Daughter and her hubby are looking at moving to the St. Pete area in a couple of years from Misery (That's Missouri to some people).?ÿ Daughter appears to have inherited her mother's poor circulation issues making cold weather even colder on her than normal people.?ÿ I think it's called Raynaud's disease.
Her hubby has had relatives in that general area since he was a youngster, sometimes spending much of summer vacation down there.?ÿ That's why they had a beach wedding at Clearwater Beach.
People kept telling me to move south to get away from the cold and snow.?ÿ I tried?ÿ it, moved to Massachusetts once, but I wasn't that impressed, so I moved back
@mightymoe creeps and scum are in the eye of the beholder I guess. I would use that term for the landowners.?ÿ
?ÿ
@mightymoe creeps and scum are in the eye of the beholder I guess. I would use that term for the landowners.?ÿ
?ÿ
I'm not surprised.?ÿ
?ÿ
@mightymoe I'm more curious than anything else. Clearly public lands landlocked by private property are inaccessible to the public by means of stepping over the corner or 'corner hopping' as they refer to it as it's violating the airspace of private property. Would this include accessing to the same public lands via helicopter or hot air balloon? Does that public land become a defacto private reserve of the adjoining private property owners? No dog in the fight other than being a citizen and therefor a member of the public.
@mightymoe I'm more curious than anything else. Clearly public lands landlocked by private property are inaccessible to the public by means of stepping over the corner or 'corner hopping' as they refer to it as it's violating the airspace of private property. Would this include accessing to the same public lands via helicopter or hot air balloon? Does that public land become a defacto private reserve of the adjoining private property owners? No dog in the fight other than being a citizen and therefor a member of the public.
People do that all the time. So no as far as I understand. There is plenty of "Federal" lands to hunt and?ÿ accessible from public access in the area of the hopping. This was done by out-of-state hunters to bring on this legal action, it was moved to federal court erroneously in my humble opinion. The whole thing was a set-up.?ÿ
?ÿ
This issue has been a long time coming.?ÿ There's an extended interview with the hunters at Meateater Podcast.?ÿ They came off as combative to me but not sophisticated enough to be able to predict how far the landowner would take it and not wealthy enough to pick this big of a fight. The landowner is the one who's about to mess everything up for folks with defacto exclusive rights to public lands. Large land holders should encourage him ($$$) to drop the lawsuit.
?ÿ
defacto exclusive rights to public lands
I would state that as defacto access control over public land they have no more right to than any other citizen.
@williwaw See this WSJ article for access through airspace.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/hunting-land-access-dispute-wyoming-11668094125
This makes me think of Joe Pickett in real life. :-)?ÿ
I wonder if things would have turned out differently if the hunters were all surveyors? They could claim they were on a recon mission prior to sending crews. ?????ÿ
That's a very nice presentation of the issues, thanks for posting it!
In Northern Arizona the Federal Government gifted dozens, if not hundreds of checkerboarded sections to a Native American tribe with no mention of access rights. Most of the alternate sections within these sections are owned by the State, and now have no right of access either. Both parties are now landlocked from most of the land...
