Re: [Texascavers] Land ownership in Texas

[Dwight via Texascavers]

That's just the biggest "school district" of them all  

DirtDoc 

- Original Message -

From: "pstrickland1--- via Texascavers" <texascavers@texascavers.com> 
To: texascavers@texascavers.com 
Cc: pstrickla...@austin.rr.com 
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 3:32:04 PM 
Subject: Re: [Texascavers] Land ownership in Texas 

The university of Texas System has substantial land holdings in west Texas, 
including Amazing Maze Cave and 09 Water Well. 
___
Texascavers mailing list | http://texascavers.com
Texascavers@texascavers.com | Archives: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/texascavers@texascavers.com/
http://lists.texascavers.com/listinfo/texascavers

Re: [Texascavers] Land ownership in Texas

[pstrickland1--- via Texascavers]

The university of Texas System has substantial land holdings in west Texas, 
including Amazing Maze Cave and 09 Water Well.

 Dwight via Texascavers  wrote: 
> Thanks Mike. You are correct in that the private ownership of caves presents 
> it's own set of potential problems. 
> 
> But you are not correct about land ownership in Texas. There is a LOT of 
> "public" ownership, especially in West Texas. Much is held by the State of 
> Texas, not the federal gvt. (except for the National Parks and a small 
> national forest). The General Land Office, Texas Parks and Wildlife, and 
> school disricts are the largest public land owning bureaucracies but the land 
> is often leased to individuals who treat it as their own private fiefdom. 
> That may not help much if you want access. 
> 
> DirtDoc 
> 
> - Original Message -
> 
> From: "Michael Queen"  
> To: "Dwight"  
> Cc: "TAG Net" , idigca...@yahoo.com, "Cave NM" 
> , "Cave Texas"  
> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 10:19:30 AM 
> Subject: Re: [SWR CAVERS] Future of NSS membership 
> 
> I think it is a drastic oversimplification to suggest that private ownership 
> of caves necessarily makes things easier for us or safer for the caves than 
> agency ownership. We are still excluded from Skull Cave (Albany County, NY), 
> because the owners were spooked by an accident (in a separate cave owned by 
> different folk) back in about 1971. When a land management agency works well 
> things are great, as they are with private owners. However, if things go 
> south with private owners there is absolutely no recourse but to buy the 
> caves, and often the owners don't want to sell. Look at what caving in Texas 
> is like, with almost no public land ownership. Anyone who thinks you can just 
> go caving wherever and whenever one wants should think twice. So if we are 
> lucky enough to know the land owners we can decry ownership by public 
> agencies. But if we are not so lucky we should not too quickly criticize 
> public ownership, and we should speak out against efforts to transfer federal 
> lands to state o
 r private ownership. 
> 
> MQ 

___
Texascavers mailing list | http://texascavers.com
Texascavers@texascavers.com | Archives: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/texascavers@texascavers.com/
http://lists.texascavers.com/listinfo/texascavers

Re: [Texascavers] Land ownership in Texas

[Michael Queen via Texascavers]

Re new membership, sometimes outing clubs evolve in ways that reflect the
interests of their advisers. Perhaps we could proactively approach outing
clubs and offer to lead trips or give some slide (or other) shows,
demonstrations of rope work, etc.??

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Dwight  wrote:

> Thanks Mike. You are correct in that the private ownership of caves
> presents it's own set of potential problems.
>
> But you are not  correct about land ownership in Texas.  There is a LOT of
> "public" ownership, especially in West Texas. Much is held by the State of
> Texas, not the federal gvt. (except for the National Parks and a small
> national forest).  The General Land Office, Texas Parks and Wildlife, and
> school disricts are the largest public land owning bureaucracies but the
> land is often leased to individuals who treat it as their own private
> fiefdom.  That may not help much if you want access.
>
> DirtDoc
>
> --
> *From: *"Michael Queen" 
> *To: *"Dwight" 
> *Cc: *"TAG Net" , idigca...@yahoo.com, "Cave NM"
> , "Cave Texas" 
> *Sent: *Tuesday, July 11, 2017 10:19:30 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [SWR CAVERS] Future of NSS membership
>
> I think it is a drastic oversimplification to suggest that private
> ownership of caves necessarily makes things easier for us or safer for the
> caves than agency ownership. We are still excluded from Skull Cave (Albany
> County, NY), because the owners were spooked by an accident (in a separate
> cave owned by different folk) back in about 1971. When a land management
> agency works well things are great, as they are with private owners.
> However, if things go south with private owners there is absolutely no
> recourse but to buy the caves, and often the owners don't want to sell.
> Look at what caving in Texas is like, with almost no public land ownership.
> Anyone who thinks you can just go caving wherever and whenever one wants
>  should think twice. So if we are lucky enough to know the land owners we
> can decry ownership by public agencies. But if we are not so lucky we
> should not too quickly criticize public ownership, and we should speak out
> against efforts to transfer federal lands to state or private ownership.
>
> MQ
>
___
Texascavers mailing list | http://texascavers.com
Texascavers@texascavers.com | Archives: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/texascavers@texascavers.com/
http://lists.texascavers.com/listinfo/texascavers