DESPICABLE: Republicans Move To Sell Off 3.3 Million Acres Of National Land

[Coyote]

There is no reason why we need the federal government managing state land. The states are perfectly capable of doing this themselves

Sure. By slaughtering the wolves.

 

[JustAnotherNut]

Some of those Federal lands are National Parks, such as Yellowstone & many others. Didn't Theodore Roosevelt designated them as public access and can't be sold for private use?
Selling to private ownership doesn't neccessarily mean individual people, but corporations.....and they can control who is allowed access.

 

[OKTexas]

Bears Ears National Monument

Land totaling the size of Connecticut has been targeted in a new bill in the Republican House, uniting hunters and conservationists in opposition.

Now that Republicans have quietly drawn a path to give away much of Americans’ public land, US representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah has introduced what the Wilderness Society is calling “step two” in the GOP’s plan to offload federal property.

The new piece of legislation would direct the interior secretary to immediately sell off an area of public land the size of Connecticut. In a press release for House Bill 621, Chaffetz, a Tea Party Republican, claimed that the 3.3m acres of national land, maintained by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), served “no purpose for taxpayers”.

But many in the 10 states that would lose federal land in the bill disagree, and public land rallies in opposition are bringing together environmentalists and sportsmen across the west.

Set aside for mixed use, BLM land is leased for oil, gas and timber, but is also open to campers, cyclists and other outdoor enthusiasts. As well as providing corridors for gray wolves and grizzly bears, low-lying BLM land often makes up the winter pasture for big game species, such as elk, pronghorn and big-horned sheep.

Jason Amaro, who represents the south-west chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, describes the move as a land grab.

Much More: DESPICABLE: Republicans Move To Sell Off 3.3 Million Acres Of National Land

This is wrong! This is stealing part of America's public heritage for private ownership and use! This must be stopped.

How much land of the states should be owned by the Federal Government? Why?

I beleive the US Constitution gives them a 10x10 square mile block.... reading ..... reading ...... yep, don't see where they get any more.

You need to read it again.

 

[OKTexas]

Giving the land back to the states is one thing - but selling it for "private" ownership is quite another.

What do you think the States will do with it? It's part of their tax base.

 

[OKTexas]

President Theodore Roosevelt saw in conservation a means of keeping the natural wealth of the United States for the public and not leaving it as it had been for the economic benefit of entrepreneurs.

I guess he couldn't read the Constitution either. It clearly lays out the circumstances for which the feds should own land within a State.

 

[rdean]

Republicans hate this country. We've know it for a long time. Why do you think Trump puts people who hate America in charge of departments they especially hate. The woman in charge of schools hates schools. Rick Perry wants to abolish the department he now heads. Trump is a Russian Poodle working for Vladimir Putin.

Republicans want to finish the job they started under Bush.

 

[Contumacious]

Bears Ears National Monument

Land totaling the size of Connecticut has been targeted in a new bill in the Republican House, uniting hunters and conservationists in opposition.

Now that Republicans have quietly drawn a path to give away much of Americans’ public land, US representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah has introduced what the Wilderness Society is calling “step two” in the GOP’s plan to offload federal property.

The new piece of legislation would direct the interior secretary to immediately sell off an area of public land the size of Connecticut. In a press release for House Bill 621, Chaffetz, a Tea Party Republican, claimed that the 3.3m acres of national land, maintained by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), served “no purpose for taxpayers”.

But many in the 10 states that would lose federal land in the bill disagree, and public land rallies in opposition are bringing together environmentalists and sportsmen across the west.

Set aside for mixed use, BLM land is leased for oil, gas and timber, but is also open to campers, cyclists and other outdoor enthusiasts. As well as providing corridors for gray wolves and grizzly bears, low-lying BLM land often makes up the winter pasture for big game species, such as elk, pronghorn and big-horned sheep.

Jason Amaro, who represents the south-west chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, describes the move as a land grab.

Much More: DESPICABLE: Republicans Move To Sell Off 3.3 Million Acres Of National Land

This is wrong! This is stealing part of America's public heritage for private ownership and use! This must be stopped.

Every inch of federal land unconstitutionally seized by the BLM ought to be sold.


.

 

[Rustic]

Bears Ears National Monument

Land totaling the size of Connecticut has been targeted in a new bill in the Republican House, uniting hunters and conservationists in opposition.

Now that Republicans have quietly drawn a path to give away much of Americans’ public land, US representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah has introduced what the Wilderness Society is calling “step two” in the GOP’s plan to offload federal property.

The new piece of legislation would direct the interior secretary to immediately sell off an area of public land the size of Connecticut. In a press release for House Bill 621, Chaffetz, a Tea Party Republican, claimed that the 3.3m acres of national land, maintained by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), served “no purpose for taxpayers”.

