"DOI will work with HUD to identify lands to offload for the development of affordable homes"

[pacoalcracker]

Just lower interest rates to something reasonable, like 4.5% and stop hedge funds and major investment firms like Blackrock etc from competing for every single family home that comes on the market in most regions. Strip the lucrative tax write-offs available to these firms and it will stop that shit in a hurry. Those 2 items alone would solve 50% of the housing crisis. Another 30% of that problem is the high immigration over the past 4 years which is now largely under control....but there are still 10-20 million people here needing homes. That last 20% is a combination of homebuilder corporate greed and inflation over the past few years.

The Federal gov't has no business giving federal land to the states for housing of any kind. Every state has plenty of their own state owned public land to forfeit if so needed or so desired.

 

[IdahoBeav]

You're right that impact fees are typically part of large developments, and in many cases, they help offset some upfront infrastructure costs. But impact fees rarely cover the full scope of long-term public obligations that come with new development, especially when it comes to maintenance, schools, emergency services, and water management over decades.

Saying the county might benefit from increased tax revenue in 15 years assumes everything goes according to plan: full buildout, sustained population growth, stable property values, and no unexpected costs. But in the meantime, who carries the financial and ecological burden?

Again, this is not true. You're using the shotgun approach, throwing as much anti-development rhetoric as you can. The idea that local government rolls out the red carpet for developers and the municipalities and taxpayers take it in the shorts financially is not true. The developers shell out huge for traffic impact studies, public improvements, impact fees, permitting fees, environmental and feasibility studies, etc. The new residents pick up the utility user fees once they go online.

 

[littlebigtine]

Again, this is not true. You're using the shotgun approach, throwing as much anti-development rhetoric as you can. The idea that local government rolls out the red carpet for developers and the municipalities and taxpayers take it in the shorts financially is not true. The developers shell out huge for traffic impact studies, public improvements, impact fees, permitting fees, environmental and feasibility studies, etc. The new residents pick up the utility user fees once they go online.

I hear you and I want to be clear that I work in private residential construction as a contractor, so I’m certainly not anti-development. I understand how much goes into planning and executing these projects, and I know firsthand the costs and challenges developers face.

That being said I have seen firsthand how developers can take advantage of taxpayers and I iterated the story to you.

My concern isn’t with development itself, but with the scale and pace of some proposals and how well they align with long-term sustainability, especially when it comes to resources like water, infrastructure capacity, and ecological impact. Developers pay a lot up front, but there can still be long-term costs to municipalities that aren't fully accounted for, especially in areas where growth outpaces planning.

 

[grainhog]

Though the most vocal proponents of land transfer in this thread are obviously anti-BHA, for reasons apparently having mostly to do with "pint nights" and degrees of hat brim flatness...from BHA:

"A last-second amendment in Congress now threatens to sell nearly half a million acres of OUR public lands in Utah and Nevada as a budget “solution.” But make no mistake – this isn’t an afterthought. This is a pre-planned and deliberate move to avoid public accountability and scrutiny.

Purposefully introduced in the late hours of the night – with zero reinvestment in conservation and no price that makes it right – the amendment violates the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act, a bipartisan law we, as the BHA community, helped make permanent. And it sets a dangerous precedent for every state with public lands – this isn’t just about Utah and Nevada.

Here’s how you can fight back on behalf of every public land owner:

1) Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask to speak to your Representative.

