Don't let this be the fate of 640 million acres

[oneye]

As an American we all own 640 million acres of public land. In such an amazing country with such a luxurious benefit to the public, it's time to fight like hell to ensure states don't get a hold of them and have this be their fate:


https://trustlands.utah.gov/land_auctions/crouse-canyon-ps8590/

https://trustlands.utah.gov/land_auctions/diamond-rim-ps8589/

Here's the fate of our public lands. They will go on the auction block. Do at least one thing this week to stop this certain future they face if we allow them to go this way. Contact your representatives, support a group against them, post on social media, put a sticker on your vehicle, educate a friend and ask them to do the same. Those 640 million acres are worth a moment of all our time.

 

[ivorytip]

makes me so sick

 

[Musket Man]

Show some proof it will be sold. Any proof at all. Also explain why everyone concerned about public land being sold was against Jennifer Fielders bill that would have prohibited Montana from selling ANY public land transferred to the state. It makes me sick what the federal government is doing to our public land.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

IMHO this exactly why I am against transferring federal land to the states. These 2 parcels are owned by Utah and are being auctioned off. Each notification has a date set for the auction. For me this represents the tip of the iceberg on what we can expect from any land transfer to the states.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

Show some proof it will be sold. Any proof at all. Also explain why everyone concerned about public land being sold was against Jennifer Fielders bill that would have prohibited Montana from selling ANY public land transferred to the state. It makes me sick what the federal government is doing to our public land.

I don't know anything about the Montana situation MM, but proof that it will be sold is in the announcement and the date of the auction. If no one shows up to bid, guess there would be no sale. Maybe I'll bid $1.00 on each of them and see what happens!!!LOL

 

[ivorytip]

haha, then ill bid $2. that land will get sold for a huge chunk of change. would be interesting to see just what exactly that money gets put towards, big bonuses to the top dogs?? or back to the state where 100% of it should go. I figured Utah made more than enough money of all the auction tags, now they auction land. MM I want to be on board with you, I really do. I'm trying to figure out what the feds are doing to our land that's so bad? what am I missing?

 

[oneye]

Show some proof it will be sold. Any proof at all. Also explain why everyone concerned about public land being sold was against Jennifer Fielders bill that would have prohibited Montana from selling ANY public land transferred to the state. It makes me sick what the federal government is doing to our public land.

These lands will go for a lot of money MM, and so will that 640 million acres, especially the places with value. See it amazes me someone can stare the consequences of a state transfer right in the eye, and still be in denial. This is the fate of public lands. They will be sold off for short term gain for state budgets, and the states will need a lot bigger budgets if they're handed 640 million acres to manage.

 

[oneye]

haha, then ill bid $2. that land will get sold for a huge chunk of change. would be interesting to see just what exactly that money gets put towards, big bonuses to the top dogs?? or back to the state where 100% of it should go. I figured Utah made more than enough money of all the auction tags, now they auction land. MM I want to be on board with you, I really do. I'm trying to figure out what the feds are doing to our land that's so bad? what am I missing?

Some people subscribe to the idiotology that the Feds are bad no matter what and the state representatives that continually vote to strip Forest Service and BLM budgets, and have the power to fix the current system should be handed the land because they've fooled people into believing the false narrative they could do better (even though they could already properly fund the agencies and introduce legislation to fix broken policies) if they got their greedy hands on the land.

 

[shootbrownelk]

haha, then ill bid $2. that land will get sold for a huge chunk of change. would be interesting to see just what exactly that money gets put towards, big bonuses to the top dogs?? or back to the state where 100% of it should go. I figured Utah made more than enough money of all the auction tags, now they auction land. MM I want to be on board with you, I really do. I'm trying to figure out what the feds are doing to our land that's so bad? what am I missing?

From what I've read and from what I've experienced on leased State Trust lands here in Wyoming, you aren't missing anything. The State and the lease holders can withhold access on a whim. You can't Camp/have a fire on STATE lands. Not so with Federally controlled BLM and National Forest lands. I'd never trust the State of Wyoming or the powerful Agriculture top heavy State Legislators to do anything to improve access....they'd only restrict access on the lands, the land that they didn't sell-off to wealthy friends and corporations like Oil/Gas or ranchers/outfitters.

 

[highplainsdrifter]

Show some proof it will be sold. Any proof at all. Also explain why everyone concerned about public land being sold was against Jennifer Fielders bill that would have prohibited Montana from selling ANY public land transferred to the state. It makes me sick what the federal government is doing to our public land.

Take a look at this Randy Newberg video. Is this proof enough for you that the states would sell our federal lands if they had a chance?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpvl0dL-tLs

 

[ivorytip]

there is already lots of state owned land in Idaho that is off limits to public access.

 

[buckbull]

Every western state given land during statehood has sold significant chunks of their land. All have sold hundreds of thousands to millions of acres of the land they have owned. And when state legislators don't sell their land to their buddies they implement use restrictions on their land. There is a proven track record what states do with their land and its clear that folks that recreate on this land don't have a voice in what happens with this land.

 

[Tim McCoy]

Anyone that thinks states are not likely to sell off land is either uninformed, or not paying attention, in my view. Some folks are so ideologically opposed to Fed ownership, I don't think they are concerned. The simple fact is states have tighter fiscal controls in many cases, can't print money, are subject to influence by a few monied interests, the list goes on. So the temptation to sell is huge.

