Tuesday, May 6, 2014

Important cultural distinctions exist between public, private lands

Over 80 percent of Nevada is federally claimed land. Only 0.3 percent of Iowa is controlled by the federal government. When someone lives in an area where almost every inch of land is private property, it is difficult to understand what this distinction means. People east of Nebraska tend to see federal control in the positive sense of national parks, wildlife protection or needed national infrastructure. They also tend to describe these lands as if they were no different from private property. Terms such as “government land,” “federal property,” or words suggesting that the federal government “owns” the land are common. These terms are historically and culturally incorrect.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

I read this article, and the comments. Those people are very uninformed and blatantly biased, because they don't want to know both sides. Which is to say they don't want to know the truth. Sad. They probably vote, too.

Anonymous said...

People who live east of Nebraska and most city dwellers in the remainder of the country in addition to many who live in the sprawl of suburbia, which would include large swaths of the West Coast from Seattle to L.A., the entire, Denver- metro area including Boulder and up to Ft. Collins and the Santa Fe and Albuquerque and don't forget all those East Coast retirees living in Phoenix....uh, that adds up to a hell of a lot of the population in American have no clue how much land is "controlled" by the Feds in one manner or another. It is not just BLM. There are Forest Service, EPA, Fish and Wildlife, Nat. Parks, DoD, DoE. I am not even sure if I named them all.
The fed bastards claim to "own" about 47% of the state of Alaska! That alone is a huge chunk of real estate.

My question is: How does that equate to proscribed 10 Square miles? You know, that little thing mentioned in the founding document called the Constitution.
Seems a lot like that "shall not be infringed" thing, with exception of the 20,000 gun laws they have erected.

DC Wright said...

Posted my comment at the site. Most commenters actually FAVOR the current situation. Smoe are good on the facts, but only one almost nut case.

Robert Fowler said...

I live in Des Moines and I can confirm that most of the commentators on there are big government loving liberal idiot pisswits. Any time something comes up about guns, there are a few of them that are for the complete confiscation of every privately owned gun. It's no wonder they are cheer leading for big gov.

Paul X said...

"Terms such as 'government land,' 'federal property,' or words suggesting that the federal government 'owns' the land are common.

These terms are historically and culturally incorrect"

Sorry, I have to disagree. The author of the article is talking about what should be (in his opinion). What matters, is what is. The owners of something are those who control it and who can dispose of it as they please. Currently, for the land in question, that is the ruling class running the federal government, and supported by the people in the cities. It's no more important that the feds gained control through shady means, than it is that the previous owners gained control by taking it from the Indians. Nobody cares about that any more.

The ruling class has no incentive to give it up. The only way Nevadans will re-acquire control of the land they live and work on, is through revolution or secession. It's time they (and everyone in the West) recognized that fact.

Unknown said...

Some of us in Iowa are well aware of the federals propensity to grab land,It's happening here on a smaller scale,mostly in the Loess Hills region in western Ia.The Ia. DNR is so busy spending the hunting and fishing excise tax money (which is supposed to go to the preservation of wildlife )on building bike trails for the Agenda 21 crowd, that they have no inclination to resist the feds hunger for other peoples land.
Traveled three hours to Omaha last night to attend a meeting of Neb. Oathkeepers , it was well worth the trip. Met a lotta good folks there including Steve Homan. We discussed the "Old Farts Brigade" out in the parking lot after the meeting.Great guy,who clarified a bunch of issues from the Bundy Ranch fustercluck.
I'm glad to see that your scan came back negative.I had my last one on 17 March with similar results,no metastatic activity detected, blood work all within parameters.Unfortunately the surgeons carved out enough of my guts to make me eligible to run for congress,but I can still function,and will continue to do so till the undertaker catches up with me. Keep on keepin' on Mike I've been done with chemo for a year and it's a lot better world without those trips to the poison palace every couple of weeks.I hope your results are the same.