More examples of BLM excess

Discussion in 'Lounge' started by ajole, Apr 25, 2014.

  1. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    NE Utah
    We have a recreation area called Little Sahara in Utah, its a BLM thing.

    So they decided to spend our tax dollars to build two helipads. Cost $120,000, for a total of 5000 square feet of concrete and some sidewalks and wind socks, electric installation and lighting.

    They had three life flights out of there this Easter, and about 3 ambulance runs plus 33 all just that weekend. My SIL wasn't one of them, but he managed to break a collarbone out there last year. It's a bad place to be on any holiday.

    But is it REALLY up to the taxpayers to provide that sort of help?

    Here's a local paper's article about it.

    Here's a nice 2011 list of BLM projects and expenses
  2. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Assuming that it isn't up to U.S. taxpayers at large to provide emergency assistance on "BLM managed" land (ugh...), then who's responsibility is it? Or do we just let them die?

    I think that if the BLM is going to "manage" it then they're jolly well on the hook for it. "Improvements," "Emergency access," roads, fire mitigation, etc. And BLM should have to pay State and Local taxes on it too.

    Or, you know, they could just return it to the States that they stole it from..., err, "manage it for." Then the State's on the hook for those services.

    Peace favor your sword,

  3. FlashBang

    FlashBang I Stand With Talon Lifetime Supporter

    If the BLM manages the land, then they should be liable for all injuries incurred on the property... same as a homeowner. :)
  4. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    NE Utah go out in the National Forest and chop your leg off with an think the Feds should cover you?

    Go to the Grand Canyon and get to the bottom and have heart attack...Here's what the Park Service says:

    " You are accountable for costs associated with the search and rescue efforts on your behalf, and while the National Park Service has your life and safety as its highest priority, it is irresponsible to initiate such efforts frivolously.

    You think the Feds will cover you? I will tell you now...they won't. No one would even think to cry to the Forest Service or Park Service about needing to add helipads and better EMS services out there.

    So why do you think the BLM should?
  5. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    NE Utah
    Hey, they were free to NOT go out there...:rolleyes:

    Now THAT could make some sense.
  6. FlashBang

    FlashBang I Stand With Talon Lifetime Supporter

    I'm not talking about building helipads... I'm talking about suing them for any and all injuries that occur on their "property". They should also have to pay State/County/City property taxes on all the property as well. As it is, they simply take what they want and have nothing to stop them or make it not worth their while to steal property.
  7. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    NE Utah are suggesting we make it economically worth their while to turn the land over to the states?

    Or that we sue the gov't out of existence?

    Or what?:confused:
  8. FlashBang

    FlashBang I Stand With Talon Lifetime Supporter

    I am suggesting that it is made to be uneconomically sound for them to step in a take away property from States or individuals. Heck, if States can take our property by eminent domain, why not do the same to the BLM?
  9. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    NE Utah
    Well..they aren't stepping in, they stepped in about 100+ years ago.

    They didn't "take property away", they simply had land that wasn't taken by citizens during homesteading, because the gov't was too stupid to understand that citizens couldn't live on 160 acres when there was no water on your acreage, out here, and so, they kept it.

    As for eminent domain...the state has no standing to take land from the Federal gov't that way, even though the Federal gov't is just an agent of the people in that sense.

    But I sure wish they would put that to the test and get the Supreme court to make a ruling. We ARE trying...
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2014
  10. This is a free country and that means people have to freedom to make choices and reap the rewards, or pain and agony, of those choices. Just because someone chooses activiites like mountain climbing or off roading that can result in loss of limb or life doesn't mean everyone else is responsible for saving you if you have an accident. If you want to engage in 'high risk activities' you should be required to have insurance to cover rescue/recovery operations.

    But they're not on the 'hook' for it, we the tax payers are.
  11. cicpup

    cicpup Resident PITA Supporting Member

    How irresponsible of someone to have a frivolous heart attack.