3) Tell your Representative: “My name is [your name], and I’m a public land hunter and angler. I’m calling to urge you to oppose any public land sales in the budget reconciliation bill. These lands belong to all Americans. This process has been rushed, and the public deserves better. Keep public lands in public hands.” "

 

[CJ19]

Though the most vocal proponents of land transfer in this thread are obviously anti-BHA, for reasons apparently having mostly to do with "pint nights" and degrees of hat brim flatness...from BHA:
"

There are far more people that are indifferent to PLT than proponents. Unfortunately for the average hunter and public land lover like myself, BHA has contributed more to this indifference than just about any other conservation group out there. If BHA would have been on the side of sportsman and not politics throughout most of their existance, perhaps they would not have such a terrible reputation among the average sportsman. The faces most people associate with BHA are Land Tawney, Buzz Hettick, and Ryan Busse. Polarizing figures make a lot of enemies or alienate a lot of people. Evidence of the disconnect between big conservation inc and sportsman is present in social media of virtually all the largest "conservation" organizations of the same ilk as BHA. Repairing the damage that BHA has done to their own reputation through hyper partisan leadership will be hard now that their reputation is established and wide spread.

I suggest reading what people like myself and many others are posting and make suggestions to the group at your next BHA pint night accordingly. My first suggestion would be - that when you post a message asking people to call their reps to lobby for a cause BHA cares about, do not start that message with a triggering introduction that is counter productive to what you are trying to accomplish. BHA has struggled with that concept repeatedly. I will leave you with this. Why is it BHA and not NWTF, DU, TU, etc that is always the butt of these jokes?

 

[grainhog]

There are far more people that are indifferent to PLT than proponents. Unfortunately for the average hunter and public land lover like myself, BHA has contributed more to this indifference than just about any other conservation group out there. If BHA would have been on the side of sportsman and not politics throughout most of their existance, perhaps they would not have such a terrible reputation among the average sportsman. The faces most people associate with BHA are Land Tawney, Buzz Hettick, and Ryan Busse. Polarizing figures make a lot of enemies or alienate a lot of people. Evidence of the disconnect between big conservation inc and sportsman is present in social media of virtually all the largest "conservation" organizations of the same ilk as BHA. Repairing the damage that BHA has done to their own reputation through hyper partisan leadership will be hard now that their reputation is established and wide spread.

I suggest reading what people like myself and many others are posting and make suggestions to the group at your next BHA pint night accordingly. My first suggestion would be - that when you post a message asking people to call their reps to lobby for a cause BHA cares about, do not start that message with a triggering introduction that is counter productive to what you are trying to accomplish. BHA has struggled with that concept repeatedly. I will leave you with this. Why is it BHA and not NWTF, DU, TU, etc that is always the butt of these jokes?

So, holding the BHA stuff aside (I'm incidentally not a member, don't attend their events, or those of any other organizations with corporate sponsorships or ties to internet hunters): half a million acres. You either oppose it or you don't-you obviously don't, and without intending to invalidate your intense feelings, I'm not posting to you, the several people who always like your comments, or the real estate agents. It's clear you have some preconceived and immovable conviction (though I honestly don't know what it is). That's why I rarely respond to your comments. There are many other people reading this thread, the majority of whom don't comment/like comments, and many of them (most?) oppose (or may oppose with sufficient information/awareness) land transfer.

 

[CJ19]

So, holding the BHA stuff aside (I'm incidentally not a member, don't attend their events, or those of any other organizations with corporate sponsorships or ties to internet hunters): half a million acres. You either oppose it or you don't-you obviously don't, and you, the several people who always like your comments, and the real estate agent's are not who I'm posting to. It's clear you have some preconceived and immovable conviction (though I honestly don't know what it is). That's why I rarely respond to your comments. There are many other people reading this thread, the majority of whom don't comment/like comments, and many of them (most?) oppose (or may oppose with sufficient information/awareness) land transfer.

most people i speak with are just ... meh about PLT unless DIRECTLY impacts them. i am not happy about it, but the conservation community has worked really hard at creating enemies over the last 5 years. Western public land hunters too. The messaging is incoherent from both those groups. I mean, i laided out a very specific response to your post and your response is basically screeching because you don't agree with what a lot of the hunting community is telling you. I have no financial stake in the western PLT. You probably do. Most of thee people complaining here do. So this is a you and a western hunter problem more than its my problem.

I don't know what to tell you when you have a response that misses the mark soooo badly. Conservation and lobbying groups have done a poor job capturing public opinion and feelings, we are seeing that reflected now in how people are responding broadly about this issue...not a priority or just plain indifference. not sure why its so hard to understand.

