9 million acres of public land in utah could be closed to OHV use

[Austere]

^ Even Kucinich? That wife of his is hot.

 

[argatoga]

The problem is finding someone to replace them. It use to be seen as a great civic duty to serve in elected office. Now that isn't the case. Few people want to deal with the drama and headache of it all. The whole system needs an enema.

 

[Spectre]

^ Even Kucinich? That wife of his is hot.

All means all. And just because Kucinich has a hot wife doesn't mean that he's a good legislator (he's not).

The problem is finding someone to replace them. It use to be seen as a great civic duty to serve in elected office. Now that isn't the case. Few people want to deal with the drama and headache of it all. The whole system needs an enema.

Agreed. The evidence of how far it's fallen is shown by the lack of quality in the current people vying for employment there. And we need to do something to keep people from making elected positions into a lifelong career, which is actually ruining the system. Paying them next to nothing might be a good way to accomplish this....

We also need to make national level posts part time, so those making the laws actually have to come back and face their constituents as well as the consequences of their legislation. We do this in Texas (our legislature only meets for six months every other year) and it cuts way down on the amount of stupidity (and re-election-justifying legislation) from our capital.

 

[freeferrarisdonotexist]

Actually, this isn't about Obama per se. It's more about people getting suckered in by the whole hope and change concept promulgated by the Democrats and handing over the Congress (who actually makes the laws) to them.

See, the Democrats are the party of the radical environmentalists and have been for years. They're the ones that always close land and eternally restrict access, kicking hunters, bikers and even horseback riders off of lands they have used for generations. They've done this under Clinton, under Carter, and now under Obama. When they don't have the presidency but do have Congress, they still push for this sort of thing only slower because they have to stick parts of their agenda in bills the President won't veto - which is what they did under Reagan and the two Bushes.

If you voted a Democrat into national office, you are responsible for this. If you didn't think this would happen, then you didn't look into what that party stands for and does.

I'm not saying vote Republican (and I'm not a Republican.) I am saying that if you voted Democrat, you are responsible for this.

I'm certain I'm going to get a ton of neg reps for this, but the truth needs to be told.

From what I've seen in my time in America both parties are dangerous- Democrats on terms of environmental extremism and some of their social policy, Republicans in terms of extreme capitalism, religious control, and plain old redneck values (ie, hating everyone except America, trying to make laws based on religion etc).

While I dislike politics as well, I do hold a few opinions on American politicians- Joe Biden is as gaff-prone and dumb as Bush Jr., John Bainer (the man who basically said, in response to global warming, "the world will end when Jesus says so" instead of an actual argument) is what makes religion in politics disturbing, and Sarah Palin is a full-fledged dumbass.

In terms of government as long as I am not murdering/raping/stealing and paying my taxes, they can fuck off as far as I'm concerned. That's when "big government" starts to irritate me, not when they provide some services or raise taxes a bit, but when they start telling me what to do apart from criminal behaviour.

 

[Spectre]

From what I've seen in my time in America both parties are dangerous- Democrats on terms of environmental extremism and some of their social policy, Republicans in terms of extreme capitalism, religious control, and plain old redneck values (ie, hating everyone except America, trying to make laws based on religion etc).

While I dislike politics as well, I do hold a few opinions on American politicians- Joe Biden is as gaff-prone and dumb as Bush Jr., John Bainer (the man who basically said, in response to global warming, "the world will end when Jesus says so" instead of an actual argument) is what makes religion in politics disturbing, and Sarah Palin is a full-fledged dumbass.

In terms of government as long as I am not murdering/raping/stealing and paying my taxes, they can fuck off as far as I'm concerned. That's when "big government" starts to irritate me, not when they provide some services or raise taxes a bit, but when they start telling me what to do apart from criminal behaviour.

Both parties attempt to make laws based on religion. The difference is that the Republicans are both less successful at it and more open about it. The Democrats pass laws based on their peculiar religions of "anthropocentric global warming" and other earth-worshipping religions, yet deny that these are religions (when they really are.)

Also, extreme capitalism goes on under both parties. The only question is who gets to do it, and how honest is the government when someone gets caught.

 

[Twerp128]

Everyone sees what the media prefers them to see.

