Are pro-environement progressive liberals-moderate liberals welcome in Wyoming (whether vacationing or relocating) (home, bankrupt)

[Itz]

Originally Posted by sunsprit

While not in Wyoming, a perfect regional example of "pro-environmentalist" attitudes screwing up local resources (and the economy and people's lives) can be found in Colorado and the "tree huggers" there. .

not to mention the out of control Coyote population in THE metro area, and the out of control prairie dog population in THE metro area... I see a coyote at least 1x a week now.. heck.. theres even a space set aside titled "Prairie Dog Habitat" (no joke)... as they infest peoples yards!
Not to mention the NUMEROUS bear encounters/attacks on people that have built their huge houses in the mountains... in the back yard of black bears and wonder "Something needs to be done"..

Not to mention all the SCREWED up taxes and FEES!!! /facepalm

[molon labe]

Honestly, I would prefer that you live somewhere else. I moved to Wyoming to get away from the insane laws and taxes that you people seem to create wherever you have the majority. Most people here don't like stupid enviro laws, don't like gun control, aren't socialist, and like to keep the money they earn instead of giving it to the government to redistribute.

I grew up in CA, so I've seen first hand what the result is when people of the "liberalsocialist environazi" group force their viewpoint on others. I noticed Libertarians are mentioned in this thread, and there is one glaring difference between the "liberal" (socialist) element and Libertarians- LIBERTARIANS DON'T FORCE THEIR VIEWS ON OTHERS. They are firm believers in people choosing for themselves, while "liberals" (socialists) want to force social programs, environmental laws, a myriad of other restrictive laws, and the resulting taxes onto the backs of everybody else.

Come by and visit... Wyoming has many nice places to see; but please never live here. We don't want to be told what kind of carb the engine in our personal vehicle can have or what kind of gun we should be "allowed" to own (while those telling us that have armed guards for themselves). We don't want to pay high taxes to pay for your failed social programs. We don't want our state to become bankrupt like the "liberal" (socialist) states out there. We don't want to be invaded by illegals and their resulting erosion of our standard of living (fueled by the "all cultures are equal" crap you see in CA) in this state. We don't want elitist scum like Feintein, Pelosi, Kennedy, Schumer, etc "representing" us. The more socialists that come here, the better chance those things have of happening.

I can and do get along with a wide variety of people, but "liberals" just can't seem to go anywhere and not make a giant mess of things, so please stay in Boston.

[a42887]

Originally Posted by sunsprit

I think a lot of the problem(s) here start with someone from out of the area, typically from a high population density riparian climate, come into Wyoming with all kinds of high-minded "ideals" of what constitutes "pro-environment" solutions that aren't applicable to a high alititude desert.

In my observation, a conflict starts when an outsider starts telling a successful farm or ranch operation how to do things differently ... and when they cannot persuade an owner to change their methods that have provided a living here for a family for generations, they start ordering others around because they "know better" what's good for the folks who have been here awhile.

The real facts of the matter are that the true stewards of the lands have been the farmers and ranchers who could eke out a living and survive here for a long time. Contrary to the views of our "betters" from out of the area, few "rape and pillage the land" to their own self destruction of the resources. Given better ways to conserve water, for example, by going to low pressure pivots from flood irrigation or high pressure pivots, farmers have embraced a lot of good technology at great expense along the way. That's along with improved varieties of crops, better farming techniques with less tillage of the fragile topsoil, etc. Ranchers have consistently sought out improved breeds of livestock that are more capable of dealing with the climate and forage conditions here, too, for increased yield and productivity.

And the extractive industries have been seeking improved ways to increase their yield while lowering their costs of production and costs to restore the environmental impacts of their work.

So, here's my take on a "pro-environmental" advocate ... c'mon out and see what's actually going on here, and how it is different from the polluted and destroyed areas from where you came. The causes, effects, and solutions here are different than "back East", or in California. One size solutions do not fit all.

The same philosophy extends to local social and political issues. We're a lot different group of people than found on the streets of the big mega-population centers of the country. What may "work" or ... in your frame of reference ... be "desirable" where you came from may be the anti-thesis of what will or can work or be of benefit here, if it's even needed. But you need to come here and study what's going on before mindlessly repeating the mantra of whatever cause you have from where you came first.

There's reasons why this portion of the country is so sparsely populated, and why we don't have huge population centers here. This is a basic issue about the type of resiliency and behavior of the people here. And it's why we typically don't appreciate the "solutions" that some think are indicated in a whole different part of the country ....

While not in Wyoming, a perfect regional example of "pro-environmentalist" attitudes screwing up local resources (and the economy and people's lives) can be found in Colorado and the "tree huggers" there. We've seen problems like a "blow-down" or "beetle kill" over a large acreage of perfectly salvageable trees for commercial purposes. But the "tree huggers" prevented harvesting of the timber in accordance with their views of how the forest should be managed, "clear cutting" BAD BAD BAD. Now we've got acres and acres of "firewood" that's decaying and bug infested ... and just waiting for a good lightning strike. Had the wood been cleared, healthy forest re-growth could have been promoted; now we're facing watershed problems, too. Well intentioned but misguided folks don't understand the difference between low altitude riparian hardwood growth and high altitude evergreen softwoods .... but they're not going to let that ignorance get in the way of their "cause" to "save the trees!". And don't worry about the livlihoods that they destroy along the way, the "cause" and their good "intentions" are all that count to them.

Amen!

Originally Posted by molon labe

Honestly, I would prefer that you live somewhere else. I moved to Wyoming to get away from the insane laws and taxes that you people seem to create wherever you have the majority. Most people here don't like stupid enviro laws, don't like gun control, aren't socialist, and like to keep the money they earn instead of giving it to the government to redistribute.

I grew up in CA, so I've seen first hand what the result is when people of the "liberalsocialist environazi" group force their viewpoint on others. I noticed Libertarians are mentioned in this thread, and there is one glaring difference between the "liberal" (socialist) element and Libertarians- LIBERTARIANS DON'T FORCE THEIR VIEWS ON OTHERS. They are firm believers in people choosing for themselves, while "liberals" (socialists) want to force social programs, environmental laws, a myriad of other restrictive laws, and the resulting taxes onto the backs of everybody else.

Come by and visit... Wyoming has many nice places to see; but please never live here. We don't want to be told what kind of carb the engine in our personal vehicle can have or what kind of gun we should be "allowed" to own (while those telling us that have armed guards for themselves). We don't want to pay high taxes to pay for your failed social programs. We don't want our state to become bankrupt like the "liberal" (socialist) states out there. We don't want to be invaded by illegals and their resulting erosion of our standard of living (fueled by the "all cultures are equal" crap you see in CA) in this state. We don't want elitist scum like Feintein, Pelosi, Kennedy, Schumer, etc "representing" us. The more socialists that come here, the better chance those things have of happening.

I can and do get along with a wide variety of people, but "liberals" just can't seem to go anywhere and not make a giant mess of things, so please stay in Boston.

Amen!

You two, molon labe and sunspirit, epitomize why I moved here. To be with like minded people. Just wanted to chime in with my support.

[jody_wy]

most all pro enviromental groups use fear to raise money ...$20 check at a time

[Durian Beach]

Originally Posted by sunsprit

I think a lot of the problem(s) here start with someone from out of the area, typically from a high population density riparian climate, come into Wyoming with all kinds of high-minded "ideals" of what constitutes "pro-environment" solutions that aren't applicable to a high alititude desert.

In my observation, a conflict starts when an outsider starts telling a successful farm or ranch operation how to do things differently ... and when they cannot persuade an owner to change their methods that have provided a living here for a family for generations, they start ordering others around because they "know better" what's good for the folks who have been here awhile.

