people of ND what the measure actually will do and who is funding it's passage?

Why not tell the voters these orgs funding this measure are the same ones suing states over wolf management and other things and "collaborating" with the EPA?

looks like exactly what I said had to happen happened.  those against bucked up and coughed up the cash.  But unlike you I don't put much faith in polls.  I don't believe the 60-40 for the measure figure.  especially when you see a 60-40 the other way as the result.  tells me the polls were like 90% of the polls, complete bs.

So eye, for the record then you do not have an issue with out of state interests trying to manipulate changes to our states constitution or laws?

I don't particularly care for it but it is what it is.  It's happening and i will always happen.  There are tons of things that I don't like but have to live with.  Property taxes being one of them.  At least until we do away with them.  

 

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

 

wstnodak Said:

gst Said:

wstnodak Said:

gst Said:

wstnodak Said

What does that have to do with conserving some of ND gabe?  So because some group talked to another group, that means we are responsible for spanking them?  I think that's what you are saying.  Are you saying this just for your personal gain gabe?

You seem to have NO problem telling our state how to manage itself so what is your deal with others having their opinion? 

If you really can not see the possible negative consequences of inviting orgs like the ones filing these lawsuits and collaborating with th EPA on how our state should manage our state  into our state west I am not going to invest further time into explaining it to you.

And west I support BOTH yours and my ability to have a say in telling our state to manage itself, I simply do not think out of state orgs should. Pretty simple really.

Try dropping the personal crap EVERY post west and actually discuss an issue for once.

You will not allow it gabe with your self serving, arrogant, and condescending nature.  Many have tried.  I don't know why you even bother to ask people to "discuss" with you anymore?

West, I have to break it to you, it really won;t "bother" me much if you don;t "bother" anymore!

Yet you STILL can't help responding!hahahaha  Get over yourself there almighty and just one time realize that other people have interests that are not the same as yours and they just might want to protect those interests.  This really has become a case of you vs. the sportsman and I'm convinced that more and more are seeing it that way.  Like I have said before, thank god the majority of the farmers/ranchers in this state don't think like you!

I've said this numerous times and I'll stick to it.  This measure is all about hunting access.  Farmers have tied up the land and this is the result.  And now they're screaming the loudest.  They only have themselves to blame if this measure passes.

 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Hardwaterman Said:
gst one more time pull your head out of your butt!

You want to play word games instead of being issue driven, my position is still correct and everyone knows this. MY right to sell to whomever I deem fit is infringed upon by the like of you and the organizations you support.

Enough of the BS about duly elected representation, the issue is does it violate my constitutional rights as a landowner and I do believe the courts are going to say yes!

In regards to conservation, I want a landowner to have the right to enter into any conservation easement they deem fit for there situation and the property. THERE IS NO RIGHT OF A FUTURE OWNER TO HAVE A FRIGGING SAY IN IT AND ANYONE BUYING LAND WITH  THAT EASEMENT DOES SO KNOWING IT AHEAD OF TIME!

Thus they lose nothing because they never owned that use.

On that same note I wish that no separation on property ever existed but if one is allowed others should as well and should be treated like mineral rights!

So that is the issues where I stand not where you claim I stand, in regards to my statement regarding conservation I will again state that the programs supported your group alone is pitiful and it is a G&F program that you piggy back off of!

GET IT!!!!!!!

So go back to checking the calves and cows, hope your year goes well with that and weather holds for good calving conditions etc... BUT on these issues your greed and hypocricy keeps beaming brighter and brighter!!!

One thing is clear, the stranglehold on conservation that the ag groups of this state needs to be broken and if the petition and lawsuit by Cook are the hammers to do it, then so be it.

One thing that will not change is your constant bull crap about things being something that they are not. The defense of who gets to buy land without Gov and board approval is nothing but greed driven just as the issue over easement lengths. Treat all property as they do mineral rights and stop hiding behind the barn door admit why you oppose them because it is competition, I and others would at least give you some respect for being honest instead of the smoke up our collective butts you and your keep pushing.

NOW you got the dumpster fire blazing!

Hell even the perpetual easement rant!

As to the emboldened statement ron, two things,
1. You might want to see who is "piggybacking" off whom. I don;t think the NDG&F are the creators or sponsors of the national program Enviromental Stewardship program. which the state program participates in regionally there big shooter. You might want to check out the NCBA and their national program and some of the winners before moving on to number 2.

Ron check it out and then come back and tell us how "pitiful" these commitments to conservation are.

http://www.beefusa.org/environmentalstewardshipaward.aspx

OOPS.

http://www.ndstockmen.org/?id=80&page=Environmental+Stewardship+Award

But hey don;t take my word for it, contact the G&F yourself.

http://gf.nd.gov/about-us/links

OOPS again.

Perhaps you can find mention of this "G&F program", on their website, I can not.

Credibility ron, knowing what you are talking about helps.

2. still waiting for you to offer up your conservation commitment and actions to see what you consider not "pitiful" by comparison.

Once again credibility ron, it is helped by backing up what you accuse.

Pages