 

[grainhog]

most people are just ... meh about the proposal on the table. i am not happy about it, but the conservation community has worked really hard at creating enemies over the last 5 years. Western public land hunters too. The messaging is incoherent from both those groups. I mean, i laided out a very specific response to your post and your response is basically screeching because you don't agree with what a lot of the hunting community is telling you. I have no financial stake in the western PLT. You probably do. Most of thee people complaining here do. So this is a you and a western hunter problem more than its my problem.

I don't know what to tell you when you have a response that misses the mark soooo badly. Conservation and lobbying groups have done a poor job capturing public opinion and feelings, we are seeing that reflected now in how people are responding broadly about this issue...not a priority or just plain indifference. not sure why its so hard to understand.

No, no, YOU'RE screeching and YOUR response misses the mark so badly, and so forth

 

[CJ19]

No, no, YOU'RE screeching and YOUR response misses the mark so badly, and so forth

mb bro. wont waste your time then.

 

[Billinsd]

There are many other people reading this thread, the majority of whom don't comment/like comments

That's because most aren't interested much, either way. If many were really upset about this PLT, they would be commenting, and liking/disliking a whole lot more, like they are doing on Meateater FB and other influencer FB pages. The Rokslide community is not shy about posting when it's something they are very passionate about. Maybe the forum is really slow, because people are fishing?

 

[littlebigtine]

That's because most aren't interested much, either way. If many were really upset about this PLT, they would be commenting, and liking/disliking a whole lot more, like they are doing on Meateater FB and other influencer FB pages. The Rokslide community is not shy about posting when it's something they are very passionate about. Maybe the forum is really slow, because people are fishing?

Maybe the reason no one is commenting is because they dont want to argue with you and CJ

This is a western hunting forum.

This is not field ethos.

 

[CJ19]

Maybe the reason no one is commenting is because they dont want to argue with you and CJ

This is a western hunting forum.

This is not field ethos.

i will assure them i will not argue with them. i am stepping out of the conversation so you guys can get to the bottom of. best of luck.

 

[COelk89]

Does everyone deserve the right to live exactly where they want? Or is that a situation in this country that should be sorted out by the environment, socioeconomics, and capitalism. There is plenty of housing available in the rust belt.

Selling off public lands for "affordable housing" is straight out of the Eastern Bloc. Which Oligarch gets to sell this affordable housing?

 

[littlebigtine]

i will assure them i will not argue with them. i am stepping out of the conversation so you guys can get to the bottom of. best of luck.

But where else will you post?

 

[realunlucky]

In this thread there are some members that are way way to invested in the conversation to be taken seriously.

Almost like it's thier job to sell one side of the story. Sorry can't take your opinion seriously at this point.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[mostlybirch]

If the answer to the question "Can public lands be transferred to private development?" passes the YES/NO question, after that it becomes degrees of what is acceptable. If you can transfer land on the edge of town, then you can transfer plots in prime elk habitat.

 

[KurtR]

He really isnt wrong I know alot of people who have moved to indifferent that used to be really invested in being against PLT. Western influencers and con orgs have pushed people away with the sky is falling every week for the last so many years.

 

[Teodoro]

Count me for one who thinks this is BS, but doesn't want to get sucked into the BS on the board.
But in case it's a helpful example for anyone, let me say it:
Eating your seed corn is stupid.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

He really isnt wrong I know alot of people who have moved to indifferent that used to be really invested in being against PLT. Western influencers and con orgs have pushed people away with the sky is falling every week for the last so many years.

There was a story written about stuff like that, believe it was called "The boy who cried wolf."

 

[mostlybirch]

He really isnt wrong I know alot of people who have moved to indifferent that used to be really invested in being against PLT. Western influencers and con orgs have pushed people away with the sky is falling every week for the last so many years.

I can't understand giving up on public lands due to annoying "influencers"