Transferring/Selling Public Land

Discussion in 'Bowhunting Talk' started by Blacktail Slayer, Jan 8, 2016.

  1. Blacktail Slayer

    Blacktail Slayer Weekend Warrior

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Posts:
    98
    Likes Received:
    4
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Location:
    West
    Having access to public land to hunt, fish and camp is very important to some of us. Here is a lot of great information about the talk over the past few year with transferring or selling our Federal Public Land.

    Stop the Silly Talk of Selling Public Land
    My New Year

    Our Public Lands Not For Sale
    http://backcountryhunters.org/images/Public_Lands_Report.pdf

    Pretty good article on a few bad things that have happened in the past.
    Transferring control of lands bad idea | Idaho Statesman

    Found this pretty interesting if true.
    "Oil and gas companies are squatting on 3.25 million acres of YOUR public lands, often without paying royalties or rent. Our new report explains how the industry routinely exploits loopholes to stockpile leases."
    Land hoarders: Oil and gas companies are stockpiling YOUR public lands | Wilderness.org

    The problems with the state movement to take federal land | Reveal
    "The backing of groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a nonprofit that drives policy and whose members include Koch Industries and ExxonMobil — have begun to reintroduce land-transfer bills in statehouses across the West. Last year alone, conservatives in Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Washington and Wyoming put forward legislation that laid the groundwork for transfers of public land to the states.

    Their goal is simple: open up greater stretches of the West to mining, drilling, ranching and other economic activities, generating tax revenue for the states, and, of course, profits for the companies and individuals involved. (Otherwise, the states simply couldn’t afford to manage so much land.)

    The only way it makes sense financially is to open the land up

    States cannot afford to manage this much public land unless they open more of it to natural resource extraction. This is what a report commissioned as part of Utah’s land transfer law found: For Utah to be able to generate the money it needs to manage 31 million more acres, it would have to increase drilling and mining. And it would need to demand 100 percent of the royalties from extraction (Utah currently splits mineral royalties 50-50 with the federal government). And even then, oil and gas prices would need to remain stable and high.

    An Idaho study found that in 8 of 9 scenarios, the state couldn’t afford a land transfer at all. In the one scenario where the state could make money, the timber industry would have to be having an extraordinary year."
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2016
  2. Sota

    Sota Legendary Woodsman

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    25,928
    Likes Received:
    15,461
    Dislikes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I do not agree with the Feds holding all the land they do and dictating what happens on that land, funny little thing called states rights that the federal gov't likes to ignore more and more.
     
  3. elkguide

    elkguide Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Posts:
    6,574
    Likes Received:
    7,666
    Dislikes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Vermont
    Freedom is expensive and difficult.
     
  4. Backcountry

    Backcountry Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Posts:
    4,265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bitteroot Valley
    If the states begin to gain control of the lands you can kiss a large portion of your public access good bye.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  5. Sota

    Sota Legendary Woodsman

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    25,928
    Likes Received:
    15,461
    Dislikes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Minnesota
    There is plenty of federal land that does not allow public access as well.
     
  6. Backcountry

    Backcountry Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Posts:
    4,265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bitteroot Valley
    So....? Screw it, let's allow the closure of more lands?

    What exactly are you getting at?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  7. Sota

    Sota Legendary Woodsman

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    25,928
    Likes Received:
    15,461
    Dislikes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I would rather see the land out of the gov't ownership and control.
     
  8. Backcountry

    Backcountry Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Posts:
    4,265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bitteroot Valley
    And when your state is short on money and a developer offers to buy a section of state land?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  9. Sota

    Sota Legendary Woodsman

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    25,928
    Likes Received:
    15,461
    Dislikes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Lets not change the topic we are talking about Federal lands. Do realize the % of land the feds "own" in the western states?
     
  10. Backcountry

    Backcountry Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Posts:
    4,265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bitteroot Valley
    30% in my state or nearly 30,000,000 acres.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  11. Sota

    Sota Legendary Woodsman

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    25,928
    Likes Received:
    15,461
    Dislikes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Private land to you is a bad thing?
     
