Under Prop. 120, Arizona declares sovereignty over federal land
Grand Canyon
Welcome to the discussion.
-
Current users sign in here.
10 comments:
Rules of Conduct
Happening Now...
-
Saturday 5/25/2013
-
Friday 5/24/2013
Connect with us
© Copyright 2013, East Valley Tribune, Tempe, AZ. [Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]
A Division of 10/13 Communications
samkat posted at 1:54 pm on Sun, Sep 23, 2012.
Crandell is an idiot. If prop 120 comes before the voters, I will vote against it.
aaarrrggghhh posted at 2:49 pm on Sun, Sep 23, 2012.
No, we should NOT be developing/destroying more land, which is the ultimate goal of those AZ agencies that want to take this land. Leave it alone. This is just another in a long, long, far too long string of waste-of-taxpayer-dollars antics by the AZ legislature.
one of the last posted at 3:52 pm on Sun, Sep 23, 2012.
The Key word is sovereign . The Legislature wants sovereignty over Arizona to exploit it as they want. Destroy the Air, the Water, the land what ever their big money backers want. And start a war against Mexico while they are at it. The majority are still being ruled over by Russel Pearce. And this Prop. 120,is unconstitutional.
doctor posted at 3:58 pm on Sun, Sep 23, 2012.
While this bill will not go anywhere in the federal system I do support the bill. I have worked with the federal government on developing PRIVATE land in the forest. The forest service has cut off all but one entry/exit to this land; has not allowed any development of the private land such as permanent facilities, water well, bathroom, cabin, etc. The forest service is willing to TRADE this land for other land about 30 miles further away....the forest service wants to develop this PRIVATE land into a park for the public to rent spaces for a profit. This has been an ongoing fight for some 12 years. Yes, I do support Prop. 120 but I do not expect it achieve its goal.
downtownresident posted at 4:31 pm on Sun, Sep 23, 2012.
This means turning control of all that land to the lunatics that populate the capitol and legislature?
Bad idea. Really bad idea.
They're not mature enough to make a rational decision.
NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!
Deddzone posted at 9:29 pm on Sun, Sep 23, 2012.
Vote the current nuts out of the state government! Yet another waste of tax money and time.
wdgnas posted at 5:56 am on Mon, Sep 24, 2012.
Arnquist is not alone in those concerns. Earlier this year the Legislature approved a virtually identical measure, only to have it vetoed. Gov. Jan Brewer said while she shares the frustration of how the state’s natural resources are being managed, this is not the answer. She said if the federal government were to somehow accede to the demand, the state is totally unprepared to take over close to 73 million acres of federal land.
but the politicos know several private entities that will take a stab at it.
Bluepoet posted at 10:48 am on Mon, Sep 24, 2012.
There should be a penalty for propostiions that are symbolic...however, since there isn't, I will "symbolically" vote no...
What a waste of time=taxpayer dollars!
If there's frustration by some, with the federal bureaucracy in land management, just ponder the frustration of the voter, who expects the voted to at least have the basic communication skills to get their job done, instead of forever posturing...
Fedupwgov posted at 5:04 pm on Sat, Oct 13, 2012.
Although I hate the over-regulation forced upon everyone now by the Federal Government EPA, CWA, CAA that have hindered and closed many businesses and that not enough funding to the Forest Service and BLM has closed access to many areas controled by them. I know that AZ State Trust Lands and the controls over them are far worse and less accessible onto them. Mining, logging, prospecting are really hard to get permits into AZ Trust Lands. AZ Trust Lands are auctioned off or out right sold to individual intrest groups, businesses and individuals for personal uses. Think it is hard to go anywhere now in a Forest Service/BLM area to camp or hike, hunt or fish, take photographs or ride your bike or motorcycle or ATV or shoot your guns...All of those require short term permits on Trust Lands...oh sorry, you can only shoot a gun if you are legally hunting something, not target shooting allowed. Vote NO on Prop 120 There has to be a better way.
tjwestbr posted at 2:43 pm on Tue, Oct 23, 2012.
"force the federal government to surrender its title" - the Federal Government does not hold title to this land. The land is held in trust, (not owned) by the united States of America on behalf of the owners: 'We the People'. The united States of America cannot own land other than 10 square miles in Washington DC. "The Federal Government" i.e. the UNITED STATES corporation can 'own' land being a private corporation, but it does not own BLM or federal forest lands that are still owned by 'We the People'. Hence we are not talking about transfer of title, we are talking about who gets the responsibility to 'manage' the land owned by 'We the People'. Since the Federal Government does not have the constitutional authority to 'manage lands', it makes sense to have Arizona manage the lands on behalf of 'We the People'