MAP - Public Lands for Sale in US Senate Bill

I think we can all agree that Mike Lee needs to go. I still have some faith in BLM and USFS making decisions though. I don't think this ends up near as bad as Newberg wants to portray it but I also don't like the slippery slope and don't want it normalized to continue in the future. Seems like once Mike Lee is gone it'll come to an end

Despite the sensationalization, it’s still a chunk of land the size of/bigger than a state that is being mandated for sale. There isn’t a map of what’s been selected for sale, specifically, is there? Just what’s eligible, and some soft language, right?

Seems like square peg, round hole planning.
 
It’s in the “One Big Beautiful Bill” which appears to be stalled at the moment, not to mention a 64% disapproval rating from the public. It’s taken a bit of a backseat to Iran this week, but there are more cracks forming in the GOP over Iran, over the OBBB in relation to spending, Medicaid, SNAP etc. add on a looming war with Iran with a lot of internal MAGA disagreement over that and we’re starting to see some vocal criticism from some hardcore MAGA Senators, which is a bit surprising. A super conservative TN Senators just called his colleagues “war pimps” in an interview. Meanwhile, Ted Cruz is personally ready to roll his sleeves up and load ordinance onto bombers.

There’s somewhat a chance this whole bill could crumble. Not because of public lands, but because the unity is falling apart.
Please send Ted Cruz to Iran!
 
It’s in the “One Big Beautiful Bill” which appears to be stalled at the moment, not to mention a 64% disapproval rating from the public. It’s taken a bit of a backseat to Iran this week, but there are more cracks forming in the GOP over Iran, over the OBBB in relation to spending, Medicaid, SNAP etc. add on a looming war with Iran with a lot of internal MAGA disagreement over that and we’re starting to see some vocal criticism from some hardcore MAGA Senators, which is a bit surprising. A super conservative TN Senators just called his colleagues “war pimps” in an interview. Meanwhile, Ted Cruz is personally ready to roll his sleeves up and load ordinance onto bombers.

There’s somewhat a chance this whole bill could crumble. Not because of public lands, but because the unity is falling apart.
Yeah but either way this won’t be a factor when the bill passes or doesn’t, the bill will pass at some point with give and take but this is not something that is on the radar of things that matter.

If they don’t pass the bill everyone’s taxes go up.
 
Something I find interesting is zero of the threads on this are blowing up, only a few people in each.
 
Showing up late to this one and didn't read the whole thread, but one absolute thing is that residents in every western state have argued more for residents and less for anyone else, which leads the rest of us to shrug our shoulders a bit when things like this happen. Especially given the fact that most of the loudest voices against this didn't make a peep as our country went $36,000,000,000.00 in debt.
 
Showing up late to this one and didn't read the whole thread, but one absolute thing is that residents in every western state have argued more for residents and less for anyone else, which leads the rest of us to shrug our shoulders a bit when things like this happen. Especially given the fact that most of the loudest voices against this didn't make a peep as our country went $36,000,000,000.00 in debt.
The US has been trillions of dollars in debt since before I was born. Almost irrelevant as the OBBB increases the debt, and the sale of public lands would amount to a fraction of a drop in the bucket.
 
The US has been trillions of dollars in debt since before I was born. Almost irrelevant as the OBBB increases the debt, and the sale of public lands would amount to a fraction of a drop in the bucket.
Until you count the timber and minerals that the USGS has kept on the balance sheet since before you were born.
 
The notion that this sell off, which will amount to roughly $30B max, is going to do anything to the $37T debt is flat out stupid. It’s indefensibly stupid, you’re going to have to find a new angle.
 
The US has been trillions of dollars in debt since before I was born. Almost irrelevant as the OBBB increases the debt, and the sale of public lands would amount to a fraction of a drop in the bucket.
And this sale wouldn’t be noticed by 99% of our country as well in reality. Sell off 50 million acres and it won’t reduce the opportunities for 95% of tourists in western states.

Heck CO has bigger issues at hand then losing federal lands, they may lose hunting before we know it, which cracks me up that 87% of funding to fight this has come from nonresidents, where is all this resident hunter support.
 
Yeah but either way this won’t be a factor when the bill passes or doesn’t, the bill will pass at some point with give and take but this is not something that is on the radar of things that matter.

If they don’t pass the bill everyone’s taxes go up.

And if they pass it our debt goes up.

I hate taxes as much as anyone, but I’m more worried about the pain that may fall on my kids one day and less worried about the pain now to my pocket (taxes)

We as a society are far too focused on the now and not the potential problems in the future. It’s the reason prices can go up on many things almost uncontrollably, as long as we can make the monthly note affordable we don’t care.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
And if they pass it our debt goes up.

I hate taxes as much as anyone, but I’m more worried about the pain that may fall on my kids one day and less worried about the pain now to my pocket (taxes)

We as a society are far too focused on the now and not the potential problems in the future. It’s the reason prices can go up on many things almost uncontrollably, as long as we can make the monthly note affordable we don’t care.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Our debt is going up either way for tax breaks that will effect 75% of the middle class in jobs and income. Keeping federal lands that really benefit a minority just doesn’t make sense unless you are a resident without private land to utilize, then you have a cheap paid for play ground to enjoy. Of the 250 million acres of blm and usfs lands, we could sell off 200 million and still have recreation opportunities for the 90% that use federal lands. Yes resident tags will be super easy to get but good luck with access.

