Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The problem native residents of Montana have with "newcomers" is newcomers want to change rules to make it more "comfortable" and compatible to the life style they left. Everyone wants their 5, 10, 15, 20 acre tract of Montana. Do you have any idea what these "developments with their fancy California style CC&R's" do to Montana farmers/ranchers. We eventually have to sell because our taxes increase to a point we can't afford to continue farming."
Do the farmers and ranchers in Montana get a tax break for "agricultural use" land?
There is what is called CRP (Crop Reduction Program). Some wheat ranchers were paid not to grow crops. The reason for this was to free up some land for "hunters" for upland game birds...it was also to cut production of wheat, etc. Little did government know...foxes and coyotes eat the upland game birds. CRP is going away. Want to know why. Multimillionaire basketball players and other richey riches (Hollywood stars...is that in California, LOL) were buying the land/farms and putting the land into the CRP program. They weren't working the land...They were getting paid to have their land in CRP. There aren't enough government people, or so they say, to make sure the "owners" of this land were taking care of weeds etc. We didn't need monitoring until this abuse occurred. Anyway, now that this program is going away because of abuse, the richey riches are bringing in developers and subdividing their farm/ranches....They aren't going to make the money off the government so they will be pimps of our wonderful beautiful state Montana. They don't care. Montana is disposable to them.
All of this land opened up...and on came the hords of those wanting a better life and, unknowingly, bought this "developed" pimped land. A better life of one room school houses.....until there are too many people in the valley to have a one room school house. Schools are built and the principals don't have control over the "children" because the parents will sue, just like back in the big cities. Then we have crime just like the cities because the kids aren't accoutable. Ah, its a mess.
Anyway, the CRP is the tax break, if you want to call it one. Our land is zoned agricultural, if you want to call that a tax break. That's why people buy 20 acre parcels. Theirs can be zoned "agricultural." Hah. A farm is a BUSINESS just like a gas station or an accounting company is a business. Same deductions, only ours are for fuel, cost of repairing machines, same business write offs as any business. Its a nicer business to be in than an accounting business until one is chopping ice of the water or cleaning a calf in 40 below weather with a chilling wind.
CRP is going away because of abuse. If our neighbor sells out to a "developer" our taxes will go up....because these people who buy these parcels are going to want some conveniences....these conveniences come at a price....The county or state steps in and supplies these conveniences like road maintenance, fire protection, fiber installation, heck, why not pavement so that their Subaru won't bottom out. The people moving in won't want to buy a 4x4....it costs too much in gasoline to drive to their job in the city...Its a vicious circle. Most Montanan's try to stick to their guns, but we become weary ... "perhaps" (wonderful Liberal word) we should "just move", get the money, and run to New Zealand.
Then the newcomers could have Montana....but I couldn't do that. It would be pimping a beautiful lady.
I am from Texas; I know there is some sort of tax break here for agricultural land, though I am not sure about the precise percentage of the discount.
Since my Grandaddy was a rancher for part of his life, I have heard some great stories, and I am very sympathetic to the trials and tribulations of ranchers and farmers.
It seems a shame that loopholes in the laws intended to protect farmers and ranchers benefit opportunists like land developers (and others)!
I've been reading this forum for months. The level of irony amazes me. Everything that has been said regarding some people's supposed "way of life" disappearing- everything you know and love, the sights you see every day, the fishing spots you used to visit- has already been taken from the Native Americans. If anyone has already mentioned this, then forgive me for being redundant.
"I used to drive down some lone stretch of highway and would not see a car for hours....." Yeah, after the Indians had to put up with buldozers, noise pollution, your automobile pollution, your plumbing and telephone poles ruining the view and the landscape, so that you might get the opportunity to view THEIR land in the comfort of an enclosed vehicle?? Your almighty dollar and most honorable government has broken every treaty ever written so that you could sit in your house all day and type on the computer???
It's not YOUR way of life that disappears and signals the beginning of the end of the good ol' days.....this change began in earnest about two hundred years ago by other whites who claimed to have the monopoly on REALITY, and basically they were so powerful that those same trends that were begun two hundred years ago have escalated into what is now a household word- GLOBAL WARMING- . Have a great day!!
