# New Land Transfer Bill



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

There is a lot of very crappy legislation being proposed right now. Bishop has also introduced a bill attempting to reverse the Bears Ears designation and reduce the size of Grand Staircase-Escalante significantly.... scary times.


----------



## mattman (Jan 30, 2015)

"Lands previously classified as suitable for disposal", Ugh.
Maybe they just get spoiled, spending all there time in Utah, and don't realize what they have( along with some heavy padding to there pockets, most likely).


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

The Tea Party insurgency has deep roots in Utah. I am holding out some hope for the moderate republicans to sideline these bills. I just fear the anti-fed contingent in the Congress is smart and persistent enough to succeed. We still have the final stop gap of Trump's potential veto as he has stated he is against lands transfers. He has stuck to most of his promises, in regards to policy, but he has a few unusual and aggressive ideas that will require Congress to be compliant which means he will have to cave on some of his preferences.

Good time to support news, needed to remain informed, and non-profits to fight these bills.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

restrac2000 said:


> ...We still have the final stop gap of Trump's potential veto as he has stated he is against lands transfers. He has stuck to most of his promises, in regards to policy, but he has a few unusual and aggressive ideas that will require Congress to be compliant which means he will have to cave on some of his preferences.


All bets are off if they offer their approval of him and tell him that he'll be the smartest president ever for signing something they bring him.


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

Trump's relationship with Congress will be telling and I have no clue how to predict that outcome. 
Some of these bills can still be fillibustered if I understand correctly. Luckily long time conservative Senators, like Hatch, saved the fillibuster from being eliminated the last few years. Its a glimmer of hope for Congress. Congress may have an unprecedented majority control but I take some solace in the obvious cracks exposing a lack of RNC unity on many issues. 
I will say the outdoor community may need to put aside historic internal tensions for the next few years if we want to stop this regressive action. It will take everybody from hunters, rafters, skiers, hikers, fisherman, and maybe even motorized hobbyist to fight this monied interest. Access to BLM and USFS lands effects the average American in all of those groups. Most of us will never be able to afford the cost of recreating if these lands go to states and private ownership.


----------



## griz (Sep 19, 2005)

Andy H. said:


> All bets are off if they offer their approval of him and tell him that he'll be the smartest president ever for signing something they bring him.


No doubt many countries and special interest groups will be consulting psychology types on how best to deal with and manipulate Trump for their purposes. 

Sadly, a fauning gal with big tits is probably all it will take.

It's going to be a long four years. 

Time to fight back, no doubt.


----------



## Lebowski (Aug 19, 2015)

restrac2000 said:


> We still have the final stop gap of Trump's potential veto as he has stated he is against lands transfers.


This is where my hope lies. DT Jr. is an avid hunter and senior is trying to get Zinke in as DOI secretary. I really hope that they both bend his hear and tell him this is a bad idea.


----------



## Lebowski (Aug 19, 2015)

mattman said:


> "Lands previously classified as suitable for disposal", Ugh.
> Maybe they just get spoiled, spending all there time in Utah, and don't realize what they have( along with some heavy padding to there pockets, most likely).


I wonder if these are just the lands that are identified as 'disposal' in the BLM RMPs and the USFS LRMPs. If so, it will be fairly easy to see what lands are up for grabs. If not, then all bets are off I guess.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Lebowski said:


> This is where my hope lies. DT Jr. is an avid hunter and senior is trying to get Zinke in as DOI secretary. I really hope that they both bend his hear and tell him this is a bad idea.


Folks like that don't need public lands to hunt and fish on. If you've ever floated the Lower Blue, you've seen where and how they fish. And the idea of being able to buy up large swaths of now-public land is the whole idea of the legislation. Put the government (deeper) into debt with more ridiculous tax cuts, then everything will be sold off at firesale prices. And they're not going to be selling off many parcels that people like us could buy for our own little piece of paradise...


----------



## tjligon25 (Mar 19, 2015)

I think it would be awesome if there was an entity with public interest in mind that could "privately" purchase these lands, only to immediately preserve and give back to the public for public use. 