I know personally, my mayor, my representatives past and present, one local senator, also know Dick DeVos. The majority of people in politics are good people, just like you and me. The bullshit comes from all the special interest and lobbying, and the few extremists. A good friend of the family gave up his seat as representative because he was dealing with egotistical constituents and special interest PTA moms who really didn't know what the fuck they were talking about, just who to throw the shit at. He said, he took the job because his love of working with people, and quit when he started to hate the people he was supposed to serve. He took a teaching job in Palestine where he was immensely happy. Ironic.

Paying them next to nothing might be a good way to accomplish this....

What do you think elected officials make? And how do you total up benefits? Cum hoc ergo propter hoc.

 

[EyeMWing]

Agreed. The evidence of how far it's fallen is shown by the lack of quality in the current people vying for employment there. And we need to do something to keep people from making elected positions into a lifelong career, which is actually ruining the system. Paying them next to nothing might be a good way to accomplish this....

Screw it, I'll do it. Just give me a few years to age enough to become eligible and a few million to get my name on the ballot. And then I'll be needing legions of congresscritters who will stay on message.

 

[zookiemike]

Fucking stupid bullshit.

I want to walk in the woods. I don't need some yuppy trash commissioning some ass clown to tell me where to walk or drive.


Are we commies?

 

[warren]

No, but he's been in Washington too long as well. Throw them all out and start over.

Great, just what we need: replace a bunch of experienced people who do their job poorly -- and thus screw it up, with a bunch of inpexerienced people don't know what they're doing -- and will thus screw it up.

 

[Spectre]

What do you think elected officials make? And how do you total up benefits? Cum hoc ergo propter hoc.

In Texas, our state legislators make a grand total of $7200 per year. Since they only work for six months every two years, this means that they have to out and get jobs in the community. This means that they can't hide in the capital away from their constituents and the consequences of their laws. That's the point of a part time legislature that isn't paid squat.

I think that's about the right mix, personally. Entirely too many of our Senators and Representatives stay in the insulated atmosphere in Washington and lose touch with not only their constituents but reality itself. (Sheila Jackson-Lee comes to mind, to name one idiot from my own state.)

A US Senator, not including benefits, etc., lobbyist gifts, or any other income, makes $174,000 per year. We certainly are not getting our money's worth out of them.

Great, just what we need: replace a bunch of experienced people who do their job poorly -- and thus screw it up, with a bunch of inpexerienced people don't know what they're doing -- and will thus screw it up.

It's not like the new people could possibly do any worse - and as past US political experience has shown, quite often they do a heck of a lot better than the evicted incumbents!

 

[GRtak]

BACK ON TOPIC

Riding areas are always under attack from various groups. You have powerfull tools available to help you fight it being closed. If you send an email it will get ignored. If a group(think of a snazzy name) and they send 1000 emails, you will be noticed.

 

[Dsemaj]

They already did it to New York.

Folks, this is what happens when you let the envirowacko party run the US. They close down all the public lands unless you have a horse or want to hike in, and then wonder why nobody wants to use said lands.

The proposed Wilderness designation would also make the land off limits to ATV riders, mountain bikers and horseback riders.

Even want to ban horses, for crying out loud.

 

[thedguy]

Fuck everything east of the Rocky Mountains.

So far Utah has become the dumping ground for high level radioactive waste from the East Coast.
Now they want to make money by dumping Depleted Uranium, which gets "hotter" as it decays into it's daughter elements.
They also want to line their pockets by bringing in radioactive waste from fucking Italy and dumping that in my back yard.
I have a coal-fired electrical plant that spews air pollution into my state, but every watt of energy goes to California.
And speaking of California, stop filling your swimming pools with our water! How the fuck can you be surprised when our farmers and ranchers cut you off for irrigating the fucking desert for your lawns?!

Oh, but it's ok to take away access to our lands in the name of the goddammed fucking environment? When the fuck did Washington or private interests ever care? I drive past a Uranium tailings dump every time I go to Moab, but I can't drive my SUV over the sandstone?

Tongue My Hairy Crack, Washington!

Back off-topic here:

You know I was showing some sympathy but you just couldn't resist could you?

You mind showing some proof that we are using YOUR water for our pools and not for our currently drying up farm land in the San Juaquin, Coachella, and Imperial Valleys?

The countries most populous state isn't all swimming pools and water parks.

 

[argatoga]

I thought Southern California got most if its water from the Northern part of the state.

 

[thedguy]

On-topic: As I'm too lazy to actually do the work myself, if someone gives me a template to fill in the blanks and someone to send a letter off too, I'll gladly submit it to anyone and everyone in congress to tell them to leave MOAB alone. Considering how much I hear about the place from off-roaders I can only imagine what it would do to the states economy if people are practically banned from it.

