Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the News

[dabrockster]

although technically without the comma, that post doesnt mean what you want it to mean

[Donuthole]

This. There is a lot of government mismanagement of federal lands, and there are some outrageous things happening with liberal groups using the courts, and in some cases the BLM and Forest Service, to serve their purposes, but Bundy is a whack job. Whether he was wronged or not, his reaction was wrong one from the beginning, and he's drawn out every crazy from this side of the Mississippi to come brandish a weapon. He has set back ranchers across the West, as every rancher with a legitimate cause from here on will be categorized with this crazy jackass and his militia. As an aside, what the hell do these crazy militia men think they are going to accomplish against any real military action that they would have to face? A unit of (pick your favorites: seals, rangers, recon marines, etc.) would take them out silently in one morning with a wad of chewing gum, a sharp stick, and a box of condoms, and still have enough time (and condoms) left to hit Vegas for a night on the town.

I highly doubt that wack job Cliven Bundy is even on the Mob's radar.

[Uncle Ted]

I highly doubt that wack job Cliven Bundy is even on the Mob's radar.

Too bad. It may have saved the government the trouble.

[Dwight Schr-ute]

Looks like his supporters are now running for the hills

I'd like to hear Michele Fiore's response. She's been Nevada's version of Michelle Bauchman through all of this.

Rand Paul: I like his comment and I think was the bigger topic of discussion.. Which will now just be pushed down the pages.. Too bad..
"But with regard to the general question, should the states have some prerogative in this, I think so. I would like to see the land owned by individuals, either privately or, at the very most, the state government, but not the federal government. And I would like to see the Endangered Species Act administered with a little more sense of what people need as well as what animals need."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...m-bundy/?clsrd

Okay, where do we start? Do we open up the National Parks? The State Parks? State conservation areas? City parks? I always find this discussion interesting. Let's pretend that the BLM goes away and the government opens up all that land to the public. Do we really believe that the Cliven Bundy's are going to drop a check to buy up those 65,000 acres so he can continue to graze his cattle on submarginal agriculture? It's not going to happen. If Cliven were to kick the BLM out, he'd be shooting himself in the foot. He can't compete in the open market. If he could, he already would be.

Now for the ESA. How do we make that any more user friendly? How do you begin to consider what is best for a species when you're measuring that against the species that is almost always the direct contributor of the first's endangerment? Do we base management decisions on convenience? To we establish an economic ceiling? If Mr. Paul doesn't think that these things aren't already happening, then he doesn't really understand the ESA. As I've discussed in this thread before, the listing process for a species is long, arduous, and data based. The process includes many opportunities for the public to provide input, which much be considered in the final decision.

I've been involved in four large construction projects this spring, all that take place within desert tortoise habitat, not to mention an endangered plant, two endangered bird species, and an archaeological district. We consulted each project with the Federal agencies, who put a list of unreasonable requirements such as: speed limits, proper disposal of garbage, some fencing, and project monitoring. I realize that this isn't every one's experience with the ESA, but in my experience, the Federal agencies approach these with the perspective of "how can we make it happen" not "how can we shut this thing down." Seems like Cliven was given the same treatment. He was essentially told "We're happy to work with you and your permits, but given the new information we have, we need to reduce the amount of cattle that we can allow in this particular area. Cliven ended the conversation by ignoring them for 20 years.

[ERCougar]

I'd like to hear Michele Fiore's response. She's been Nevada's version of Michelle Bauchman through all of this.



Okay, where do we start? Do we open up the National Parks? The State Parks? State conservation areas? City parks? I always find this discussion interesting. Let's pretend that the BLM goes away and the government opens up all that land to the public. Do we really believe that the Cliven Bundy's are going to drop a check to buy up those 65,000 acres so he can continue to graze his cattle on submarginal agriculture? It's not going to happen. If Cliven were to kick the BLM out, he'd be shooting himself in the foot. He can't compete in the open market. If he could, he already would be.

I took an Environmental Economics class at BYU from Arden Pope. I don't remember much from the grazing rights discussion, except that the grazing rights fees charged by the BLM are WAY below market value.

I would love for the Burning Man people to follow through with Bundy Fest.

[Dwight Schr-ute]

Cliven's thoughts concerning the Negro on video.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...ape_watch.html

[New Mexican Disaster]

I admit nothing.