Sent from my VS987 using Mountain Buzz mobile app


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

tjligon25 said:


> I think it would be awesome if there was an entity with public interest in mind that could "privately" purchase these lands, only to immediately preserve and give back to the public for public use.
> 
> Sent from my VS987 using Mountain Buzz mobile app


Conservation Lands Foundation has been known to do this in certain situations. They purchased up a couple parcels of private land located at the perimeter of the Browns Canyon National Monument and then "donated" them to the Forest Service.

There are also more locally based organizations that do the same thing on a smaller scale, like Central Colorado Conservancy and Conservation Colorado.


----------



## bgarnick (Nov 16, 2006)

*Take Action*

We all need to take action if we want to impact these decisions. Here is a link to contact the House Committee on Natural Resources where the bill is currently sitting. 

https://naturalresources.house.gov/contact/


----------



## tjligon25 (Mar 19, 2015)

I have read a lot of articles saying that H.R. 621 died today due to public outcry. That's 3.3 million acres that stays public once this is confirmed

Sent from my VS987 using Mountain Buzz mobile app


----------



## troutbum001 (Jan 28, 2016)

Chaffetz withdraws public land sale bill after outcry from hunters and anglers | Idaho Statesman


----------



## BrianK (Feb 3, 2005)

Great news. The lesson is don't fuck with fishermen - they are a super vocal group. Anytime there is a threat to fishing they come out in force. Boaters need to align with them wherever we can.


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

Great news.

Don't forget the outcry from hunters. There was a huge outcry in Utah amongst Chaffetz's constituents, many of them public lands hunters. Many of us in that group have watched western states cozy up to special interest to pass bills like this only to see access to land and wildlife closed.

Definitely a good day for citizen activist.


----------



## griz (Sep 19, 2005)

Hunters have economic clout to back them up, as well. 

In Colorado, for example, we make up the second biggest industry for tourism in the state and add 4 billion a year to the state's economy alone. 

Tough to ignore.


----------



## tjligon25 (Mar 19, 2015)

The way I kinda see it, its not hunters, fisherman, boaters..I see outdoor enthusiasts who put their foot down and said it doesn't matter if this land has deer, rapids or giant trout, it's ours and you(the feds) cannot privatize it. Which is awesome because we are a serious force when we do what others have not, and voice our opinions as one.


----------



## Domar Dave (Feb 4, 2011)

There is another bill pending from Chaffetz that is also troublesome. It is a proposal to eliminate law enforcement authority from the BLM and US Forest Service. He somehow imagines that should be handled by the county sheriff departments. Obviously, the sheriffs and deputies would have no interest or priority in enforcing regulations that protect public lands. While some of us have had the occasional negative experience with a BLM ranger or Forest Service LEO, at least they are trained specifically to enforce land management policies. And recreation is only a small part of the regulatory duties of these officers. They are responsible for compliance in the mining, timber and grazing programs which would probably run rampant without any agency enforcement authority. Some of the sportsmens groups who opposed the land transfer bill are also opposing this one.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Domar Dave said:


> ...a proposal to eliminate law enforcement authority from the BLM and US Forest Service. ...They are responsible for compliance in the mining, timber and grazing programs which would probably run rampant without any agency enforcement authority.


I expect that's the whole idea.


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

Yep, i believe its from Chaffetz as well. Plus my state is forwarding efforts to change the Bears Ears Monument status. Yeah, Utah, such a good use of our money! Not even sure how they hope to do that given its designated under Congressionally approved Antiques Act powers. From last night's video feed they seem misinformed and think its just some executive order over reach.


----------



## tmacc (Sep 6, 2009)

tjligon25 said:


> it's ours and you(the feds) cannot privatize it


One thing to point out, it isn't the feds, it's UT, WY, etc state legislators that are pushing for this.


----------



## tmacc (Sep 6, 2009)

Yup, Restrac2000, kinda sucks to be a resident of UT sometimes.


----------



## st2eelpot (Apr 15, 2008)

The Bill that is about taking away the BLM and US Forest Service's ability to police their land is HR 622. It's currently in the House Committee of Agriculture, and is not yet up for a vote for the full house. This is one of Chattetz's bill's.