I thought Southern California got most if its water from the Northern part of the state.

The populated area does (i.e. LA). All the Colorado river usage goes to the farmland in the latter 2 mentioned valley's. San Juaquin gets it from the North as well.

All our pools are filled with water from the Sierra Nevada's and much of what flows south into NorCal.

Oh and on that note, the parts that due use the Colorado river haven't been using their allotment of water the passed 2 years or so.

 

[Blind_Io]

Back off-topic here:

You know I was showing some sympathy but you just couldn't resist could you?

You mind showing some proof that we are using YOUR water for our pools and not for our currently drying up farm land in the San Juaquin, Coachella, and Imperial Valleys?

The countries most populous state isn't all swimming pools and water parks.

The populated area does (i.e. LA). All the Colorado river usage goes to the farmland in the latter 2 mentioned valley's. San Juaquin gets it from the North as well.

All our pools are filled with water from the Sierra Nevada's and much of what flows south into NorCal.

Oh and on that note, the parts that due use the Colorado river haven't been using their allotment of water the passed 2 years or so.

If California needs water X for crops and water Y for swimming pools/water parks/ and green lawns in the middle of the damn desert. They use Sierra Nevada water for Y and water from the Colorado for X. They still use X+Y. If they reduced Y, they would need less water from the Colorado river system. It doesn't matter that right now the Colorado is going to crops, if all the Sierra Nevada water wasn't so wasted they could use their local supply for the crops.

The reason water use is down is because about 4-5 years ago Utah, Nevada, Arizona and a couple other states, if I recall, got together and cut California off. Our crops and livestock were dying because of drought and California was demanding more water than ever. Now there are strict controls on how much water California can take from the rest of the West.

Put yourself in my shoes for a few minutes. How would you feel if your state was treated the way Utah is being treated? I'm pretty sure you don't want an above-ground high-level radioactive waste dump site one hour up wind from your house. I'm pretty sure no one in California wants a Chemical Weapons Incinerator in their back yard. Believe me, it's not fun trying to explain to visitors that those big things on poles are sensors to detect any leaks of chemical weapons, like nerve gas.

So pardon the living fuck out of me if I'm just a little bit pissy about the whole matter.

Oh, and here is your proof:
http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcconserv/1fedoff12.html

LAS VEGAS -- California must meet a commitment to reduce its dependence on Colorado River water over the next 15 years, a federal Interior Department official has warned.

``If California is not successful, the results could be grave for California,'' said Bennett Raley, the assistant interior secretary who handles water issues.

Dennis Underwood, vice president of Colorado River Resources for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, said he was confident the goals will be met through conservation and agreements to obtain water from other sources.
The urban water district serves 17 million people from Santa Barbara to the Mexican border, but has to yield Colorado River water rights to agricultural users in three other districts -- the Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley Water District, and the San Diego County Water Authority.

``We're the lower priority, so we're the ones who would be hit the hardest,'' Underwood said.
Raley, speaking to an annual Colorado River Water Users Association conference, said several more dry years like 2001 could limit other states' ability to send surplus water to California.

He acknowledged that a cut in water to Southern California would have a ripple effect. He predicted battles about agricultural water use and the possibility of a north-south water war in the state.
``In contrast,'' Raley said, ``we have so much to gain from successes.''

Raley said he was Interior Secretary Gale Norton's emissary to complete an agreement that former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt negotiated last year among California and the six other Colorado River Basin states -- Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada.

It is due to be completed by December 2002.

Dubbed the ''4.4 Plan,'' it lets California receive surplus Colorado River water that would otherwise go to the other states, in return for California's pledge to reduce reliance on the river within 15 years.
California is entitled to 4.4 million acre feet of water a year under the 1928 Boulder Canyon Project Act. That agreement was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1964. Nevada is allotted 300,000 acre feet. Arizona gets 2.8 million acre feet.
In recent years, California's annual draw has grown to as much as 800,000 acre feet above its allotment.

The cities are at the bottom of the list, but they do draw from the Colorado. Note the date is 2001, about the same time the other Western states started to raise hell about California's overuse of the water system.