In all seriousness, I looked at what was taking place and saw bigger topics that could have had major implications later on in the public opinion of Big Govt. Could it have had an impact? Who knows.. But he just harpooned any clout he had in the media/political world by his stupid comments.. Guess that's what happens when you hold a fireside without being prepared and run off topic...

Aren't you a government bureaucrat yourself?

[Uncle Ted]

Maybe it is time for Nevada to follow Arizona and get the Mexican Gray Wolf back in clark county… This could solve a lot of problems (e.g. drive out the Bundy's cattle and solve the homeless problem in the streets of Las Vegas).

Arizona Game and Fish officials have backed a proposal to make changes to the reintroduction of Mexican gray wolves into Arizona and New Mexico.
The move came the same day that Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed legislation that would have permitted people to kill wolves in self defense.
[…]

https://news.azpm.org/p/local-news/2...overy-program/

Good thing that Jan Brewer vetoed that bill so folks can't kill these wolves in self defense.

[cowboy]

I'd like to hear Michele Fiore's response. She's been Nevada's version of Michelle Bauchman through all of this.



Okay, where do we start? Do we open up the National Parks? The State Parks? State conservation areas? City parks? I always find this discussion interesting. Let's pretend that the BLM goes away and the government opens up all that land to the public. Do we really believe that the Cliven Bundy's are going to drop a check to buy up those 65,000 acres so he can continue to graze his cattle on submarginal agriculture? It's not going to happen. If Cliven were to kick the BLM out, he'd be shooting himself in the foot. He can't compete in the open market. If he could, he already would be.

Now for the ESA. How do we make that any more user friendly? How do you begin to consider what is best for a species when you're measuring that against the species that is almost always the direct contributor of the first's endangerment? Do we base management decisions on convenience? To we establish an economic ceiling? If Mr. Paul doesn't think that these things aren't already happening, then he doesn't really understand the ESA. As I've discussed in this thread before, the listing process for a species is long, arduous, and data based. The process includes many opportunities for the public to provide input, which much be considered in the final decision.

I've been involved in four large construction projects this spring, all that take place within desert tortoise habitat, not to mention an endangered plant, two endangered bird species, and an archaeological district. We consulted each project with the Federal agencies, who put a list of unreasonable requirements such as: speed limits, proper disposal of garbage, some fencing, and project monitoring. I realize that this isn't every one's experience with the ESA, but in my experience, the Federal agencies approach these with the perspective of "how can we make it happen" not "how can we shut this thing down." Seems like Cliven was given the same treatment. He was essentially told "We're happy to work with you and your permits, but given the new information we have, we need to reduce the amount of cattle that we can allow in this particular area. Cliven ended the conversation by ignoring them for 20 years.

Dwight, you and I are on opposite sides of this, and I don't have time to answer this completely, but a couple quick things: 1) Nobody's talking about eliminating NP's or State lands. That's a straw man, and you know it. The reasonable approach would be for the BLM and Forest Service to turn management over to the states, and allow states to sell land as it sees fit. States won't sell much, as we have seen, and they will do a better job of managing the land. 2) The ESA is a pain in the ass. I know you'd like to have us pretend that compliance is a matter of meeting 'reasonable' guidelines, but that just isn't true. Moreover, it is being used by radical environmental groups for a purpose it was not intended: to grab and control land that has an otherwise productive and beneficial use. 3) I'll guarandamntee you that the BLM did not say "we're happy to work with you on this." That ain't how they do business. They tell people how it is, what's going to happen, and that noncompliance will result in a loss of grazing privileges. If you think otherwise, put down the crack pipe.

We'll never agree, so I've said what I'll say...for now. But even though you're a misguided environmentalist whacko, I still like you, and I'd be happy to buy you dinner some time as long as you don't bring friends.

[TripletDaddy]

dont trust him, dwight.

[Solon]

although technically without the comma, that post doesn't mean what you want it to mean

This is why we need a vocative case in English.
Or just an understanding of basic comma usage.

[TripletDaddy]

This is why we need a vocative case in English.

preaching to the choir on this one, bro.

[YOhio]

Jennings.jpg

[dabrockster]

This is why we need a vocative case in English.
Or just an understanding of basic comma usage.

preaching to the choir on this one, bro.

[cowboy]

dont trust him, dwight.

I'll tell you what, Dwight. If we go to lunch, you're impossible polite to the server, and you end up picking up the tab, I'll send you two briskets so you can throw a party (without me) for your 200 closest friends.