Transfer of Federal Public Lands?

[elkinrutdrivemenuts]

Another one was just stopped in Wyoming, they wanted to transfer for a piece that would cut off over 4,000 acres of other public land.  Personally, I can't see how any public land sportsman or lover of the outdoors could be anything but fanatically against this.

It blows my mind as well.  Sadly those that do buy into the bs theory are also the same type that have to learn lessons the hard way.  This is one mistake we cannot allow because we will never get this land back. 

[JLS]

The forest service budget is a few billion dollars or something like that. You'd have to be an idiot to attack federal public lands to minimize federal reach.

If it were up to me the budget would be tripled.

THIS.  For goodness sakes.  There's plenty to gripe about regarding federal over-reach and big-government, but federal land management is not one of them. 

The core issue, as has already been pointed out, is that most states are under a legal requirement to SELL state-owned land unless that land can be managed for a profit.  That is the antithesis of preserving land for recreation and conservation.  How the hell are you supposed to secure and protect enough habitat to support an elk or mountain goat herd AND manage that land for profit at the same time? If the states didn't have the requirement to sell, this would become an interesting question about who is better than who at land management.  As it stands, it's not even a question.  The Federal government is legally allowed to preserve our lands.  The states are not. 

Steven Rinella said something on his podcast that hit me hard, and should motivate each and every one of us to fiercely protect our federal public lands. 

"I own the title to 640 million acres of land, and so do each and every one of you."

It's also worth noting that the outdoor industry is 887 BILLION dollars a year in the US.  Public lands in the West play a huge role in the outdoor industry. 

Even if only a conservative estimate of half that revenue was related public land use, that's still over 400 BILLION dollars.  I think the operating budgets that are roughly 1-2% of these revenues, and I consider that a pretty good return.  Honestly, the amount of grazing and timber revenue folks get all spun up over really pales in comparison.

[DaveMonti]

Another one was just stopped in Wyoming, they wanted to transfer for a piece that would cut off over 4,000 acres of other public land.  Personally, I can't see how any public land sportsman or lover of the outdoors could be anything but fanatically against this.

It blows my mind as well.  Sadly those that do buy into the bs theory are also the same type that have to learn lessons the hard way.  This is one mistake we cannot allow because we will never get this land back.

This is simple.  Some folks are so anti-Federal Government that ALL their decisions and support lie against it.  These people are not looking at any federal issues objectively, only emotionally.  As with anything, there is a balance, but all that goes out the window when your arguments are emotional based.  It goes both ways on every issue, fanatical support for Pro or Con. 

[yakimanoob]

It's also worth noting that the outdoor industry is 887 BILLION dollars a year in the US.  Public lands in the West play a huge role in the outdoor industry. 

Even if only a conservative estimate of half that revenue was related public land use, that's still over 400 BILLION dollars.  I think the operating budgets that are roughly 1-2% of these revenues, and I consider that a pretty good return.  Honestly, the amount of grazing and timber revenue folks get all spun up over really pales in comparison.