What if the federal government decided to start selling off swaths off public land?

[Loo.wii]

Sweden is larger than California by land mass with 1/4 of the people. That’s why that system can work. Also the people have far less divergent worldviews (when compared with USA). There is no chance the Nordic system of private land widely available for public use would work well here.

I’m not suggesting that the Swedish prospective would work here. It was more so a basis that I used to pull the thread.

 

[Will_m]

Aren’t you European?

 

[PredatorSlayer]

Or the catholic church.

I think the mormon church is one of the largest farm land owners in the US and they have close to $300 Billion in cash and stocks. Plus all of the real estate they currently own all over the world.

 

[Fireflyfishing]

The one thing that grinds my gears is the corporate and big brother ownership of so much of the housing market. Without going into full socialism, it would be nice if home ownership/living quarters were the one thing a little less preyed upon by people making tons of money off of other people. Not saying people should ever be given houses for free, but when people and corporations buy up 1/2 of small towns, it makes it next to impossible for a lot of people to buy a house, thus they're stuck with renting.
Same is to be said for land, if government land is to go for sale, who do you think will buy it? Some plumber that lives down the street from you, or a trillion dollar company that will exploit it to make a couple more trillion?

China

 

[Wyo_hntr]

There is nobody on here that would be for “What if the federal government decided to start selling off swaths off public land?”.

Therefore, it’s a troll post.

Correct.

Every four years or so this topic is brought up, probably to try and sway hunters to vote a specific way.....

I am totally against the selling off of public land.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Ironically just saw an article where Biden admin is mulling unlocking BLM, NF land to build housing on it… one project in Nevada, one in steamboat springs, another in Ketchum ID. Horrible precedent if you ask me. I’ll see if I can link it. I hate this idea just like I hate that Jack wagon Mike Lee who definitely wants to sell off federal land. Any hunter should oppose this for a lot of reasons so it doesn’t seem like a controversial

 

[Okhotnik]

Re: your second paragraph, you may want to read "No Such Thing as Bad Weather." It's about the Scandinavian approach to parenting young kids and the author details what you mention there. Fair warning, there are a lot of crunchy opinions in the book but she details the paradigm of free outside play quite well.

Re: the sale of federal lands, I'm against it. It was one of TR's greatest moves and countless have reaped the benefits from it. Look at Europe, especially the Mediterranean region, to see the effects of poorly managed landscapes in private hands: deforestation, erosion, "climate change"/temp increase, etc.

 

[Loo.wii]

Aren’t you European?

No. I am of African descent

 

[dlee56]

I have a hard time seeing the profit being worth the bad publicity. I wonder if there’s a valuation on all the National Forest and BLM in the country.

2023 federal budget was $6.2 trillion. How many years could be paid for when you sell off all the public lands really? Probably more logical to keep the taxpayers happy so they can continue milking us for all we’re worth.

 

[IdahoBeav]

. . . mulling unlocking BLM, NF land to build housing on it… one project in Nevada, one in steamboat springs, another in Ketchum ID. Horrible precedent if you ask me.

Depends on the land. There is a lot of federal land that is useless to wildlife and would be great for ag, industrial development, housing, etc. There are also areas critical to wildlife that are, unfortunately, being developed.

 

[Loo.wii]

I have a hard time seeing the profit being worth the bad publicity. I wonder if there’s a valuation on all the National Forest and BLM in the country.

2023 federal budget was $6.2 trillion. How many years could be paid for when you sell off all the public lands really? Probably more logical to keep the taxpayers happy so they can continue milking us for all we’re worth.

I don’t think selling off the land would be of any serious benefit. We still have a trillion dollars debt. I think war would be more profitable.

 

[Loo.wii]

Depends on the land. There is a lot of federal land that is useless to wildlife and would be great for ag, industrial development, housing, etc. There are also areas critical to wildlife that are, unfortunately, being developed.

Which land is useless to wildlife that would be better used for housing ? I want an example as it would help my perspective.

 

[WRO]

I work in real estate and development, large swaths no, random inholdings etc absolutely need to be sold.

 

[WRO]

Which land is useless to wildlife that would be better used for housing ? I want an example as it would help my perspective.

onX Hunt

webmap.onxmaps.com

Just an exapmle

 

[Loo.wii]

I work in real estate and development, large swaths no, random inholdings etc absolutely need to be sold.

Yeah
I could support the gov selling off patchwork blocks of nf. Like those found in the NF near boulder. I would hope that the money would be used to expand the NF or blm.

 

[Loo.wii]

onX Hunt

webmap.onxmaps.com

Just an exapmle

Ah ok that’s a pretty dumb strip of land to hold. Sell that and buy a parcel that makes Sense and isn’t an awkward patch.

 

[WRO]

Ah ok that’s a pretty dumb strip of land to hold. Sell that and buy a parcel that makes Sense and isn’t an awkward patch.

onX Hunt

webmap.onxmaps.com

There’s all the west, my good friend works for blm and said most of those city in holdings turn into homeless camps.

 

[Mojave]

Here in Germany it is called the freedom to wander. It does not include hunting, farming, camping, fishing.

It includes walking, hiking and limited use with dogs and horses.

 

[bpa556]

Happens all the time when Federal land gets tranferred to a State that has a legislative requirement to balance the state budget...Federal Lands go to State Lands and then are sold off the highest bidder because state law requires a balanced budger. Older trick in the book...Ever wonder why there is no public land in TX?

Your “example” sure as hell isn’t the reason there’s “no public land in Texas”…

There is public land in Texas. Between state and federal public lands, there’s total public land area in Texas larger than a handful of states.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bpa556]

One of my favorite things about western states are the large swaths of uninterrupted public lands with diverse ecosystems and terrain . My disdain of the east and south is partially due to the fact not much public land exists. Monday morning quarterbacking about a hundred or so years too late i think the lack of public land in the east and south is a huge disservice to all Americans. There seems to be mulling about the possibility of federal land being sold off whether its through more covert means like natural resource leases or being sold out right to arbitrary private land owners. I would personally be staunchly against selling off public lands. What is your opinion on the subject?


The discussion that prompted this conversation was with a friend of mine who is from Sweden. According to my understanding the cultural standard there and a few of their neighboring countries is although land can be privately owned, it is for the use of all people. So as long as you're not being an Ahole no one is going to bother you if you're hiking or camping on their massive swath of land. Now i know the American cultural and political perspective/context is almost contrary to this perspective but the spirit of this perspective is visible in efforts by some states to allow corner crossing etc. If public lands were sold off would you be in favor of stipulations that would allow use of private lands for public activities specifically on lands that were formally public immediately before the land was sold?

Off the top of my head i don't remember the word for that Swedish cultural standard referenced above but i will include it in my next update.

The federal government has been selling off land since it nationalized all of the “lands not homesteaded” in the western states.

I don’t care a whit. I find it unendurably stupid that the federal government defers animal control on federal lands to the states. The states then charge American OWNERS of that property, who happen to reside elsewhere, orders of magnitude more to hunt their own property.

No, if a private owner purchases federal land, they should not be coerced into allowing public access.

If the public doesn’t want their land sold off, they better vote for candidates against it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk