Nemont, here's more info:
http://www.hunttalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25089
I'm keeping a file on this issue to show hunters, fishermen and anyone else who enjoys public land. I'll copy what I have and put it here. We have an election coming up and anyone who votes for these Reps. is an idiot.
**********************************************************
Otter supports flawed giveaway of public land
Federal land is a legacy and a treasure belonging to us all — not inventory to palm off when times get tough.
It's reckless for U.S. Rep. C.L. "Butch" Otter to attach his name to a bill to put 15 percent of U.S. Forest Service and Interior Department lands on the auction block. It's even more frightening since Otter, a Republican gubernatorial candidate, wants the job of setting Idaho's budget, helping to manage 2.5 million acres of state endowment land, and preserving public access to hunting and fishing.
Otter is among a dozen co-sponsors of a giveaway under the guise of paying for rebuilding needed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and subsequent disasters.
The bill is reminiscent of a loosely worded proposal that could have allowed companies to stake a mining claim, purchase the land, then set up vacation homes or ski resorts on federal land. That ill-advised proposal died earlier this month amidst vehement criticism from environmentalists and recreation groups, former federal lands managers and Western politicians from both parties. The hurricane bill is even worse — because it opens up much more land to the highest bidder.
The mining rider might have covered "only" 360,000 acres nationwide. The hurricane bill could affect a staggering 5 million acres in Idaho, a land mass as large as the Boise and Payette national forests combined.
Otter has mishandled the Katrina issue from the start. He was one of only 11 House Republicans to vote against a $51.8 billion relief bill in September. At least then, Otter had legitimate qualms: He worried that Congress didn't specify where the money would go and hadn't built in adequate safeguards. His argument for the hurricane land sale fails to stand up to scrutiny.
"I find it interesting that, at a time when many local governments are struggling to make ends meet, some would oppose an effort to restore to local property tax rolls and Idaho-based stewardship some carefully selected parcels of the nearly two-thirds of Idaho that is controlled — and too often locked up from multiple use — by the federal government," he said Monday.
Otter has it backwards. Putting public lands in private hands is more likely to limit multiple use than to preserve it. Federal land managers must strive to balance economics and recreation, resource use and resource protection. Developers are under no such obligation.
"This is not Democrats versus Republicans," said Jerry Brady, Otter's Democratic opponent for governor. "This is too important for politics. It goes to the heart of why we live in Idaho."
Brady's right, yet there's even more to it. Access is a matter of state public policy. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game is paying private landowners through Access Yes!, a forward-thinking program that has opened up 240,000 acres of private land and 250,000 acres of adjacent public land. How would this program play with a governor who wants to privatize the people's land? Otter didn't say Tuesday. In a prepared statement, he said, "Reaching the conclusion that the sale of federal lands to local landowners here in Idaho would necessarily mean a loss of access to sportsmen does a disservice to the value that Idahoans place on stewardship."
As long as we're asking questions, is Otter the kind of governor who'd be willing, under the constitutional constraints of a balanced state budget, to consign state lands or other valuable public assets to the clearance rack? Another fair question.
A gubernatorial candidate aspires to be the CEO of state government. Otter's support of this bill raises serious concerns about his business strategy.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/.../512210314/1053
HR 3855 would sell 15 percent of national forest lands and 15 percent of the lands managed by the Department of the Interior, with a priority placed on states like Idaho, where the federal government owns more than 15 percent of all the land in the state.
The proceeds would be directed to a disaster relief fund.
Sponsors: Idaho Rep. Butch Otter, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, and 11 others.
Brady bashes Otter on lands bill
Measure would allow federal lands to be sold
Gregory Hahn
The Idaho Statesman | Edition Date: 12-20-2005
Email This ArticlePrinter Friendly Page
The first volley of the 2006 race for Idaho governor was lobbed by the Democrats Monday.
Eastern Idaho newspaper publisher Jerry Brady attacked Congressman Butch Otter for co-sponsoring a bill that would sell 15 percent of both federal forest lands and land managed by the Department of the Interior to raise money for disaster relief.
With support from some Idaho sportsmen, Brady said the bill would be a blow to hunters and anglers in Idaho, as well as those who just enjoy the outdoors.
When the federal government unloads its lands, "no trespassing signs go up and you are locked out," Brady said.
Otter countered that the bill could help Idaho collect money in property taxes.
"I find it interesting that, at a time when many local governments are struggling to make ends meet, some would oppose an effort to restore to local property tax rolls and Idaho-based stewardship some carefully selected parcels of the nearly two-thirds of Idaho that is controlled — and too often locked up from multiple use — by the federal government," Otter said, in a prepared statement e-mailed to The Idaho Statesman.
