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

[wyosam]

According to this we are making less people.

In 2023, the US fertility rate, the average number of children born to a woman during her reproductive years, hit a record low of around 54 births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44, a 3% drop from the previous year.

Here's a more detailed breakdown:

• Record Low Fertility Rate:
  The US fertility rate in 2023 was at its lowest level in over a century, with a 3% decrease from 2022.
  
  
• Birth Rate Decline:
  The number of births in the US also decreased by 2% in 2023 compared to 2022.
  
  
• Total Fertility Rate:
  The total fertility rate, which is the average number of children a woman is expected to have in her lifetime, was around 1.62 children per woman in 2023.
  
  
• Factors Contributing to the Decline:
  Several factors are believed to contribute to the declining fertility rate, including women delaying motherhood, economic downturns, and increased awareness of reproductive health.
  
  
• Comparison to Previous Years:
  In 1957, the fertility rate was 122.9 births per 1,000 women ages 15–44, which is more than double the current rate.
  
  
• Implications:
  The declining fertility rate raises concerns about the future of the US population, including potential workforce shortages and challenges for social security and healthcare systems.
  
  
• Data Source:
  The data on fertility and birth rates comes from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Awesome! Now if only the economy (and everything else mentioned) wasn’t dependent on continuous exponential growth. Guess between this and deportations we should be good to leave public land as it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Billinsd]

I voted for the current administration, am in favor of their stance on deportation, and am 100% against their stance on developing public land. Those things do not have to be mutually exclusive, and you don’t have to support a political platform on every single issue without thinking critically for yourself… JFC

Excellent! That what I was trying to get out of you. I agree with everything you said, except I disagree with you on developing public land. You are NOT the problem. I'm wondering who valves public land much more than our country and it's borders. Carry on. Bill

 

[Dos Perros]

One county in Nevada would like 40,000 acres, with 33 acres set aside for affordable housing. I have little doubt this is not an isolated idea and I bet counties all over the west have similar plans. So when every county with their hands out are all tallied up will the land giveaway be millions of acres with a few hundred for cheap housing?

Rosen Introduces Bill to Make More Federal Lands Available for Housing Development, Protect Public Lands in Washoe County - Jacky Rosen

The Washoe County Lands Bill Would Protect Public Lands, Support Tribal Communities, Allow For Responsible Development, And Create New Opportunities To Lower Housing Costs WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) announced that she is reintroducing the Truckee Meadows Public...

www.rosen.senate.gov

Nevada is 80% federal land.

 

[Dos Perros]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/VNBA5aXL1TjfMK85A Sell this thing at market value and use the funds to acquire more land elsewhere.

 

[elkhunter505]

Nothing is dependent on CONTUOUS EXPONENTIAL GROWTH!! That is a very bad thing. Steady long term growth is necessary for a healthy economy and the well being of the county and it's citizens.

Not sure how to do it, but we need to break the relationship between growth and the economy/power. Growth at the level we see across the planet is unsustainable. If we could level everything off and be at basic replacement rates or even if we were slightly declining, it would be better for recreation, better for the planet, better for communities, better for everyone across the world. I feel like there are lots of political things that are forcing population growth to continue. One of them is not helping developing nations to become educated and the second is the need for people to create power/money. Seems like it’s in a global interest to stagnate or decline population sizes but we are too busy fighting power battles over religion or philosophy to just leave everyone else alone and chill out.

 

[Billinsd]

Not sure how to do it, but we need to break the relationship between growth and the economy/power. Growth at the level we see across the planet is unsustainable. If we could level everything off and be at basic replacement rates or even if we were slightly declining, it would be better for recreation, better for the planet, better for communities, better for everyone across the world. I feel like there are lots of political things that are forcing population growth to continue. One of them is not helping developing nations to become educated and the second is the need for people to create power/money. Seems like it’s in a global interest to stagnate or decline population sizes but we are too busy fighting power battles over religion or philosophy to just leave everyone else alone and chill out.