It seems a shame that loopholes in the laws intended to protect farmers and ranchers benefit opportunists like land developers (and others)!
woahh doggie....its not a loophole. Its on the up and up, the CRP stuff. Takes money to make money and these freeloaders figured out how to do it until they were caught. I'll tell you a loophole. Remember many many years ago when they wanted a transcontinental railroad? The land was GIVEN to the railroad to get the thing done. Do you know what happened when the railroad was done and the land they didn't use wasn't given back??? It is now lumbered by Plum Creek Timber....land that should have been given back to Montanans. When Plum Creek is done with the land....guess what. They trade it to investors whom have purchased land with timber on it. Then guess what....the land Plum Creek timbered and traded to the investors is now sold to developers....They develop it and sell it to ALL those that can afford their high prices, usually out of staters, as Montanans don't have money. Then these people live on their ranchettes with "agricultural" rates on their property taxes. THE LAND WAS NEVER THE RAILROADS TO GIVE TO PLUM CREEK TO GIVE TO DEVELOPERS TO SELL TO OUT OF STATERS!! It was Montanans land and should have been given back to Montanans. And everyone gets upset with a lumberjack...Geez! The RR's keep the mineral rights....imagine that.....I wonder how many of you know that either a RR or a Mining company own your mineral rights . How many of you have checked this ? I'm sure your realtor told you that they can't touch the ground....because you own the dirt on top of the minerals... Hah . Buyer Beware and from the looks not many have been "bewaring" >>> Oh well. I wonder why Montanas "are so angry."
Boise has actually become a fairly major city. This has helped the economy in Idaho and new industries and jobs are the result.
True point....I would actually gag to have another Wal-Mart here with low wages... Anyway, the point "CITY" is a good point. If one wants the "lifestyle" of Montana they can live in a small CITY in Montana, not dot the once open country side with 5-10-15-20 acre plots of ground...developed by someone who doesn't have an interest in Montana...they only have an interest in MONEY MONEY MONEY.
Living in a small "city/town" in Montana is better anyway. Because the mineral rights are usually not available on the plots these people purchase, they are subject to these mineral rights being "explored." It is harder to displace a town/city than a couple of people with 20 acre plots in the middle of nowhere. Ask Bozeman and the front range up by Choteau. Ask the people, both ranchers and Indian Reservations, about the methane gas "exploration" in South Eastern Montana.
My point is, if you must live in Montana, if you aren't farming/ranching, then there is no need to buy your 40 acre plot in the middle of nowhere and ask for "services" you take for granted in the cozy world outside of Montana right now. Do you know how many dollars and sometimes lives are spent tyring to protect your home in the middle of a forest?
Has anyone seen what has happened in Southern Oregon (Gee, is that close to California) ? My goodness, that is what we are trying to avoid. I understand someone may need a modular home, but the land down there is over $200k for and acre with a single wide beaten up trailer on it. The land has been subdivided and divided. Now, since only "money" people can buy in the area, they preface each listing with "value is in the land."
Force developers to PAY FOR and to open land around towns. Make them spend some money on development and the land. Make THEM pay for the infrastructue to support these developments. 5-10 acre parcels that are maintained are enough for most people. Gee, developers would have to spend more for the land...land owned by Montanans. What a thought! Make the money for services come from the developers, not the naive person that buys their plot of dirt in the middle of nowhere, near a creek, which by the way, they don't have water rights to and were "told" or "assumed" what is included in the bit of beauty. Make the money come from these corporate developers and not the little people of Montana.
There's one thing that needs to be addressed regarding development in western states in remote forested areas and that's the problem of forest fires. People are wanting to live in their own private beautiful setting surrounded by trees but they're also expecting protection from firefighters if the need should arise. As more and more people build in remote areas it forces firefighters to literally risk their lives trying to protect private property. I happened to have an interesting discussion with a graduate student sitting next to me on a long airplane flight a few months ago. She was a very intelligent young woman and was quite knowledgeable about this subject from her studies. She told me that because fires are a natural phenomenon that have occurred for eons that the forests and vegetation have adapted to fires and that they actually provide a useful purpose. We are defeating this purpose when we allow the excess vegetation and underbrush to accumulate by either not allowing the fires to consume it or by not thinning out all of this ignitable material. The problem is greatly compounded when we allow too much development. We saw the tragic result of this mismanagement here in Arizona where I live in the last several years. Fires got started and got completely out of control and destroyed vast amounts of forest land as well as a great deal of private property. This whole issue needs to be addressed in a comprehensive manner because uncontrolled building in these areas is making the problem worse every year.
She told me that because fires are a natural phenomenon that have occurred for eons that the forests and vegetation have adapted to fires and that they actually provide a useful purpose. We are defeating this purpose when we allow the excess vegetation and underbrush to accumulate by either not allowing the fires to consume it or by not thinning out all of this ignitable material....This whole issue needs to be addressed in a comprehensive manner because uncontrolled building in these areas is making the problem worse every year.