But many in the 10 states that would lose federal land in the bill disagree, and public land rallies in opposition are bringing together environmentalists and sportsmen across the west.

Set aside for mixed use, BLM land is leased for oil, gas and timber, but is also open to campers, cyclists and other outdoor enthusiasts. As well as providing corridors for gray wolves and grizzly bears, low-lying BLM land often makes up the winter pasture for big game species, such as elk, pronghorn and big-horned sheep.

Jason Amaro, who represents the south-west chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, describes the move as a land grab.

Much More: DESPICABLE: Republicans Move To Sell Off 3.3 Million Acres Of National Land

This is wrong! This is stealing part of America's public heritage for private ownership and use! This must be stopped.

Washington Redskin, quit your fucking drinking

 

[Tom Horn]

FINALLY! Want to knock down the national debt? The freaks want to know they can drive a Prius through the west and see NOTHING but rocks and sage brush. SCREW THEM! SELL US OUR LAND AND BUTT OUT OF OUR LIVES.

 

[Tom Horn]

There is no reason why we need the federal government managing state land. The states are perfectly capable of doing this themselves

Sure. By slaughtering the wolves.

Huh?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Bears Ears National Monument

Land totaling the size of Connecticut has been targeted in a new bill in the Republican House, uniting hunters and conservationists in opposition.

Now that Republicans have quietly drawn a path to give away much of Americans’ public land, US representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah has introduced what the Wilderness Society is calling “step two” in the GOP’s plan to offload federal property.

The new piece of legislation would direct the interior secretary to immediately sell off an area of public land the size of Connecticut. In a press release for House Bill 621, Chaffetz, a Tea Party Republican, claimed that the 3.3m acres of national land, maintained by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), served “no purpose for taxpayers”.

But many in the 10 states that would lose federal land in the bill disagree, and public land rallies in opposition are bringing together environmentalists and sportsmen across the west.

Set aside for mixed use, BLM land is leased for oil, gas and timber, but is also open to campers, cyclists and other outdoor enthusiasts. As well as providing corridors for gray wolves and grizzly bears, low-lying BLM land often makes up the winter pasture for big game species, such as elk, pronghorn and big-horned sheep.

Jason Amaro, who represents the south-west chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, describes the move as a land grab.

Much More: DESPICABLE: Republicans Move To Sell Off 3.3 Million Acres Of National Land

This is wrong! This is stealing part of America's public heritage for private ownership and use! This must be stopped.

Why does the fed even have this land? It's like an HOA, where they don't think that the homeowners (states) can take care of their own shit. smh Stop your incessant yowling.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Republicans hate this country. We've know it for a long time. Why do you think Trump puts people who hate America in charge of departments they especially hate. The woman in charge of schools hates schools. Rick Perry wants to abolish the department he now heads. Trump is a Russian Poodle working for Vladimir Putin.

Republicans want to finish the job they started under Bush.

DERP!

 

[FA_Q2]

Giving the land back to the states is one thing - but selling it for "private" ownership is quite another.

You have any clue how many times in the History of the United States that we sold land for private ownership?

Are we going to sell it all for private ownership? What about Yellowstone? Shouldn't citizens have access to enjoy camping, hunting, hiking, fishing on these public lands? Or will they all end up being owned by the rich with NO TRESPASSING signs and guards?

Do you have any idea how much land BLM and the Federal Government have seized (stolen) from the American people?

No. Do you?

She just gave you all the information in the part of the post that you cut out. Trying to be blatantly dishonest?

What do you think is so wrong with selling 0.5% of the federal lands owned? That land is doing nothing. That is not preservation - it is blatant waste.

 

[FA_Q2]

Some of those Federal lands are National Parks, such as Yellowstone & many others. Didn't Theodore Roosevelt designated them as public access and can't be sold for private use?
Selling to private ownership doesn't neccessarily mean individual people, but corporations.....and they can control who is allowed access.

So, exactly how many acres of Yellowstone are they selling?

 

[Mrs. M.]

Giving the land back to the states is one thing - but selling it for "private" ownership is quite another.

You have any clue how many times in the History of the United States that we sold land for private ownership?

Are we going to sell it all for private ownership? What about Yellowstone? Shouldn't citizens have access to enjoy camping, hunting, hiking, fishing on these public lands? Or will they all end up being owned by the rich with NO TRESPASSING signs and guards?

Do you have any idea how much land BLM and the Federal Government have seized (stolen) from the American people?

No. Do you?

She just gave you all the information in the part of the post that you cut out. Trying to be blatantly dishonest?

What do you think is so wrong with selling 0.5% of the federal lands owned? That land is doing nothing. That is not preservation - it is blatant waste.

I added the map and info after I posted it so I had to edit and add the info afterward. I don't think he saw it.

 

[TheDude]

You're a socialist and expect the government to take care of you. Trump's a capitalist. Isn't balance great?

