UT's land grab rejected by Supreme Court

TurkeyReaper69

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Messages
134
Utah would be better off pushing for better or revised management standards then wasting Tax payer money on this BS.
I sometimes suspected that was always the intention. Like someone else mentioned above "a flare in the night to alert R president and congress". What does Utah want? Increased royalty payments on O&G to the state? Higher PILT? The antiquities act to be repealed? Was this all a bargaining chip to achieve something?

Right after the election and around the time the Uintah and Ouray Rez filed suit against them they slightly changed course on this whole charade
 

TurkeyReaper69

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Messages
134
Not to mention millions of acres have been and will be given to the native corporations from the blm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Republicans want to sell land to their friends, Dems want "costewardship" or "tribal management" of federal lands. Two sides of the same damn coin.

We, the public land owners get f**ked either way.
 

TurkeyReaper69

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Messages
134
As an Alaskan I’m extremely torn on this topic. State management likely leads to eventual sales and once it’s gone it’s gone. On the flip side, federal dictatorship about land use is reaching sky high levels.

If you had massive federal closures superseding your state fish and games management model like we do, you may not be as cheerful to keep the Feds in control. An overhaul of the department of interior would be epic but likely never to happen.
Not to hijack this thread, but Secretary Haaland was just able to quietly slip on additional members to the federal subsistence board (who will represent tribal interests in AK), I sure as hell hope the new administration is able to get representation from a hunting and angling group and the ADFG a permanent spot at that table.

 
Top