I don’t see why this is something the Federal government needs to be involved in? Can’t states make such decisions on their own accord?
3 Likes
People can make fake and unsupported claims and it can be difficult to dispel them because people want to believe them? One word:
dossier
3 Likes
tell it to tim scott and his police reform bill
4 Likes
Right, observation is powerful. How do we accredit “experts” currently?
1 Like
One of the downsides. But wasn’t that “experts”?
What did capitalism do to materialism?
Color is subjective.
2 Likes
Lol. Red herring alert.
Q: What does this have to do with a heritage area in Montana.
A: Nothing. Just more fearmongering.
Allan
There’s the real IRONY. They regurgitate the nonsense and narrative they are fed from the fake news then whine and complain about “misinformation” from anyone who disagrees. 
1 Like
Hammer…meet nail. BAM ! 
1 Like
Must be nice.
No bites?
Or bytes?
This has nothing to do with “experts”. We don’t need “experts” in this situation. A woman is making baseless claims about what would happen if Montana accepts federal funds for a National Heritage designation (a program started by Reagan, btw). Despite the fact that a National Heritage Area designation does not, and by law cannot, alter in any way whatsoever anyone’s property rights this woman says that this designation would would forbid landowners to build sheds, drill wells or use fertilizers and pesticides. It would alter water rights, give tourists access to private property, create a new taxation district and prohibit new septic systems and burials on private land. None of that is true and she could not point to any prior instances of any of that ever occurring.
Oh but it does Jimmy. It has everything to do with “experts”.
Don’t small think.
We’re going to see a lot more of this.
Who told you that?
Help me out. What’s the big picture here? I see an area of the country that has a lot of history to it and the federal government offering funds to the state to help promote it and get more tourists. Sometimes a cigar is only a cigar.
National heritage areas do not appear to have affected private property
rights, although private property rights advocates have raised a number of
concerns about the potential effects of heritage areas on property owners’
rights and land use. These advocates are concerned that heritage areas
may be allowed to acquire or otherwise impose federal controls on
nonfederal lands. However, the designating legislation and the
management plans of some areas explicitly place limits on the areas’
ability to affect private property rights and use.
Despite concerns about private property rights, officials at the 24 heritage
areas, Park Service headquarters and regional staff working with these
areas, and representatives of six national property rights groups that we
contacted were unable to provide us with a single example of a heritage
area directly affecting—positively or negatively—private property values
or use.
That is from 2004. If someone wants to claim there have been instances subsequent to that then they would have to provide examples of such.
No. NHA designation does not affect private property owners or restrict their property rights, nor does it require that they maintain their property to particular specifications.
Recent laws establishing National Heritage Areas have contained provisions intended to address concerns about potential loss of, or restrictions on use of, private property. For example, the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act, which established six NHAs in 2019, stated that designation of the new NHAs would not reduce the rights of any property owner; require any property owner to permit public access to the property; alter any land use regulation; or diminish the authority of the state to manage fish and wildlife, including the regulation of fishing and hunting within the NHA.
https://www.nps.gov/articles/national-heritage-areas-faqs.htm
Zoom out. She did her own “research” and convinced people. How is that different than the NYT? Yet you automatically side with NYT why? Why do you believe them?
That is what is changing. And the overlords of information don’t like it.
Look at what happened with the “experts” and the virus. Especially Fauci.
Exciting times!
We are moving from information feudalism into information capitalism. Watch what they do.
2 Likes
Government “experts”.
1 Like