The real facts of the matter are that the true stewards of the lands have been the farmers and ranchers who could eke out a living and survive here for a long time. Contrary to the views of our "betters" from out of the area, few "rape and pillage the land" to their own self destruction of the resources. Given better ways to conserve water, for example, by going to low pressure pivots from flood irrigation or high pressure pivots, farmers have embraced a lot of good technology at great expense along the way. That's along with improved varieties of crops, better farming techniques with less tillage of the fragile topsoil, etc. Ranchers have consistently sought out improved breeds of livestock that are more capable of dealing with the climate and forage conditions here, too, for increased yield and productivity.

And the extractive industries have been seeking improved ways to increase their yield while lowering their costs of production and costs to restore the environmental impacts of their work.

So, here's my take on a "pro-environmental" advocate ... c'mon out and see what's actually going on here, and how it is different from the polluted and destroyed areas from where you came. The causes, effects, and solutions here are different than "back East", or in California. One size solutions do not fit all.

The same philosophy extends to local social and political issues. We're a lot different group of people than found on the streets of the big mega-population centers of the country. What may "work" or ... in your frame of reference ... be "desirable" where you came from may be the anti-thesis of what will or can work or be of benefit here, if it's even needed. But you need to come here and study what's going on before mindlessly repeating the mantra of whatever cause you have from where you came first.

There's reasons why this portion of the country is so sparsely populated, and why we don't have huge population centers here. This is a basic issue about the type of resiliency and behavior of the people here. And it's why we typically don't appreciate the "solutions" that some think are indicated in a whole different part of the country ....

While not in Wyoming, a perfect regional example of "pro-environmentalist" attitudes screwing up local resources (and the economy and people's lives) can be found in Colorado and the "tree huggers" there. We've seen problems like a "blow-down" or "beetle kill" over a large acreage of perfectly salvageable trees for commercial purposes. But the "tree huggers" prevented harvesting of the timber in accordance with their views of how the forest should be managed, "clear cutting" BAD BAD BAD. Now we've got acres and acres of "firewood" that's decaying and bug infested ... and just waiting for a good lightning strike. Had the wood been cleared, healthy forest re-growth could have been promoted; now we're facing watershed problems, too. Well intentioned but misguided folks don't understand the difference between low altitude riparian hardwood growth and high altitude evergreen softwoods .... but they're not going to let that ignorance get in the way of their "cause" to "save the trees!". And don't worry about the livlihoods that they destroy along the way, the "cause" and their good "intentions" are all that count to them.

It is often a matter of good intention, but complete ignorance by suburbanites resulting in the disasterous job killing policies they vote for. To any recently turned 18 voting age kid in Suburban America or the Soccer Mom types(Replacing football and baseball with soccer has been a leftist wet dream for decades now.), sure clear cutting looks ugly. But how else are you going to do it? If you watch a few of those rural industry reality shows on the History or Discovery channels you see just how much effort it goes into getting the stuff out of these remote places and into market wether it be gold, oil, diamonds, crabs, or wood products, etc. Basically the only way to get the trees out of the treacherous terrain of the Oregon mountains is to errect a giant fishing pole on the top of the mountains and basically start mowing every thing from the top down to make way to drag it up to the top of the mountain and haul it away by truck. Just grabbing a few select trees here and there? There is no way to get them out of the wilderness excepting lifting them by monster helicopter which would cost a hair shorter than going to the moon. Not to mention the "carbon footprint" that the global warming hoaxers like Gore would soon whine about. But when some agitators put a referendum on the ballot putting silly restrictions on clear cutting the few that know the reality of the situation are outvoted by heavily urban areas that mean well but have no grasp on the reality of the situation. Sure it might not look nice to see a checker sized scar in a mountain, but at least there are jobs and money comming into the region. The alternative is a depopulated wilderness zone with no one around to enjoy it.

[WyoNewk]

Speaking of Oregon logging... or not, the spotted owl controversy is stopping forestry plans once again, thanks to our new administration. My wife used to live in Medford, OR. She says spotted owls frequently nest in the middle of the business district.

But the Obama administration has reversed plans for increased harvesting of the forest again, citing that spotted owl numbers are lower than ever. Duhhhhhhhhhh. Should that tell us anything?