Actually the less federal lands the easier it’ll be to get a tag as long as you can afford it, residents have said many time nonresidents can afford crazy prices, well we are more used to it then residents but in time it won’t matter who is a resident or not and hunting leases will come to rule the west, as they have the east and central states.
 
While he's not a US Senator, this is what I got back from Colorado State Senator Dylan Roberts;


Hi Andrew,

Thank you for reaching out and for your advocacy on this important issue. I completely agree with you that our public lands must remain in public hands. I strongly oppose any effort to sell them off through the federal budget reconciliation process. However, as a State Senator, I do not have a vote on the "Big Beautiful Bill" - that is for our US Senators.
This session in Colorado, however, I was proud to be the lead sponsor of SJR25-009, a bipartisan resolution that clearly states Colorado’s opposition to the sale or transfer of federal public lands. It reflects the values of so many Coloradans who rely on these lands for hunting, fishing, and recreation.

We also passed two other bills this year that reinforce our commitment to land access and conservation:

  • HB25-1332, which creates a working group to explore new opportunities for recreation and conservation on state trust lands.
  • SB25-049, which strengthens protections for our natural resources and supports outdoor recreation.
While the reconciliation bill is a federal issue, I am happy to help connect you with members of our congressional delegation, including Congressman Neguse and Senators Bennet and Hickenlooper. They have been strong voices for keeping public lands in public hands, and your input would be valuable to them. Let me know if you need the right contact information for their regional staff.

Also, on Friday, many of us recently spoke out against the US Senate plan to sell public lands. The Vail Daily wrote about that press conference: https://www.vaildaily.com/news/colorado-republicans-senate-public-lands-for-sale/

Thank you again for taking the time to write and for your continued commitment to protecting the lands that make Colorado such a special place.

Best,
Dylan

--
Dylan Roberts

State Senator - Colorado Senate District 8

cell: (970) 846-3054
 
Our debt is going up either way for tax breaks. Keeping federal lands that really benefit a minority just doesn’t make sense unless you are a resident without private land to utilize, then you have a cheap paid for play ground to enjoy. Of the 250 million acres of blm and usfs lands, we could sell off 200 million and still have recreation opportunities for the 90% that use federal lands. Yes resident tags will be super easy to get but good luck with access.

Those land always have the ability to benefit the populous whenever they may decide to want to go enjoy them. People are getting into the outdoors more and more and I feel the trend overall will continue

Long as we have them, we have the opportunity. Once they are gone, the opportunity is gone for good.

We are losing acreages rapidly from natural growth, these federal lands generations from now will likely be all that is left! I’m not willing to toss them up because most “today” aren’t using them. The use on these lands has only been going up, not down over the last 30 years


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Those land always have the ability to benefit the populous whenever they may decide to want to go enjoy them. People are getting into the outdoors more and more and I feel the trend overall will continue

Long as we have them, we have the opportunity. Once they are gone, the opportunity is gone for good.

We are losing acreages rapidly from natural growth, these federal lands generations from now will likely be all that is left! I’m not willing to toss them up because most “today” aren’t using them. The use on these lands has only been going up, not down over the last 30 years


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That’s just it 85% have zero desire to enjoy them outside of visiting a national park, so tell me again why they care?

When the CO anti’s destroy the CPW in CO to rewild it, they’ll get a shock when there is no public federal lands the to rewild, unless they plan to buy it all.

Also how does having federal land give our country opportunities outside of selfish desires for free use to land, selling federal land gives us all an opportunity to buy large tracts of land, if one desires, the more available land there is the prices will drop per acre in the short term.
 
That’s just it 85% have zero desire to enjoy them outside of visiting a national park, so tell me again why they care?

They may not care, but when and if they ever would care, they’ll be glad people fought for them.

At one time we didn’t care to play on computers, now look at us. I’m sure glad we didn’t pass a ban on computers or smart phones because we once didn’t use them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I also think more people care than believed, many people use some sort of public grounds even if it’s a small neighborhood play ground.

They just need to associate it to them correctly and they’d be on board


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I also think more people care than believed, many people use some sort of public grounds even if it’s a small neighborhood play ground.

They just need to associate it to them correctly and they’d be on board


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Take out national parks, monuments and lands easily accessible, motorized/atv/Jeep trails, hiking trails and the majority will not care and to keep just these would probably be 10million acres of currently established things, yes there are groups that care but which conservation org has 50% of our population, so around 160 million members funding it?

Heck, take all conservation orgs and you probably don’t even have 10% of our population supporting them with a membership or otherwise.

The reality is, those that enjoy usfs and blm lands for all recreation are in a minority that keeps decreasing and one in which many that recreate want to see many types of recreation halted or reduced. Heck most conservation orgs are trying to reduce recreational users opportunities every year.
 
Take out national parks, monuments and lands easily accessible and the majority will not care, yes there are groups that care but which conservation org has 50% of our population, so around 160 million members funding it?

Heck, take all conservation orgs and you probably don’t even have 10% of our population supporting them with a membership or otherwise.

The reality is, those that enjoy usfs and blm lands for all recreation are in a minority that keeps decreasing and one in which many that recreate want to see many types of recreation halted or reduced.

How can you say the amount to use these lands keep decreasing?? I’m pretty confident the usages have been going up not down.

I’m not but 38, but have been camping and hunting on public lands since I was old enough to walk and there’s no doubt a growing use of public lands.

People complain about crowds now, for reason. And that reason is more people using them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top