Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire How many here would eliminate the National Park Service? (Or USFS)

The Utah thread and subsequent responses made me wonder how many here (presumably almost all outdoorsmen) if they had the single power, would eliminate the National Park Service? http://www.nps.gov/index.htm
Do you feel any differently about the U.S. Forest Service? http://www.fs.fed.us/
If you have an opinion on the above it would also be curious to know if you know where the nearest NPS or USFS lands are to you and exactly what activities are permitted there.
If you would NOT eliminate the departments what if any changes would you make?

Both agencies seem to have assumed the attitude that the lands they administer belong to them. I don't believe I would eliminate the agencies, but I would eliminate the executives and install a culture where the services would help the public utilize the land to it's maximum potential.

I'm not a fan of throwing the baby out with the bathwater..

But I would switch the USFS to Dept. of the Interior, and out of the USDA, in a New York minute.

Also interesting posting this question on the Campfire Forum, where few venture out far from their computers in the suburbs.

Try posting this in the General Hunting forum for some probable differing responses.

Actually, the wilderness areas should all go to either the Park Service or a separate US Wilderness Service. The USFS should be eliminated and the lands sold to the respective states with bonding support from Uncle.

Where are the states going to get money to buy them?

Not from recreational funds.

They'll sell and lease the best acres to the highest bidders, and then mismanage the leftovers.

A crappy solution to a crappy problem, IMO..

TEXAS here we come!

I would get rid of both. But you certainly could combine them into one.

The state criticism is not necessarily true. Louisiana has a good system of public hunting lands and is always acquiring more. Some other states have even better programs.

I recently heard that the federal governments owns approximately 30% of all the land in the U.S. That just ain't right.

It literally takes an act of congress to force the Park Svc to allow hunting on any land they control. I don't want them to have anything to do with our wildernesses or it'll be the same thing there.

You wish. Texas has been owned by individuals for almost 200 years. Government land will go to the entitled.

Not necessarily false either.

Special interest money will be doled out very efficiently on the state political level, as opposed to the federal level..

I'm sure lots of politicians in western states would love this to happen.

Couple of old saying come to mind.. The devil you know, and watch out what you wish for..

If you start following the Constitution then there isn't any Federal Land and the problem of these agencies is self solving.

self solving.. yeah, just snap your fingers.

I hope that you are being sarcastic--otherwise I say "bullsh*t!

Look at hunting access to state trust lands in the west. It is quite restricted and frequently nonexistent depending how the leases are written. In New Mexico, lessees regard state trust land as being exclusively for their use and, despite an agreement between the State Land Office and Department of Game and Fish for hunter access during open seasons, most of the best habitat remains locked up by one means or another. Lots that is "open" requires hunters to access it by one unlocked gate that always happens to be as far away from game populations as one can get, while paying hunters can almost shoot elk, deer or pronghorns off the hoods of their trucks.

As far as selling the lands off, if that happens you can write off free public access. It will be either none at all or very expensive.

Everyone wants to hunt the National Parks, but the Park Service's mission is preservation and protection, not managing for multiple use. Look at a tract of Forest Service land that gets the same intensity of use as Rocky Mountain or Yellowstone national parks and tell me if that is someplace that you would like to hunt.

Not I, because I absolutly love fishing and hunting on their properties without any need for permission. To date, I've not had one bit of my access rights diminished. If those were pretty much all private holdings, they would be trashed (overgrazed, logged, developed), and we would mostly be in a fee hunting situation like Texas.

As screwed up as it is, we're still in the best damned country in the world.

65% of Alaska... and huge chunks of that were taken away from hunters by the carter administration.

Would be happy to dump both and put states in the drivers seat. It is typical for the Feds to constrain future use of these resources through US Code and they should do so thru negotiations on a case basis.

There's a lot more of the alphabet that needs removal from federal authority as well. One thing I would absolutely not do is combine the subject agencies with DOI.

Seeing how our state manages our state land, as mudhen mentioned, HELL NO. Just look at some of our recent "land swaps" and you can get an idea how bad it could get.

Eliminate forest service and park service, put dept of interior in charge of it all.

Post's like this always humor me, when most of your post are on the campfire Forum.