It's going to be the same thing in Wyoming with the stupid (I mean that kindly) sage grouse.

[NVDave]

Originally Posted by WyoNewk

[...] the stupid (I mean that kindly) sage grouse.

You can say that again.

In Nevada, when we'd be haying, we could be coming down the field in a 180-HP rotary hay mower. For those who have never been around big equipment, I ask you to try to imagine a diesel engine running at 2000RPM, coupled to a 10-disc rotary mower head that is howling like a cross between a huge swarm of bees and a jet engine. Let's stipulate that even someone who is completely deaf would invariably notice this thing -- from 100 yards away.

So I'd be coming down the field in one of these rigs. Deer, squirrels, gophers, weasels, badgers, cats, you name it -- everything is scattering in front of this machine. Everything except the sage grouse, that is.

When I'd be coming down the field at 6 MPH and I'd see something wriggle only a foot in front of the mower just before the mower would suck in that portion of the crop, I'd know without having to ask that it was another stupid sage chicken that just got sucked through the mower and the conditioners. And then I'd have to throttle the machine down, disengage the mower, let everything coast to a stop, then go back into the windrow and pick out the pieces of sage grouse from the windrow so it would not get baled up. Baled meat results in botulism in the bale, and it drops cattle deader than a wedge.

[Durian Beach]

Originally Posted by WyoNewk

Speaking of Oregon logging... or not, the spotted owl controversy is stopping forestry plans once again, thanks to our new administration. My wife used to live in Medford, OR. She says spotted owls frequently nest in the middle of the business district.

But the Obama administration has reversed plans for increased harvesting of the forest again, citing that spotted owl numbers are lower than ever. Duhhhhhhhhhh. Should that tell us anything?

It's going to be the same thing in Wyoming with the stupid (I mean that kindly) sage grouse.

The Soccer Mom's and college kids supporting these things may be sincere, but at the highest escellon of the democratic party I suspect supporting such policies is a cynical way of getting back at their political enemies which they see as rural americans. It's sad too because such pointless policies kill the whole economy and hurt their constituents as well. It is like sacraficing the first born virgin into the volcano to appease the weather gods, a totally fruitless thing to do. Even boondogles like the welfare state have some benefits such as keeping the folks at Cadillac employed.

[Cloudfish]

Originally Posted by NVDave

So I'd be coming down the field in one of these rigs. Deer, squirrels, gophers, weasels, badgers, cats, you name it -- everything is scattering in front of this machine. Everything except the sage grouse, that is.

...and skunks.

[Durian Beach]

Originally Posted by NVDave

You can say that again.

In Nevada, when we'd be haying, we could be coming down the field in a 180-HP rotary hay mower. For those who have never been around big equipment, I ask you to try to imagine a diesel engine running at 2000RPM, coupled to a 10-disc rotary mower head that is howling like a cross between a huge swarm of bees and a jet engine. Let's stipulate that even someone who is completely deaf would invariably notice this thing -- from 100 yards away.

So I'd be coming down the field in one of these rigs. Deer, squirrels, gophers, weasels, badgers, cats, you name it -- everything is scattering in front of this machine. Everything except the sage grouse, that is.

When I'd be coming down the field at 6 MPH and I'd see something wriggle only a foot in front of the mower just before the mower would suck in that portion of the crop, I'd know without having to ask that it was another stupid sage chicken that just got sucked through the mower and the conditioners. And then I'd have to throttle the machine down, disengage the mower, let everything coast to a stop, then go back into the windrow and pick out the pieces of sage grouse from the windrow so it would not get baled up. Baled meat results in botulism in the bale, and it drops cattle deader than a wedge.

Sounds like the "Jagoffasaur" in South Park where the kids summary of the "moral" of the story at the end is "some creatures are dumb and just meant to go extinct and we shouldn't bend over backwards trying to save them." Matt and Trey haven't exactly endeared themselves with the Hollywood crowd by desecrating a lot of their sacred cows.