Brief Bill overview: Chaffetz Introduces Land Management Bills | U.S. House of Representatives

Here is the phone number to the House Committee on Agriculture: 202 225 2171. Feel free to call them to tell them if you are for/against this bill.

Feel free to call your representative to let them know you are against this as well, so if it comes to a full vote your voice is heard.

If you're in CO, here is a list of the representatives based on what district you're in (which you can easily google):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Representatives_from_Colorado

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

This would be taking the enforcement capabilities of the management agency rangers and LEOs and handing their responsibilities to the local sheriff, state troopers, etc. The local sheriff likely lacks knowledge of the very resources they're supposed to be protecting, how those laws apply to looters, the extractive industries, recreationists, and the particular issues associated with the "stakeholder group" (that's us) involved. This really makes me uncomfortable. If you want a good example of what we could be dealing with from "local law enforcement" consider having a county sheriff at Westwater checking in groups and enforcing Utah liquor laws to the letter of the law. That six-pack you picked up in Fruita? Hop in the back of the car, son...

Wherever you are, you can find phone numbers for your elected reps here.

-AH


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

Andy H. said:


> Utah liquor laws to the letter of the law. That six-pack you picked up in Fruita? Hop in the back of the car, son....


Totally agree. This is undoubtedly a nod to the Bundy crew from one of Utah's early Tea Party insurgents. We are watching not only the assault of the administrative state as we know it but also defanging any enforcement potential of what remains. 

On a side note, best unintended pun I have seen in a while, Andy. 

Phillip


----------



## mattman (Jan 30, 2015)

Another detail in addition to some very good points made about HR 622 is where state and local LE agency's would get the funding for a VERY Large new jurisdiction which they are not very familiar with. Would the money come from your state and local taxes, increased tickets and fines, be none existent, Come from the Federal Government in some appropriate amount, or some over budgeted windfall that allows local sherif's to spend at there reasonable, or wasteful discretion?
I don't know the answer, but how this would be paid for, is a HUGE aspect.

If I were I were getting mugged, or in a wreck, I would not want sheriff deputy's and State troopers, off in the Booneys where they can do nothing.


----------



## zercon (Aug 30, 2006)

*Bishop*

Outdoor Retailer trade show shopping for a new host city as outdoor industry blasts Utah public land policies
The Outdoor Retailer trade show, which currently brings about $45 million a year to Salt Lake City during its winter and summer gatherings, is shopping for a new home. Denver previously was considered as a home for the show. Could it land in Colorado

Maybe the good people of Utah will consider this next time there is a chance to get rid of Rob Bishop


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

Utah's 1st District went overwhelmingly republican last election, by a margin of 40%. Until democrats start moving in major numbers into deep red districts then there is no way he is ousted. His district is not as affected by this potential move as the greater SLC area to the south.

I worked for years in Duchesne. District 1 is massive but gerry mandered (not going to change given the RNC'a major success in focusing on state government) district that is largely rural, heavily benefits from extractive industries, ranching, and ideologically is against federal regulation and "over reach". Bishop is reflecting his constituents accurately and wisely. 

The conservation and environmental movement never adapted well to the tea party insurgency that is now almost a decade old. So much of our energy and money goes into lobbying federal action which was always heading for an eventual collision with state rights and far right wing interests. The Tea Party was mocked for years but built up support after every monument designation, every new regulation, and especially with every new EO that had an environmental emphasis. 

And what we have now is that movement's very real maturation. They have the ability to dismantle the administrative state as we know it. They have the means and money to reduce federal land ownership and management. Deregulation is a reality, its just a matter of how much and how fast. 

The DNC and progressive movement failed to adapt and protect Western lands as we know them. Until they accept that special interest models like SUWA (ie rely on monied interest and lobbying outside the districts largely affected) are antiquated and accept the new paradigm than we will continue to fail. These massive land designations have, many times, left locals disaffected and radicalized. The service industry jobs that replaced resource extractive jobs left locals economically compromised. The "New West" is not sustainable for far too many people.

I support Patagonia and others in using their money for their ideals. But until more people dig deep into the complex social and economic realities and listen to the rural populations they disproportionately affect than I predict more and larger failures for conservation. We need their buy-in and support after decades of making them our enemies.


----------