And speaking of farmers - this time from 2009.
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-mar...tial-conservation-end-california-water-crisis

A report released today by California's Pacific Institute estimates that reasonable water conservation improvements on the state's farms could save a huge amount of water--far more than what farmers have been forced to relinquish to protect fish habitat during the state's ongoing drought. The amount that could be saved, 1.8 trillion gallons annually, is more than 15 times the size of the municipal supply of San Francisco.

The report, Sustaining California Agriculture in an Uncertain Future, provides considerable ammunition to environmentalists in their fight with farmers over the West's dwindling water resources. In the midst of the third year of drought in California, growers are blaming endangered species laws for crimping their water supply and contributing to $1 billion in lost revenue this season. Though they've used their plight to call for weakening environmental regulations and building more dams and reservoirs, the report suggests their efforts are misplaced. Smarter conservation has allowed some growers "to increase their income, crop yields, and production, even during drought," says Pacific Institute president Peter Gleick. "Such success stories offer the state a vision of what a healthy agricultural future might look like."

The water conservation methods that the Gleick studied are already in use in the state, though many farmers cling to older practices. For example, 60 percent of crops in California are still irrigated by flooding the field, even though drip irrigation methods can easily halve water use. The report also suggests that farmers apply less water to crops during drought-tolerant growth stages and use sensors that can detect when soil is dry.

These ideas can seem far-removed from our lives until we realize that the products we consume account for more than 90 percent of our daily water use, far more than what comes out of our taps. I explore this idea in "What's Your Water Footprint," a piece in the current issue. The Pacific Institute and other environmental groups eventually hope the concept of a water footprint will catch on much as carbon footprints have. The idea could be used to reward farmers who do the right thing, either with tax breaks, loans, or a premium for the products they sell.

The case for looking at carbon footprints and water footprints together is stronger than ever. A new study from the University of Colorado found that climate change creates a 50 percent chance that the reservoirs supplied by the Colorado River, the West's main water source, could run dry by 2057. And a study released today by UC Davis found that California's $10 billion fruit and nut industry is under threat from higher temperatues, which could make it impossible to grow walnuts, pistacios, peaches, apricots, plums, and cherries almost everywhere in the Central Valley. If that happens, all the water conservation technology in the world probably won't save us.

On-topic: As I'm too lazy to actually do the work myself, if someone gives me a template to fill in the blanks and someone to send a letter off too, I'll gladly submit it to anyone and everyone in congress to tell them to leave MOAB alone. Considering how much I hear about the place from off-roaders I can only imagine what it would do to the states economy if people are practically banned from it.

Go to the link in the first post. At the bottom you can enter your ZIP code. All you do is fill out the form and it sends a letter to your representative on your behalf.

 

[thedguy]

Based off of what you posted it's our farmers refusing to do things efficiently and not our empty pools that no one can afford to keep up. So please stop saying our fucking pools. I'm all for making the farmers pick up efficiency, I'm sure you've noticed on other posts of mine I'm not a fan of pointless waste.

Beyond any of that, until the economic downturn California has had a massive increase in number of idiots moving in. To top it off I've seen a few news articles (i'll post 'em up later if you want) showing that farmers have not only reduced their consumption in the imperial/coachella valley's they aren't even using their allotment of the CO river, even in this time of a drought.

As far as the rest of it goes, you bitch about my state and how poorly it's run but considering how much you are hating how the way things are going in yours all of a sudden, perhaps yours isn't run so well either... or at least doesn't have it's own residence interest first. Shouldn't have spent so much damn time bitching about the British Nanny state and how things are being run here in Cali now should ya?

 

[tone76]

I read 'OHV' as 'overhead valve'.

I guess that means that vehicles with sidevalve engines should still be OK to use in the Utah wilderness, then.

 

[Blind_Io]

Based off of what you posted it's our farmers refusing to do things efficiently and not our empty pools that no one can afford to keep up. So please stop saying our fucking pools. I'm all for making the farmers pick up efficiency, I'm sure you've noticed on other posts of mine I'm not a fan of pointless waste.

Beyond any of that, until the economic downturn California has had a massive increase in number of idiots moving in. To top it off I've seen a few news articles (i'll post 'em up later if you want) showing that farmers have not only reduced their consumption in the imperial/coachella valley's they aren't even using their allotment of the CO river, even in this time of a drought.

As far as the rest of it goes, you bitch about my state and how poorly it's run but considering how much you are hating how the way things are going in yours all of a sudden, perhaps yours isn't run so well either... or at least doesn't have it's own residence interest first. Shouldn't have spent so much damn time bitching about the British Nanny state and how things are being run here in Cali now should ya?