Obama Sets Record for Federal Land and Water Seizures

 

[JustAnotherNut]

Some of those Federal lands are National Parks, such as Yellowstone & many others. Didn't Theodore Roosevelt designated them as public access and can't be sold for private use?
Selling to private ownership doesn't neccessarily mean individual people, but corporations.....and they can control who is allowed access.

So, exactly how many acres of Yellowstone are they selling?

I think you misunderstood......I had said that some of those federal lands are National Parks. Then I asked 'Didn't Teddy Roosevelt designate them as public access (parks) that can't be sold for private use(?).
Some of the other federal lands are NOT designated as parks and would be subject for possible sale. I live in Washington state and can see from the map, Hanford & possibly Satsop (nuclear plants) COULD possibly go up for sale to the right buyer, IF it came to that. There are some other areas that are owned by the feds that is just open range desert type in Eastern Washington that could be sold to individuals, such as farmers/ranchers. And much of the land that runs along the lower slopes of the Cascade Range and Olympic Mts, is already owned by timber companies & other corporations & they would probably buy up much of what the feds would sell in those areas.

 

[Spare_change]

Bears Ears National Monument

Land totaling the size of Connecticut has been targeted in a new bill in the Republican House, uniting hunters and conservationists in opposition.

Now that Republicans have quietly drawn a path to give away much of Americans’ public land, US representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah has introduced what the Wilderness Society is calling “step two” in the GOP’s plan to offload federal property.

The new piece of legislation would direct the interior secretary to immediately sell off an area of public land the size of Connecticut. In a press release for House Bill 621, Chaffetz, a Tea Party Republican, claimed that the 3.3m acres of national land, maintained by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), served “no purpose for taxpayers”.

But many in the 10 states that would lose federal land in the bill disagree, and public land rallies in opposition are bringing together environmentalists and sportsmen across the west.

Set aside for mixed use, BLM land is leased for oil, gas and timber, but is also open to campers, cyclists and other outdoor enthusiasts. As well as providing corridors for gray wolves and grizzly bears, low-lying BLM land often makes up the winter pasture for big game species, such as elk, pronghorn and big-horned sheep.

Jason Amaro, who represents the south-west chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, describes the move as a land grab.

Much More: DESPICABLE: Republicans Move To Sell Off 3.3 Million Acres Of National Land

This is wrong! This is stealing part of America's public heritage for private ownership and use! This must be stopped.

Given that the federal government OWNS 2.7 BILLION ACRES - it's pretty tough to get excited about this.

Makes you wonder - what do they need all that land for?

"The federal government is looking to use the budget process to expand its ownership of land across the United States despite already owning three of every 10 acres, Rep. Louie Gohmert warned Monday.

Gohmert, R-Texas, said the government’s “massive” control over land has preserved less than 1 percent of endangered species and instead harmed individuals whose livelihoods depend on land ownership.

Gohmert, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee’s subcommittee on oversight and investigations, made his remarks as part of an event at The Heritage Foundation.

Does the Federal Government Control Land Near You?

 

[xband]

Some of those Federal lands are National Parks, such as Yellowstone & many others. Didn't Theodore Roosevelt designated them as public access and can't be sold for private use?
Selling to private ownership doesn't neccessarily mean individual people, but corporations.....and they can control who is allowed access.

So, exactly how many acres of Yellowstone are they selling?

I think you misunderstood......I had said that some of those federal lands are National Parks. Then I asked 'Didn't Teddy Roosevelt designate them as public access (parks) that can't be sold for private use(?).
Some of the other federal lands are NOT designated as parks and would be subject for possible sale. I live in Washington state and can see from the map, Hanford & possibly Satsop (nuclear plants) COULD possibly go up for sale to the right buyer, IF it came to that. There are some other areas that are owned by the feds that is just open range desert type in Eastern Washington that could be sold to individuals, such as farmers/ranchers. And much of the land that runs along the lower slopes of the Cascade Range and Olympic Mts, is already owned by timber companies & other corporations & they would probably buy up much of what the feds would sell in those areas.

The repubs are only undoing what Obama did during his last month in office.

 

[Spare_change]

The rough beauty of the American West seems as far as you can get from the polished corridors of power in Washington DC. Until you look at the title to the land. The federal government owns large tracts of the western states: from a low of 29.9% in Montana, already more than the national average, up to a whopping 84.5% in Nevada.

This map, depicting the distribution and share of federal land per state, was first published on this blog way back in 2008. Nevertheless, it keeps accumulating comments and hits at a steady pace, and is still frequently shared around. Unlike hundreds of other random maps, this one has become a perennial. That raises an interesting question for map geeks like yours truly: Which nerve, exactly, does this map strike with the Great Online Public?

Let's start with the most obvious answer: the map is stunningly effective at bringing home its message. And that message is: Federal land ownership out west is huge.