So true, so very true. The "developers" don't even develop. They subdivide...most naive purchasers of this "developed ground" out of need create what is termed "Home Owner's Associations." The home owner's associations must maintain their roads and set "standards" for the people who also were only looking for a bit of beauty called Montana. They eventually start creating rules and regulations that not only cover the road maintenance, but determine what side of the road to walk on.
Home Owner Associations decide they don't want livestock. I wonder how many realize the vegetation below those beautiful trees are instant combustables. The cows, deer, horse, goats and all grazing animals "in the natural environment" eat these combustibles. Nowadays, people don't want animals "grazing" on their 20 acres. They want the natural look...i.e. deadfall that is naturally controlled by natural wildfires, broken up by bears looking for grubs and lays there and becomes "fire starter." Montana is a dry state and deadfall doesn't break down as quickly as in the state you may have left.
When these "nature lovers" own their piece of ground its off limits to grazing and their "free roaming dogs" chase the deer, bears, and natural enemies of rodents away from the grounds. The dogs aren't Livestock Guard Dogs, their human dogs and its so cute to watch them chase the deer away from the newly planted nursery grown nonnative plant.
Lodgepole need to have a fire to release the seeds from the pinecones. Montana is made up of a lot of forests that need fire. We wouldn't have aspens if we didn't have fire. After a fire comes the grasses for wild grazing animals, then the aspens and willows which protect the seedlings of the new lodgepole pine. I have seen so many beautiful "parked out" parcels. Old growth lodgepole. Hello?? What are you going to plant when this tree crowns? Austrian pine? Some fast growing conifer not native to Montana?
The "parked out" land is beautiful and the people feel they are doing their part to control fires...what happens when the last Lodgepole crowns without fire? Oh, I guess we can go to the nursery and buy a new one. That's very similar to what has happened to many species of animals. We can go to the zoo and look at them. Or we can have huge corporations like the Sierra Club come in and outlaw anyone from coming into the "spaces" allowed for these animals. Or we can be responsible people and leave nature and live near the cities/towns, allow nature to take its course without intervention of "Clubs" protecting the pine bark beetle from being sprayed.
I say hold developers (subdividers) responsible. If a person sees a way to make a buck and they have people naive enough to buy what is termed "developed" they will sell it to them. Look at the Garnet Range East of Missoula and north of Drummond. What do these people really get for their money? A once cut in road that winds back into rolling mountains. One way in/out. "Uhmmm, your other stake is somewhere over by that creek bed" says the realtors who sell this stuff, "Could never find the damn thing." The purchaser is responsible for their own means of power, heat, water, waste...what did the purchaser get, but a piece of ground cheap. What did the county get? Another person to support with agricultural status tax dollars.
The county and sometimes federal dollars are responsible for their protection. The "developer" runs as fast as he can to the bank. The "realtor" accepts their commission and the parcel owner tries to create a Home Owners Association, if they can get enough other's to buy into their dream, to keep the road up. People buying in Montana must make the DEVELOPER (Subdivider) responsible. Montana property won't seem so CHEAP if the developer needs to put some money into it and, dah, develop it.
By this I don't mean the ridiculous CC&R's created by some anal "private" developer. Their "Emerald Forest" with houses available in 3 color choices,minimum 1200 sqft homes with no more than 18" of concrete visible, and no fences, no livestock, no cutting of trees and a "walking path" easement across everyone's ground. I don't know where these CC&R's came from but THEY ARE NOT NATIVE TO MONTANA either and are becoming more prevelent.
People be aware of what you are doing to Montana and please know we are friendly, but the changes that are made to Montana are not all visible. We are not a monetarily rich state. Gee, is that why we can be exploited by what some term "developers?" Probably so. Be responsible and make your "developer" responsible. I can't afford to support you on your 40 acres and the comforts you take for granted. Montana's beautiful country side won't stay beautiful without proper management.
Natviemontana.....................yahoo......give' er hell, you got my vote....Reguarding a previous statement you made to me about living in the missoula area, I have in more recent post starting refering to 'western' montana when trying to make a point.
genielamp wrote:
Quote:
I've been reading this forum for months. The level of irony amazes me. Everything that has been said regarding some people's supposed "way of life" disappearing- everything you know and love, the sights you see every day, the fishing spots you used to visit- has already been taken from the Native Americans. If anyone has already mentioned this, then forgive me for being redundant.