*sigh* look, there is only so much water to go around. Water is being used on LA swimming pools and lawns in the middle of the desert when it could go to farming. I don't care that the Colorado water is going to farming, the fact that California needs any water from the Colorado is because they have outgrown their native water supply in the Sierras. California has also outgrown their power grid and their solution was to build a coal power plant in Utah and run power all the way to California; we get all the pollution but don't see a single watt. It's no different than the East Coast benefiting from clean air because they use nuclear power, but when it's time to deal with the byproducts, they ship it into my back yard.

I'm not saying that California hasn't made improvements, I'm saying that they were abusing their access to water at the expense of other states and it took a federal court action to fix it. This is one case where Utah and our neighbors won the round. I bring it up because if it wasn't for the prevalent attitude that Western states are a desolate, empty wasteland it wouldn't have happened in the first place. The same attitudes that resulted in the confrontation over water is responsible for the radioactive waste being dumped and the building of dirty coal plants without any local benefit. You are arguing about one symptom, but the problem persists.

Um, the stuff going on in my state is being done at the federal level, not the state level, so try again.

It's not that there are more idiots moving in, it's that all the smart people are moving out. Have you seen the highways out of California recently? It's a non-stop caravan of moving vans as people move out in search of work and lower costs of living. It just seems like there are more idiots total because there are more per capita.

 

[thedguy]

*sigh* look, there is only so much water to go around. Water is being used on LA swimming pools and lawns in the middle of the desert when it could go to farming.

LA isn't in the Desert.

I don't care that the Colorado water is going to farming, the fact that California needs any water from the Colorado is because they have outgrown their native water supply in the Sierras.

Last I checked the Colorado also runs along the border of Arizona AND California, we have rights to it as much as any other state. We've had rights to it for what... nearly 100 years now? Long before there was more people on the west side of the mississippi (IIRC).

We have been making inroads to reduce our water consumption. A lot of it is helped by the supposed number of people fleeing the economic problems of this state for others.

If so much is in fact going to water lawns in the desert, why is it that many of the lawns that are IN the desert are either A) dead or b) made of fucking rock because of laws in those counties now allowing wasting of water in that manner. Keep in mind, you are talking to someone who works out in the actual southern California desert on a regular basis, hell I lived out there. It's full of retiree's who don't have the ability to maintain a lawn anymore.

California has also outgrown their power grid and their solution was to build a coal power plant in Utah and run power all the way to California; we get all the pollution but don't see a single watt. It's no different than the East Coast benefiting from clean air because they use nuclear power, but when it's time to deal with the byproducts, they ship it into my back yard.

I got nothing here, our state passed some retarded emmissions laws so the solution was to not build power stations here (as god forbid there be any nuclear power). On that subject, if we did have a couple of nuke plants and piped water from the ocean, we could desalinate it and not bother the rivers anymore... of course then San Francisco would start bitching about some random crap in the ocean close to shore.

I'm not saying that California hasn't made improvements, I'm saying that they were abusing their access to water at the expense of other states and it took a federal court action to fix it. This is one case where Utah and our neighbors won the round. I bring it up because if it wasn't for the prevalent attitude that Western states are a desolate, empty wasteland it wouldn't have happened in the first place. The same attitudes that resulted in the confrontation over water is responsible for the radioactive waste being dumped and the building of dirty coal plants without any local benefit. You are arguing about one symptom, but the problem persists.

Um, the stuff going on in my state is being done at the federal level, not the state level, so try again.

Well if your state was doing it's job then they might not be allowing the Fed to bully them around so much. If they weren't so busy trying to protect Mormons right to have 9 wives and 1800 kids then you might not be having such a problem. Obviously they were concentrating on the real issues at hand.

It's not that there are more idiots moving in, it's that all the smart people are moving out. Have you seen the highways out of California recently? It's a non-stop caravan of moving vans as people move out in search of work and lower costs of living. It just seems like there are more idiots total because there are more per capita.

Not sure I can argue with that. Especially with the City of San Francisco now actively harboring fugitives from other countries because they are "illegal" and don't agree with the rest of the country/state laws on immigration.

I'll grant you this much, at least for once you are complaining about something remotely relevant to where you live and not about everything else.

edit: I'll stay quiet from now on, unless it's directly related to the original topic. Anything else after your public response to this Blind can be done via PM if you want.