Growth in China and India is not sustainable talking globally. There are not nearly enough resources for everyone in the world to live at our standard of living, either. The reduction of famine and disease in third world countries, mostly due to World Christian Charities created the global population boom, because people didn't reduce the number of children they were having after many were surviving. Global overpopulation and our own extremely opulent lifestyle is unsustainable. My lifestyle is extremely opulent, do I want to drastically change, no. Do I conserve? Yes. Do I want to live in an apartment and take the bus around? No. The global wars are a different issue from overpopulation. There are Rhino and democrats chickenhawks in the US that seem to love wars and others apparently have big investments in defense contracts. Constant wars serve no purpose. We should lookout in the world for our own interests, but should stop fighting and defending others unless it's truly in our national interest.

 

[wyosam]

Nothing is dependent on CONTUOUS EXPONENTIAL GROWTH!! That is a very bad thing. Steady long term growth is necessary for a healthy economy and the well being of the county and it's citizens.

The planet can’t sustain steady long term growth, either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ozarkansas]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/VNBA5aXL1TjfMK85A Sell this thing at market value and use the funds to acquire more land elsewhere.

That’s something I would be onboard with since it essentially amounts to a land exchange. I have zero context for any potential ecological/recreational value for that land you linked, but generally speaking I’d give my support if the solution amounts to “sell ecologically insignificant lands in urban areas and use the funds to acquire more public land”.

 

[Coldtrail]

It's complicated. The laborers buy homes/rent in the crappy part of town, not in new subdivisions on the outskirts of town, correct! Their children grown up and buy new subdivisions on the edge of town and then their grandchildren and on and on. Laborers do compete to live in the crappy part of town with some new renters and home buys, who end up buying on the outskirts.
Or take me, born and raised Californio, parents both from Minnesota. I am tired living here in San Diego, which is OVER RUN! And I buy a few new lots at the outskirts of town for me and my grown kids. Isn't it obvious that this is happening?

I will try to avoid this becoming an immigration thread, but I will certainly agree that this is a complicated issue, and obviously further complicated by the individual dynamics within communities across the country, there is no one size fits all. However, if a person wants to really go down a rabbit hole, and not focus on illegal immigration and just a housing crisis.....couldn't a person argue that moving from MN to CA may be contributing to a housing crisis in CA? What about moving from CA to Missoula MT? Or buying land for a seasonal home used a couple weeks a year? Does this not also create a localized housing crisis? Where is the line? At what point does a person accept responsibility for being part of the problem? And the big question.... Does the selling of more lots change any of this, or just contribute to the problem?

 

[Dos Perros]

That’s something I would be onboard with since it essentially amounts to a land exchange. I have zero context for any potential ecological/recreational value for that land you linked, but generally speaking I’d give my support if the solution amounts to “sell ecologically insignificant lands in urban areas and use the funds to acquire more public land”.

Gosh, I was trying to demonstrate you guys were unreasonable and here you go being reasonable. I am flummoxed.

 

[elkhunter505]

That’s something I would be onboard with since it essentially amounts to a land exchange. I have zero context for any potential ecological/recreational value for that land you linked, but generally speaking I’d give my support if the solution amounts to “sell ecologically insignificant lands in urban areas and use the funds to acquire more public land”.

I also would support this. However, I think given the previous opinions of the current Interior secretary as well as the major attempt to cut government spending by the administration that any amount of money made will not be used in such a way. I think that we would all support this but it seems like a pipe dream watching what is going on with our federal land managers and how there are people talking about the cost of maintaining and managing public lands.

Additionally, while this is kind of a side tangent, watching HB 676 in MT be making its way forward despite opposition from State Land Board, DNRC, Montana Farm Bureau, Montana Stock Growers, and a variety of nonprofit organizations, makes me very skeptical of the ability of our politicians to listen to the people when they have lobbyists paying them to do these things. If that bill were to be defeated based on the variety of opponents, I would be more optimistic long term about efforts to oppose these land transfers or at least about the ability of politicians to listen to their constituents.