Oregon is trying to sell off 84,000 State owned acres, and this is a looney toony bunny hugger save a tree state. If it can happen here on that scale, it takes little imagination to realize more mining/ranching/oil dominated states would be even more likely to sell.

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/tech/science/environment/2015/12/16/elliott-state-forest-sale-attracts-four-dozen-prospective-buyers/77445222/

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

Anyone that thinks states are not likely to sell off land is either uninformed, or not paying attention, in my view. Some folks are so ideologically opposed to Fed ownership, I don't think they are concerned. The simple fact is states have tighter fiscal controls in many cases, can't print money, are subject to influence by a few monied interests, the list goes on. So the temptation to sell is huge.

Oregon is trying to sell off 84,000 State owned acres, and this is a looney toony bunny hugger save a tree state. If it can happen here on that scale, it takes little imagination to realize more mining/ranching/oil dominated states would be even more likely to sell.

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/tech/science/environment/2015/12/16/elliott-state-forest-sale-attracts-four-dozen-prospective-buyers/77445222/

Long list of potential buyers. One thing you can bet is that if any of the Tribes get the land, any access would cost the public a lot, if they let us in at all.

 

[SunnyInCO]

Don't forget the Saudi's are in the market for a lot of US lands and have been buying it up for the water.

 

[ivorytip]

the tribe here has been buying up pockets of land wherever it becomes available. makes me nervous,,they did buy a big chunk of land down on the river that we used to fish and hunt a lot before it got closed down. tribe bought it and opened it to the public this last year so that has been very cool but I hope they keep that line of mindset going.

 

[Musket Man]

Randys video proves nothing. It is cherry picking information. To tell the whole story it would have to also include how much land the federal government sold or gave away. The federal government gave away over 270 million acres with the homestead acts.That doesnt include what they have sold. Alot of land was given to or sold when various areas were being settled years ago. Saying the states will sell the land based on that is the same as saying the federal government is going to make another homestead act and give away the rest of the land it owns.

 

[oneye]

Randys video proves nothing. It is cherry picking information. To tell the whole story it would have to also include how much land the federal government sold or gave away. The federal government gave away over 270 million acres with the homestead acts.That doesnt include what they have sold. Alot of land was given to or sold when various areas were being settled years ago. Saying the states will sell the land based on that is the same as saying the federal government is going to make another homestead act and give away the rest of the land it owns.

what are you delusional? Yes, during homesteading the government gave away a lot of land and essentially that is what the states are trying to get them to do again to no avail. You're talking about the beginning of settling the west, Randy is talking about what's happening today. Your argument here has no relevance in today's world. Right now states are selling land, the federal government has proven it is good at retaining and even purchasing and protecting important land. You've yet to bring a valid point or decent argument to the situation so don't be discrediting someone such as Randy who is one of the best advocates of wildlife and their habitat we have today. But Musketman, I guess your irrelevant information is more worthy than the fact RMEF, Mule Deer Foundation, BHA, TRCP, Trout Unlimited, pheasants and quail forever, ducks unlimited, NWTF, Pope and Young, SCI, Boone and Crocket, Wild sheep foundation, and over 100 other sportsmen organizations have signed and publicly opposed a transfer to the state or sale of these federal public lands because it is a threat to future access for their members. I don't even understand how someone such as yourself can deny what is going on in the world you live in every day. STATES ARE SELLING OFF STATE LAND, and they want more inventory. Instead of clinging to politicians, why don't you stand up and protect future generations access and opportunities to these lands because supporting the land transfer is one of the most anti-hunting and anti-access sentiments anyone could have.

 

[tttoadman]

Don't forget the Saudi's are in the market for a lot of US lands and have been buying it up for the water.

Foreign ownership of land should not be legal. I don't care if it is a intercity lot or 1 million acres of forest land. No US citizen....no land for you.

 

[tttoadman]

Musket Man makes 2 people i know that support taking my public land and giving it to the states to sell off. My brother in law is the other. He is an amateur ranching and cattle guy. His bitch about the federal management plan is all about grazing rights. He claims the governments choice to not grant or renew grazing rights is a "land grab"(there is that stupid buzz word again).

Think about grazing rights. The federal government manages federal land on behalf of the public for the best use for everyone and also for the best interests of the land itself. I personally think they do a pretty good job. I have more federal land and national forest than I could ever see in my lifetime just in the state of OR.

So the scenario is...the government decides that the "Public Land", that it is tasked to manage, would be better served if a rancher's grazing rights were not continued. The rancher throws a fit, and sues the federal government for not letting him rent the land anymore?? strange?? What this really means is the government chooses to not rent the land anymore, so the renter will need to move out.

So let's put this in Musket Man's back yard:
Musket Man has 1000 acres of land that I have a term lease agreement on. He chooses to not renew my lease, because of any reason he chooses because it is his land to manage. I get mad and sue him for not letting me rent his land anymore. When he tries to have me evicted. I call the Bundy's and their merry band of bandits to come and take over Musket Man's land at gun point and claim i have the right to use the land.

This seems really logical to me. People need to quit bagging on the BLM when corporate greed is really the threat we all face. The top 1% of people with money are doing nothing but capitalizing on the fiscal woes of the fed and state governments to get their hands on more resources they can exploit.