• Help Support TNDeer:

LBL loses lawsuit.

JDBinTN said:
So no touching it at all? Can they even sow clover in fields?
Click to expand...

Nope, nothing.

The Forest Service is still allowed to do their burning as far as I know. I had hoped they would be able to burn overgrown fields like they've done in several places this past fall but they have a limited budget so I don't know how many more burns they can do.
 
Wildcat said:
. . . . . they have a limited budget so I don't know how many more burns they can do.
Click to expand...

Another point to keep in mind:
The farmers PAID the Forest Service "X" dollars per acre for all the fields they "farmed".

Not only did this bring LBL some much needed funds that could be used for mowing, burning, and food plots ---- but the fact the farmers were keeping the fields as "fields" further reduced LBL's operating expenses (assuming those fields would have been kept "fields" if not farmed).

Not to mention, the farmers left a significant part of the crops "un-harvested" providing both additional cover and far more wildlife forage than all the planted wildlife "food plots" combined on LBL.

Of course, if the fields are just allowed to revert to forest, there won't be any money needed to mow and maintain them.

One thing many people don't understand is that much of LBL was NOT forest prior to the 1800's. Much of LBL was grassland prairie and oak savanna, prior to the extermination of the native bison & elk which kept the area grazed, preventing forestation. (Also a big factor in why so much of LBL was a grassland, Native American Indians also set the place on fire each fall as part of how they "hunted" the bison & elk, plus, natural fires were often simply started by lighting.)

In this particular circumstance the court failed to respect that "old growth forests" were not the predominant landscape of this area ---- the union nuts knew this, but their agenda seems to be more to establish old growth forests & wilderness areas, not to preserve native habitats.

By the way, LBL's current landscape is less than 5% fields, so it could be argued that we need more fields to restore the native habitat?
 
You want to see the habitat and how it looked before 1800?? Go to the Bison and Elk Praire just north of the Tn state line next to Golden Pond where LBL's Hq is.
 
U.S. District Judge Thomas B. Russell said it was "unreasonable" for the Forest Service to delegate it's power to issue special use permits to the National Wild Turkey Federation, who in turn signed contracts allowing two farmers to grow row crops in Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area.

This is a quote from the news release. To me this means that the forest service was wrong to delegate the authority to issue the special se permits. This dosen't say that the Forest Service couldn't issue permits to farmers directly.
 
Beekeeper said:
U.S. District Judge Thomas B. Russell said it was "unreasonable" for the Forest Service to delegate it's power to issue special use permits to the National Wild Turkey Federation, who in turn signed contracts allowing two farmers to grow row crops in Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area.

This is a quote from the news release. To me this means that the forest service was wrong to delegate the authority to issue the special se permits. This dosen't say that the Forest Service couldn't issue permits to farmers directly.
Click to expand...

The people that sued LBL STOPED the Forest Service from allowing the farmers to farm inside LBL before. After that happened the NWTF cut a deal with the FS, the NWTF took control of the fields and they gave the permits to the farmers.

This court ruling is the SECOND time the Forest service has been stoped.

I know the farmers and one of them told me that this was it, he will not be going to LBL this year and maybe never again.
 
Wildcat said:
I know the farmers and one of them told me that this was it, he will not be going to LBL this year and maybe never again.
Click to expand...
They are done farming at LBL ---- too costly and too risky even if the courts re-allowed it in the future.

I believe these were the only farmers in the area close enough to justify transporting their farming equiptment into LBL, and that had the ability to get the job done. Just transporting in the equiptment (and then around within LBL) was a costly venture. They have several hundred thousand dollars worth of farm equiptment that has been used, perhaps mainly, for their farming at LBL. I suspect they'll take their equiptment to Illinois or Iowa, auction it off, and retire.
 
Wes Parrish said:
Beekeeper said:
This dosen't say that the Forest Service couldn't issue permits to farmers directly.
Click to expand...
The judge had previously said that.
After which, LBL contracted with the NWTF for some of the wildlife habitat management.
Click to expand...
Wildcat said:
Beekeeper said:
U.S. District Judge Thomas B. Russell said it was "unreasonable" for the Forest Service to delegate it's power to issue special use permits to the National Wild Turkey Federation, who in turn signed contracts allowing two farmers to grow row crops in Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area.

This is a quote from the news release. To me this means that the forest service was wrong to delegate the authority to issue the special se permits. This dosen't say that the Forest Service couldn't issue permits to farmers directly.
Click to expand...

The people that sued LBL STOPED the Forest Service from allowing the farmers to farm inside LBL before. After that happened the NWTF cut a deal with the FS, the NWTF took control of the fields and they gave the permits to the farmers.

This court ruling is the SECOND time the Forest service has been stoped.

I know the farmers and one of them told me that this was it, he will not be going to LBL this year and maybe never again.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. Sometimes the news reports do not have the whole story.
 
Beekeeper said:
Thanks for the info. Sometimes the news reports do not have the whole story.
Click to expand...
You got that right.

And the real story here has little to do with no more farming at LBL.

The real story is these nut cases from Oregon have a plan to establish more old growth forests, prevent human useage of "wilderness" areas, and did I mention, to eliminate hunting? This was just one step of their plan.
 
Wes Parrish said:
Beekeeper said:
Thanks for the info. Sometimes the news reports do not have the whole story.
Click to expand...
You got that right.

And the real story here has little to do with no more farming at LBL.

The real story is these nut cases from Oregon have a plan to establish more old growth forests, prevent human useage of "wilderness" areas, and did I mention, to eliminate hunting? This was just one step of their plan.
Click to expand...

AMEN
 
How much impact will this have on the Deer and Turkey?

The land that was farmed was less than 2% of the total area. The area of LBL is approximately 170,000 acres and the land that was farmed was about 2,100 aces. The farmers were required to leave 20% of the crops in the fields. That would be about four hundred acres scattered over the 170,000 acres.

Hopefully, the USDA will be allowed to plant all these field in native grasses and manage them by burning or however they are supposed to be managed.

Besides, I think forest management is far more important than the farming.

Don't get me wrong, I am against this ruling and think the USDA should have total control of the area.

Oh well, all we can do is wait and see. Enjoy the place until it is totally shut down by the anti hunters and other groups that want to control this area.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top