"I used to drive down some lone stretch of highway and would not see a car for hours....." Yeah, after the Indians had to put up with buldozers, noise pollution, your automobile pollution, your plumbing and telephone poles ruining the view and the landscape, so that you might get the opportunity to view THEIR land in the comfort of an enclosed vehicle?? Your almighty dollar and most honorable government has broken every treaty ever written so that you could sit in your house all day and type on the computer
Great point...It has been all already taken away from the American Indians, my point is simply.......Let's not keep making it worse by ruining it even more.
That's right the government has broken lot's of treaties, and what you say is true, ......except when you use the word 'you'......it had nothing to do with me or a lot of people and their ancestors, considering they were still in europe when some white people were doing their dirty deeds to the indians. but then again to be fair, the indian tribes who's land was stolen just did the same piliage and plunder to the previous indian tribes that were here before them, stealing hand from the previous occupant has been going on since the dawn of time and and american indians did it to each other over the millenia, so the land the white man 'stole' from the indians in many cases may well have been land that was already stolen from someone other indians by other indians....so there really isn't much innocents in this whole notion. White man steals it from indian, indian stole it from other indian who stole it from another indian.........so who's land is it really ? the very first to arrive on it..which was......who ? With that being said, it's all a sill notion that the white man stole the land from the indians.....they stole it from someone else..other indians.....if a white person stole another white persons land...does that make it alright ? NO, so if an indian steals an other indian'a land does it make it right ? NO...............so whity just stole from the stealer..........I hope that gets my point across..............
Beside if you are a native american born today....you own a piece of the reservation and some goodies owed you...........when I was born I got jack sh*t.............sorry I ain't bashing no one........just say what is
Natviemontana.....................yahoo......give' er hell, you got my vote....Reguarding a previous statement you made to me about living in the missoula area, I have in more recent post starting refering to 'western' montana when trying to make a point.
genielamp wrote:
Beside if you are a native american born today....you own a piece of the reservation and some goodies owed you...........when I was born I got jack sh*t.............sorry I ain't bashing no one........just say what is
Oh, I hoped no one would post back to this argument especially since the poster is in Tennessee...but oh well ! Indians (Native Americans) and "White People" If we're called white people .... then what are NA's red people? Get off it.
One thing people moving here should know.. Regarding Reservations (Nations). They are controlled by Bureau of Indian Affairs (or has this name been changed to Native American Affairs, geez) a division of the Federal Government, but each Tribe has local control over their Reservation...Each Reservation is unique and A SOVEIRGN NATION. It is not governed by the same rules, regulations as the USA nation except they are combined as one nation under God. Reservations are not "another state within a state." They are a Nation within a Nation. Now if you want to get Politically Correct with me here. Just stop reading this post.
Our Reservations are different than those that pop up for Casinos. Ours are REAL Reservations or to use another term Individual Nations. Reservations are governed by Federal Government. If something happens on public/private ground by a person and the person retreats to the reservation, you have no recourse. It is up to the Laws of this Nation, this Reservation and their Tribal Leaders to decide.
Here is an example. A car was stolen...It was taken to the Reservation and 4-wheeled until it ran out of gasoline. Everything was stolen...including the license plates.
The thief forgot he left a tape in the tape deck with his name on it. This name was conveyed to the local authorities on the reservation. I don't know if the local authorities took care of it in THEIR way. I do not know if this person was white, black, green, purple, orange, yellow, red or pink. I know this person had full knowledge of the law of the Reservation.
Even though this crime was committed off the Reservation and in a city the local authorties hands were tied. BIA and also because of Federal authority, the 2 US Senators from Montana, were contacted....nothing. It was a dead end. It was explained by the municipal police "it is a regular occurence near the Interstate" in this city. I don't know whether it is or isn't. I know it happened to this person.
All I am stating is your State, Local police have no jurisdiction on the Reservation....Just like the law authorities on the Reservation don't have jurisdiction on public or private land outside the Reservation or State roads that pass through Reservations.
Some "towns" in Montana take the law into their own hands...however,unlike the Reservation they are governed by the federal, state, county and city laws...so as Montana becomes more inhabited less of this happens, but it does happen.
Reservations are a nation of their own....to either make a life on the Reservation or make the Reservation better. Indians are free to leave the reservation or stay on the reservation. There are tribes making their Reservation better and others not doing this. Their laws and life are much different than the white, yellow, pink, orange, black, brown or green man. Laws differ between Indian Nations (Reservations) too. That is why there are different reservations in Montana. Some Indian Nations like each other some don't...Some bend the truth just as past history books bent the truth to the "white man's" story...
