Selling roughly 3 million acres of public land to be required by updated budget bill

[BlackJeep23]

Grazing lands can be sold.

Utah operates with a $100,000,000 budget surplus in most years and for the last several years has cut it's state income tax. It's doing fine financially.

From The Salt Lake Tribune (not the most independent of news sources)

The updated version of the legislation, which could be included in President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” substantially increases the amount of land that could be sold off by making public land used for grazing eligible.

Michael Carroll, BLM campaign director for The Wilderness Society, said the most recent version of Lee’s proposal “shows very clearly where Senator Lee and his allies’ allegiances lie, and that’s in their desire and ideology to push for the sale of federal public lands, regardless of who those lands benefit.”

“Not only are they trying to sell off administratively designated and protected areas,” Carroll continued, “but now they’re saying, ‘you know what, we’re going to put the grazing lands, the lands that ranching communities have depended on to graze their cattle for years, on the table.’”

With that change, lands that include popular trails near Moab that are also under grazing permits — like Corona Arch Trail and the Mill Creek Trail — could be eligible for sale.

 

[Rooscooter]

I don't foresee the congressional tards paying anything down.

This is where the problem lies for sure.... but the money from this goes to the Treasury and they can buy back the bonds or cancel new auctions without any approval from Congress. Who's the President is the key however.

 

[Apparition]

This is where the problem lies for sure.... but the money from this goes to the Treasury and they can buy back the bonds or cancel new auctions without any approval from Congress. Who's the President is the key however.

It’s like EBT for Congress. Use the extra money that comes in for food so you can spend the money you already have on stuff to smoke and booze.

 

[lBasket]

Selling off lands without reducing the ongoing deficit in spending. What an absolutely genius idea with absolutely no negative long term consequences

 

[Rooscooter]

It’s like EBT for Congress. Use the extra money that comes in for food so you can spend the money you already have on stuff to smoke and booze.

Yup... that's the concern for sure. I'm sure they have this figured out....

 

[Tranz Zam]

I haven't read enough about this yet to decide what to believe. And all I've read up to this point is what Patty Murray is saying and I only trust 10% of what she says. And I question the Democrats who are crying foul about this sale when at the same time these are the people who are trying to close these areas off to motorized recreation. Not sure where to find accurate information and real data about this. I've seen land sales here in WA that benefited everyone in the long run once it was explained as to why.

I'm in the same camp. I haven't come to a conclusion on this. On one hand, I'm against the federal government owning large chunks of land, but I'm also concerned about what will happen to the land once in private ownership.

 

[Wildman]

I'm in the same camp. I haven't come to a conclusion on this. On one hand, I'm against the federal government owning large chunks of land, but I'm also concerned about what will happen to the land once in private ownership.

I'd rather it be owned by "Us The People" than to be owned privately. An example of that would be the entrance to Pritchett Canyon in Moab. Last time I was there the entrance was just a large dirt area to park & get ready for the trail. Now it's been bought and the owners charge you to drive across their property to run the trail. And this isn't the only time it's happened in that area. Area BFE was a similar situation.

So I'd much rather it be government owned public lands, but at the same time we then have to fight to keep those lands open to everyone. So there is always to sides to this issue.

 

[BlackJeep23]

My big concern is Mike Lee was for years pushing to transfer fed lands to the states. The big worry was that he just wanted this so the state could sell the land to his developer buddies. Now he's just skipping the states rights argument and going straight to selling the land. Proving those concerns valid as far as Im concerned.

 

[Apparition]

I'd rather it be owned by "Us The People" than to be owned privately. An example of that would be the entrance to Pritchett Canyon in Moab. Last time I was there the entrance was just a large dirt area to park & get ready for the trail. Now it's been bought and the owners charge you to drive across their property to run the trail. And this isn't the only time it's happened in that area. Area BFE was a similar situation.

So I'd much rather it be government owned public lands, but at the same time we then have to fight to keep those lands open to everyone. So there is always to sides to this issue.

Reminds me of this

 

[Wildman]

Reminds me of this

View attachment 625069

That is one of the other examples...

My big concern is Mike Lee was for years pushing to transfer fed lands to the states. The big worry was that he just wanted this so the state could sell the land to his developer buddies. Now he's just skipping the states rights argument and going straight to selling the land. Proving those concerns valid as far as Im concerned.

If there were rules in place I might be more for this. Similar to how DNR land is managed? But this whole thing like many other issues presented by the government have underlying twists and turns that only who knows what could mean.

 

[Apparition]

If there were rules in place I might be more for this. Similar to how DNR land is managed? But this whole thing like many other issues presented by the government have underlying twists and turns that only who knows what could mean.

I'm for selling unused areas so people can live there productively.

I also realize the government can fuck up an anvil with a rubber mallet. There's nothing they do that works and it would only be beneficial to the connected. Much like when Occidental bought Elk Hills.

And as I've said, none of this sale will end up paying down debt.

 

[InOmaha]

Someone is going to get filthy rich(er) and it's not going to be me.

Ted Turner is the largest landowner in my state. Bill Gates owns a bunch too.

 

[bbaldwin237]

Reminds me of this

View attachment 625069

As a kid I always dreamed of driving Lion's Back one day. It was such a an iconic trail to watch videos of and then it was gone in a flash.

 

[John Cooper]

I am the odd man out,

I don't think the feds should own any land.

I don't think someone should be able to stay in office more than 2 terms.

I think there should be no government unions.

I think all congress and senators should only make an average income and not be able to play the stock market.

Lastly if you run for an elected office you have to have already been working a real job(not a community organizer) .. pretty much always private sector job.

Our elected officials have been able to become millionaires only after a couple of terms, that's hogwash.

 

[Wildman]

I am the odd man out,

I don't think the feds should own any land.

So all land should be private? What about National Monuments? Wilderness area? All the public land in the west right now? Can you expand on this? What about all the national forests?

I don't think someone should be able to stay in office more than 2 terms.

No argument here other than I would extend it to 4 terms with a 1 term overlap so that the incoming person can learn the ropes.

I think there should be no government unions.

Agreed

I think all congress and senators should only make an average income and not be able to play the stock market.

Agreed. How about government housing in DC since that is part of why they claim they need to be paid so much. Similar to what military has?

Lastly if you run for an elected office you have to have already been working a real job(not a community organizer) .. pretty much always private sector job.

Agreed

Our elected officials have been able to become millionaires only after a couple of terms, that's hogwash.

I would also say they have be on the same health coverage as our military. I'm sure I could come up with a few other things...


But that isn't what this thread is about.

 

[Rooscooter]

I'm for selling unused areas so people can live there productively.

I also realize the government can fuck up an anvil with a rubber mallet. There's nothing they do that works and it would only be beneficial to the connected. Much like when Occidental bought Elk Hills.

And as I've said, none of this sale will end up paying down debt.

Filing that one away for future strategic use...

 

[John Cooper]

So all land should be private? What about National Monuments? Wilderness area? All the public land in the west right now? Can you expand on this? What about all the national forests?

I believe that we should have National monuments, if the states want public land then they should own it and it should be able to support itself.

Wilderness areas im not so hip on either. With them the .gov has complete control.

Here in the south east the timber companies own a ton of land. I used to pay for a permit and could hunt or ride all I wanted, till morons started tearing the land up and the companies started only leasing hunting rights to it.

THEIR LAND THEIR RULES. and that's cool. I don't mind paying to ride at a local OHV park. It's become that here in the east.

No argument here other than I would extend it to 4 terms with a 1 term overlap so that the incoming person can learn the ropes.



Agreed



Agreed. How about government housing in DC since that is part of why they claim they need to be paid so much. Similar to what military has?



Agreed



I would also say they have be on the same health coverage as our military. I'm sure I could come up with a few other things...


But that isn't what this thread is about.

I still don't think the .gov should be a land owner, it just gives them one more thing to control and screw up.

If the states want it, then let the states buy or lease it for their.

I am a states rights person, because on the state level I have more control as a citizen than I do on a national level.

The rest was me ranting and getting off topic and I do apologize for that.

 

[g.hayduke]

I'm for selling unused areas so people can live there productively.

Who chooses the criteria as to what "unused" means?

 

[Apparition]

Who chooses the criteria as to what "unused" means?

The people with the money who need more money.

 

[g.hayduke]

I'm for selling unused areas so people can live there productively.

The people with the money who need more money.

So you are for selling public lands for the purpose of making rich people richer?