  12. Backcountry

    Backcountry Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Posts:
    4,265
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dislikes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bitteroot Valley
    Considering 80% or more of Western hunters rely on public, yes.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  13. trial153

    trial153 Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2011
    Posts:
    8,562
    Likes Received:
    2,039
    Dislikes Received:
    31
    Location:
    NY
    Then your a moron. Plain and simple makes sounds like you never been off your postage stamp property.
    Transfering federal land the states has been a disaster for access, take a look at what has happened in places like Utah New Mexico and California , and is currently happening in the upper west.
    You can kiss public access and the North America model of conversation good by if this comes to fruition.
     
  14. Sota

    Sota Legendary Woodsman

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    25,928
    Likes Received:
    15,461
    Dislikes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Trial I have spent parts of 12 summers in different western states in parts of National Forests rarely seen by the public, I have an appreciation of what is there. I do believe in states rights more than how the Feds dictate is all.
     
  15. Sota

    Sota Legendary Woodsman

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    25,928
    Likes Received:
    15,461
    Dislikes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I know of at least 3 parcels of private land that have been turned in Wildlife Management areas open to public hunting in Anoka County alone in the past 2 years, seems Minnesota is not running out of hunting areas. California is hardly an example to use to bolster the case against state land ownership and access.
     
  16. trial153

    trial153 Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2011
    Posts:
    8,562
    Likes Received:
    2,039
    Dislikes Received:
    31
    Location:
    NY
    Why don't you call this transfer what it's is and look to who is lobbing for it. Big farming, agra corporations, mining conglomerates and the oil and gas industry are all lobbying for this so the purchase ( read rape) the states who sell.

    States records are abysmal in regards to their handling of Federal school trust lands that were turned over to them. Look at the percentage of lands that are actually still owned by those states and tell me that has worked for the public good. It hasn't in the least.
    This goes way beyond hunting. The federal lands are own by all Americans regardless of the location.

    Tell me how the sale of federal lands in Montana for example is a benefit to someone living in South Carolina for example? It isn't he won't see a dime for sale yet he and everyone else loses potential access to it.
     
  17. Sota

    Sota Legendary Woodsman

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    25,928
    Likes Received:
    15,461
    Dislikes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Minnesota
    So if you didn't hunt out west would you still be passionate about it? If you are so against mining, and logging and drilling are all needed to produce the things we use, it has to come from somewhere.You do grasp where the money the Feds use come from right?
     
  18. trial153

    trial153 Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2011
    Posts:
    8,562
    Likes Received:
    2,039
    Dislikes Received:
    31
    Location:
    NY
    Any sportsmen or person that values open spaces and public access should be against this. So yes I would be against this no matter where I hunted.its short sited and convoluted.
    I am all for private companies providing resources for profits however I am not for further subsidization of private companies by the American tax payers. Look deep and that is the obvious motivation and if it isn't then these companies are fools for spending millions lobbing for it.
     
  19. Sota

    Sota Legendary Woodsman

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Posts:
    25,928
    Likes Received:
    15,461
    Dislikes Received:
    115
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I would like to see Greg Abbott gain some traction, my main objection is my lack of faith in the Federal Gov't to run anything properly.
     
  20. trial153

    trial153 Grizzled Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2011
    Posts:
    8,562
    Likes Received:
    2,039
    Dislikes Received:
    31
    Location:
    NY
    I understand where you coming from and honestly when the issue first stated hitting the radar I felt the same way. That was until I started digging deeper.
    Two thing gong became very clear. First the states have a worse record of managing lands in many cases make the Feds looks adept in land Managment. Further more they (states) have less money and resources then the fed and their prognoses for any better or cheeper management with similar public access and use is almost impossible.
    This leads point leads the the second reason for my change of opinion. Corporations understand full well they the states can not afford to manage these lands and have history huge sell offs when if has taken place in the past. The amount of lobbying that is taken place is insane. The motivations are clear and again it becomes a tax pay subsidizing corporate profits.

    Take listen so some pod cast by Randy Newburgh and Steve Reinella as they give good insite and clarity to the issue and discussion.
     

Share This Page