I will not get into treaties with Indians nor slave trade of Blacks arguments. I will not get into the treatment of Irish or the Chinese in early America. I will not get into battles about internment camps of wars. Bad things happen to all people. I am "offended" when someone calls me white. I am an American of Irish decent, not an Irish American.
I believe this is suppose to be an informative blog for people coming to Montana. I would prefer it to remain an informative discussion of the Do's and Don'ts in Montana. Things learned from personal experience and the knowledge each brings to the table about the ways and terrains of Montana. About the trees, the lakes, the animals and the people of Montana and its government laws and the other nations within Montana called Reservations and the respect of same whether they are red, black, green, white, purple, orange or brown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeJoeMan
Natviemontana.....................yahoo......give' er hell, you got my vote....Reguarding a previous statement you made to me about living in the missoula area, I have in more recent post starting refering to 'western' montana when trying to make a point.
genielamp wrote:
Beside if you are a native american born today....you own a piece of the reservation and some goodies owed you...........when I was born I got jack sh*t.............sorry I ain't bashing no one........just say what is
Oh, I hoped no one would post back to this argument especially since the poster is in Tennessee...but oh well ! Indians (Native Americans) and "White People" If we're called white people .... then what are NA's red people? Get off it.
Mr Nativemontana........first off genielamp didn't 'wrote' that, JoeJoeMan did........second, "white people" (of which I'm one) I use the term, well, because everyone else seems to use it, is it right or wrong ? derogatory ? I don't know, doesn't really matter is just a 'word'. Is it politically correct of not ? Beat's me I'm waiting for the new edtion of "Policaly Correst Things to Say" comes out, as I have no idea anymore what terms to use. As I suspect you don't either.
Nativemontana wrote:
Quote:
I believe this is suppose to be an informative blog for people coming to Montana. I would prefer it to remain an informative discussion of the Do's and Don'ts in Montana.
Hummm......"I would prefer it.......".........humm are you in charge of the forum now ? Second, you can put all the info you want on this forum I would imagine, but why are you wanting to do it under this thread, titled "why are some people so mad"
That was a great dissertation you gave though, even if it didn't have anything to do with the name of this thread, but that's cool, so what did you think of JoeJoeman's point that the NA (is that a correct term) just repetatively stole the land from other NA's going back through the 13,000 years or so since the first waves of asians first arrived.
Now I'm just repeating (so don't shoot the messanger) what recent research has begun to bring to light, and trying to keep an open mind, but their thesis is that the latest or current NA that occupy the country were not the orginal peoples, and many waves of migration may have preceeded them. And that the people of the first wave may be very few, if any remaining left today. They speculate that one reason may be that succesive waves displaced the earlier waves of people...So now PLEASE don't take this the wrong way....but it seems like the NA were exhibiting the same type of behavior as the europeans (i.e, taking what they could get). And if we are really all one people, as we wish to profess. Then it would seem to me that no one can lay more claim to innocence or issue more guilty than the other party for practicing similar behaviors......I guess we are all the same people after all. And to clearify one point.....I MEAN NO SLIGHT OR SLANT TO ANY ONE GROUP.....I'm simply challenge contemporary social thought, which one would suspect, if held by the masses, is inherantly in and of itself should be held suspect. Wouldn't you agree ? Just curious on your's, Nativemontana..... or anyone's thoughts.........
Last edited by JoeJoeMan; 03-11-2007 at 12:13 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
CRP is going away. Want to know why. Multimillionaire basketball players and other richey riches (Hollywood stars...is that in California, LOL) were buying the land/farms and putting the land into the CRP program. They weren't working the land...They were getting paid to have their land in CRP. There aren't enough government people, or so they say, to make sure the "owners" of this land were taking care of weeds etc. We didn't need monitoring until this abuse occurred. Anyway, now that this program is going away because of abuse, the richey riches are bringing in developers and subdividing their farm/ranches....They aren't going to make the money off the government so they will be pimps of our wonderful beautiful state Montana. They don't care. Montana is disposable to them. 
Its a nicer business to be in than an accounting business until one is chopping ice of the water or cleaning a calf in 40 below weather with a chilling wind.
Irony in Montana
. How many of you have checked this
. Buyer Beware and from the looks not many have been "bewaring" >>> Oh well.
I wonder why Montanas "are so angry."
