Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Diana in Wisconsin

i would argue that all the land that can be successfully homesteaded is already in private possession

the land that can not support a living is not homesteaded

that would include much of Nevada and utah and other desert places

then there is Alaska........


2 posted on 10/01/2015 8:50:47 AM PDT by bert ((K.E.; N.P.; GOPc.;+12, 73, ....carson is the kinder gentler trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: bert

A regular home owner may not be able to have live stock but maybe chickens and for sure Vegetables


4 posted on 10/01/2015 8:52:48 AM PDT by CGASMIA68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: bert

Well, not everybody needs, or can handle, a big spread of 100 acres or more. On ten acres or less, a family can easily grow enough to survive and sell, providing the soil is good and water is available.
If by “homesteading” you mean government owned land, where it still might be possible to just stake a claim for free, then you might be correct. I haven’t heard of anyone doing that in quite awhile. Seems like Obama wouldn’t like it!


13 posted on 10/01/2015 9:13:32 AM PDT by mumblypeg (I've seen the future; brother it is murder. -L. Cohen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson