http://www.twincities.com/ci_9790837?IADID=Search-www.twincities.com-www.twincities.com


In another attempt to further worsen the Bush legacy, the former timber lobbyist who now oversees the U.S. Forest Service is preparing to convert hundreds of thousands of acres of Montana mountain forestland to residential subdivisions.

I never believed I would see the day, but I think we finally have a candidate for first former President that gets rotten fruit and eggs thrown at him whenever he appears in public.

Come on, Byl. You know nothing would stop this recession like some new housing.....

So an administration, actually a mindset in the modern republican party starting mostly with Reagan where you appoint those whos interest it is to dismantle those departments appointed to oversee them:

Dept of the Interior
FCC
FDA
CDC
US Forest Service
Bureau of Land Management
Bureau of Mining
Dept of Energy
Dept of Defense

...The list goes on and on...

Give total control to the corporations, remove all regulations from the corporations. Let one media company control the press, television, radio and even billboard advertising, push through drugs for the pharma industry so now when you treat that headache you risk severe nausea, diarhea, muscle spasms and rectal bleeding or it just sends your heart into cardiac arythmia. But hey...it's all done in the name of a free market.

Oh...and while you push the "keep government off our backs" you make laws and regulations on who we can love, what we can read, what we see on TV, what lyrics our songs can contain, what we can say, where we can travel to, what we can photograph, what can be reported on in the news, how much money we can deposit into our bank accounts otherwise we can trigger an investigation of our finances, how much cash we can carry on our person or risk having it seized and...the list goes on and on...

And there are actually average people that will argue this is all a good thing.

Not just the president...but the republican majority that supported him...also might be the democrats rolling over to him now...

Forest Service for forgoing environmental assessments and other procedures that would have given the public a voice in the matter.

And building houses on protected land surprises you?

Ignorant thing is we have houses, older yes but still viable, that people could move into.

Our mind set in this country is "has to be bigger/newer!!!".

Ignorant thing is we have houses, older yes but still viable, that people could move into.

Our mind set in this country is "has to be bigger/newer!!!".


I have at least a half dozen homes on my route that have been for sale for the last 18 months in the $600k - 1.2 range, averaging 2-3 acres. But rather than buy these homes, people are paying $250-300k for a lot and constructing the home they want. The trees fall, the open green space disappears, and another box is erected that looks strangely similar to the ones sitting vacant; but, it was built to the new owner's specs.

Success and vanity go hand in hand, it seems.

As long as world population is on an increase, the demand for new homes isn't going anywhere though.

"Want", maybe. Qualified demand? Not so guaranteed.

Otherwise, there'd be housing subdivisions all across Africa and in place of the shanties in Asia.

As long as world population is on an increase, the demand for new homes isn't going anywhere though.

That's a assumption being pushed by the housing market Kelraz.

There are a GLUT of old homes on the market, 100's in my local area and they are still tearing up farm/forest land to build new ones.

Folks have to have bigger/better, funny thing is alot of the new subdivisions sit empty as well.

We don't live in Africa or Asia though, and the US population is increasing dramatically, so lets keep this on topic.

People don't move straight from their parents home into a build-to-suit place, and as long as the market for their old home exists, they'll keep trying to move up. The market has recently "dipped", but sales are up in many areas including my own even in this economy. You can't fault people for wanting to live in a place they really want.

You can fault the government for not protecting our natural resources and protected land. And certainly we can wish that legislation on the local level would protect areas and make it less cost effective to raze forests and farmlands to make developments and make it more cost effective to raze a home and rebuild. But if an old house is sitting on the market for a long time - its probably just not priced correctly (a lot of people holding out for the prices of old, hell my house was listed for $120k more than it eventually went for), or its just a bad area still ... and those bad areas won't be a good market for the new builds either. How can it make sense that something 30 years old should sell for about the same price as a brand new house of the same size (that probably comes with a warranty for a few years, as well)?

Hello, 2005 wants its "Sell Houses For Mad Money!" pamphlets back.

There is no possible way there exists a serious demand in MONTANA for land that can not be just as easily relocated to somewhere that isn't a national forest. Yes, there are oil and gas related jobs up there, a lot of them. No, there are not millions of people throwing themselves at the empty wilderness holding first-time home buyer notes wanting their piece of the Dream (tm).

Hello, 2005 wants its "Sell Houses For Mad Money!" pamphlets back.

There is no possible way there exists a serious demand in MONTANA for land that can not be just as easily relocated to somewhere that isn't a national forest. Yes, there are oil and gas related jobs up there, a lot of them. No, there are not millions of people throwing themselves at the empty wilderness holding first-time home buyer notes wanting their piece of the Dream (tm).

Millions? I agree with you there on that point. However, there are plenty of potential buyers in the upper edge of economy that would love a vacation home in Montana. Except, they don't want to be in the ugly, wasteland part of the state that gas companies have laid to waste, they want to be in the beautiful, undisturbed part of the state. Guess where that is! Especially with easy access to Yellowstone in the summer, vacation homes are a big time deal in Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho. These projects are not aimed at middle income earners ( at least no one that would be looking for an oil or gas related job ). Jackson, WY is pretty much development locked ( unless they open national forest around the town ) so the development has moved north of the park in the last 5 or 6 years.

While watching the Tour de France... man, that country is beautiful... I would not mind living there or New Zeland..... probably New Zeland first..... :)