The bill would direct the secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior to decide which lands to sell. It's in front of the House's Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry but has not been scheduled for a hearing.
Idaho has some 33 million acres of public lands — about 62 percent of the state's entire mass. If 15 percent of Idaho’s public lands were sold, it would amount to almost 5 million acres.
The election is almost a year away, but when Lt. Gov. Jim Risch ended speculation that he would challenge Otter in the primary, it left this race — so far — a two-man battle.
Brady, a Democrat who lost to Gov. Dirk Kempthorne in 2002, was quick to take advantage of the opening.
On Monday, he stood with former Idaho Fish and Game Director Jerry Conley and longtime Fish and Game workers Jack Trueblood and Bill Goodnight.
Trueblood pointed to a story his father, famed outdoor writer Ted Trueblood, wrote a couple of decades ago called “They’re Fixin’ to Steal Your Land.”
That was about the Sagebrush Rebellion, he said.
“Let me tell you, these guys are back,” he said.
Conley, who ran the Fish and Game Department for 16 years, said he was “horrified” when he saw the bill.
“That’s land that I hope my kids and my grandkids can continue to use,” he said.
If it’s sold, only big corporations and the wealthiest individuals will be able to afford it, he predicted.
Otter is one of 13 co-sponsors of the bill pitched by Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo.
“It also might be worth asking where the criticism was when the federal government sold large portions of the Boise Foothills to the city of Boise,” Otter said in the statement. “Are such transfers only valid when they are proposed by self-appointed conservationists, and not by those who espouse the broader concept of multiple-use stewardship?”
*********************************************************
Cecil D. Andrus: Selling public lands to cover Katrina's costs is not the answer
Edition Date: 12-24-2005
Email This ArticlePrinter Friendly Page
Selling off our public federal lands to pay for the damage of Hurricane Katrina is like selling your backyard to cover the costs of a fire in your garage. It doesn't make sense.
Yet there are some in Washington, D.C., who are pushing a plan to sell off 15 percent of all the lands held by the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management and other Interior Department agencies. States like Idaho with a lot of federal acres would be first on the chopping block.
Idaho has about 33 million acres of federal public lands. Selling off 15 percent of those would equal more than 5 million acres. That's more than the entire Boise and Sawtooth national forests combined. And the 15 percent limit doesn't necessarily apply to a state-by-state approach — there's no limit in the proposed legislation to how much could be sold in any one state.
Here in Idaho, our public land is our working capital. We use our natural resources, such as timber and grazing, and we enjoy the recreation that comes with them, such as hunting, fishing, camping and hiking.
Yet our public lands are more than the sum of its parts. Over the years of my life, as I have driven and flown around this beautiful state, I've seen the prettiest blue waterfalls, the most stunning high desert cliffs, the most breathtaking forests. But just as much as the scenery, I love the fact that it belongs to all of us. None of us owns it, yet we all share it. That's one of the most central concepts of being an Idahoan — it's what makes us who we are.
I can't imagine why anyone from Idaho would want to auction off this irreplaceable treasure. I know that Jerry Brady, Democratic candidate for governor, has stepped up to defend Idaho's public lands, and I commend him for it.
Once we sell off this land, it's gone. The old Will Rogers adage is true: "They ain't makin' it no more."
Sure, you can horse-trade for a few acres here and there. We did some of that when I was secretary of the Interior under President Carter. But in all my years managing the Interior Department, our goal was always to make public land more open and accessible to the people; not sell it to the highest bidder so private landowners can put up fences, like they've done in Texas.
I'm sure some people will say that Idaho has plenty of public land, so we can afford to sell off some of it and still have plenty. But selling land isn't the same as selling potatoes, microchips or some other commodity. Rural land can be bought strategically, so that purchasing 100 acres can effectively close off 1,000 acres or more, depending on road access. This kind of buying allows one private citizen to make a minimal investment but still lock out huge tracts to everyone who doesn't own a helicopter.
Also, in the current political atmosphere, there's a strong potential for dishonesty. It seems like every day, more headlines are coming out of Washington, D.C., about politicians corrupted by greed.
What do you think would happen if the entire West were opened up to land speculators? Who do you think would be the winners and who will be the losers?
I'll tell you who. It will be the high-dollar campaign contributors and the big-time power brokers who will own the best and most valuable lands.
The hunters, fishermen, campers and other recreationists will be left out, but they won't be the only losers. It will also be the family rancher, the small-town outfitter, the restaurant owners and hotel operators and all their employees.
Idaho and the West are not for sale to the highest bidder. Our heritage, our culture and our future depend on keeping this irreplaceable resource open for all.
Should we rebuild?