 

[Billinsd]

..couldn't a person argue that moving from MN to CA may be contributing to a housing crisis in CA? What about moving from CA to Missoula MT? Or buying land for a seasonal home used a couple weeks a year? Does this not also create a localized housing crisis? Where is the line? At what point does a person accept responsibility for being part of the problem? And the big question.... Does the selling of more lots change any of this, or just contribute to the problem?

MOST people use your arguments, ignoring the MASSIVE influxe of tens of millions of foreign nations flooding our country at will without any order or control creating both direct and indirect housing crises. They blame American citizens and developers (who are creating a service for the demand as the vilans). The location of the line is in the eye of the beholder, or in my case I don't see A LINE. I don't put ANY blame on legal residents, citizens movements. My reason is we live in America and are free to travel and move our residences or buy several residences and should not feel any responsibility for overcrowding and should not be blamed in my opinion. Local governments charge developers and new home owners taxes for infrastructure. Private land owners developing their properties helps lessen housing shortages for the most part. It can contribute by creating more demand too.

 

[Billinsd]

makes me very skeptical of the ability of our politicians to listen to the people when they have lobbyists paying them to do these things.

Can we all agree it would be fantastic and our country a far better place and much more democratic WITHOUT LOBBYISTS!!! GET RID OF THEM ALL!!!

 

[elkhunter505]

Can we all agree it would be fantastic and our country a far better place and much more democratic WITHOUT LOBBYISTS!!! GET RID OF THEM ALL!!!

Overturn Citizens United and get rid of the money component.

 

[Coldtrail]

MOST people use your arguments, ignoring the MASSIVE influxe of tens of millions of foreign nations flooding our country at will without any order or control creating both direct and indirect housing crises. They blame American citizens and developers (who are creating a service for the demand as the vilans). The location of the line is in the eye of the beholder, or in my case I don't see A LINE. I don't put ANY blame on legal residents, citizens movements. My reason is we live in America and are free to travel and move our residences or buy several residences and should not feel any responsibility for overcrowding and should not be blamed in my opinion. Local governments charge developers and new home owners taxes for infrastructure. Private land owners developing their properties helps lessen housing shortages for the most part. It can contribute by creating more demand too

The line you don't see today may become more visible if you buy your lots adjacent to a nice federally owned green space which becomes high rise apartments 5yrs later with empty Walmart bags blowing across your yard. I doubt you'll be looking across the new parking lot with a few stolen shopping carts in it happy that somebody who never set foot on the property was able achieve their dream and got a little richer.

 

[grainhog]

https://www.npr.org/2025/05/07/g-s1-64760/house-republicans-approve-amendment-authorizing-the-sale-of-federal-lands

 

[CoMulies]

https://www.npr.org/2025/05/07/g-s1-64760/house-republicans-approve-amendment-authorizing-the-sale-of-federal-lands

But so many people in here said this wouldn’t actually happen???

 

[CJ19]

But so many people in here said this wouldn’t actually happen???

As an appointed BLM official, Tracey stone manning led the effort to ensure more than 20 million acres of public land was industrially developed AND expedited the review process to ensure environmental regulations did not get in the way. An effort that big conservation incorporated lobbying firm The Wilderness Society cheerled and officially lobbied for. I wonder what her salary is for The Wilderness Society just a short time after leaving her government position. Looks swampy to me. If this article is accurate, the amount of land to be transfered is less than 1 of the dozens of solar farms big conservation inc and democrats are desperate to get built on wildlife habitat in exchange for publicly funded kick back to say the other side hates public land.

 

[Ratamahatta]

Where's BHA when you need them, pint night?

 

[Teodoro]

If this article is accurate, the amount of land to be transfered is less than 1 of the dozens of solar farms big conservation inc and democrats are desperate to get built

What figure are they giving? I didn't see a total for land transferred?