Zinke's Public Lands Bill

[Elky Welky]

This is pretty interesting, and by and large a positive development:https://www.kbzk.com/news/local-new...-to-protect-public-lands-during-bozeman-visit

In a year where partisan bickering is going to only get somehow worse, public lands are probably going to be one of the few areas we'll see people crossing the aisle and doing right by all Americans. Hat's off to Mr. Zinke on this one.

 

[Dougfirtree]

I'd love to hear more specifics, but it sounds positive...

 

[Straight Arrow]

I like the bill. 'Not of fan of Zinke, but will keep an open mind, as he appears to finally get it and wanting to legislate on behalf of Montana and public lands.

 

[Forkyfinder]

This is pretty interesting, and by and large a positive development:https://www.kbzk.com/news/local-new...-to-protect-public-lands-during-bozeman-visit

In a year where partisan bickering is going to only get somehow worse, public lands are probably going to be one of the few areas we'll see people crossing the aisle and doing right by all Americans. Hat's off to Mr. Zinke on this one.

Saw this too. Bucking the norm with the people who wear that color tie as far as MT politics. Good thing for him.

Hope this can continue.

 

[elkduds]

Couple of distrusting Zinke things.
1. Qui bono (who ultimately benefits) and what is the quid pro quo? Devil is in the details, yet to be disclosed. And,


2.


3.

 

[elkduds]

"What this bill will do is essentially increase congressional oversight in the sale or transfer of public lands, and limit how the U.S. Forest Service and Department of the Interior sells or transfers land.
According to the bill, Congress would have to approve the sale or transfer of public land at least 300 acres in size, or at least 5 acres in size and accessible by waterway."

Thus, IMO, ending land exchanges that USFS and BLM have used to consolidate and improve public access to public lands. Because Congress knows better than Dept. of Interior professional land managers. And Congress is so effective at decisionmaking in general.

 

[Straight Arrow]

"What this bill will do is essentially increase congressional oversight in the sale or transfer of public lands, and limit how the U.S. Forest Service and Department of the Interior sells or transfers land.
According to the bill, Congress would have to approve the sale or transfer of public land at least 300 acres in size, or at least 5 acres in size and accessible by waterway."

Thus, IMO, ending land exchanges that USFS and BLM have used to consolidate and improve public access to public lands. Because Congress knows better than Dept. of Interior professional land managers. And Congress is so effective at decisionmaking in general.

Hmmm ... 'seems there's much more to be considered. The initial news blurb I saw would lead you to believe it was aimed at preventing the transfer of federal public lands to the states, a longtime concern regarding public lands. 'Should have known it was really something else.

 

[Trial153]

"What this bill will do is essentially increase congressional oversight in the sale or transfer of public lands, and limit how the U.S. Forest Service and Department of the Interior sells or transfers land.
According to the bill, Congress would have to approve the sale or transfer of public land at least 300 acres in size, or at least 5 acres in size and accessible by waterway."

Thus, IMO, ending land exchanges that USFS and BLM have used to consolidate and improve public access to public lands. Because Congress knows better than Dept. of Interior professional land managers. And Congress is so effective at decisionmaking in general.

You mean there might be an alterer motive? No way!!

 

[elkduds]

In trying to understand the logic of this bill I contacted BHA's national office, got this reply:

I appreciate your email. My name is Kaden, I am the government relations manager here at BHA. I am hoping I can shed some light on the topic you are concerned about.



The Public Lands in Public Hands Act was drafted by with the help of conservation organizations, including BHA, in order to make it more difficult to sell or transfer our public lands. Both Congress and federal land management agencies (DOI and USFS) have the legal authority to sell/transfer public lands. This legislation would reduce the ability of the land management agencies to do so, and make no changes to the existing authority of Congress, as that is a more complicated manner for a variety of reasons. We certainly understand the often obvious ineffectiveness of Congress, and this legislation would make absolutely no changes to the ability of Congress to sell/transfer our public lands.



While this issue is unrelated to actions regarding the Crazy Mountains, that is actually an example of public land management agencies not operating in the best interest of the public. The Public Lands in Public Hands Act would not directly impact that situation, however, it would tightly restrict those same agencies from selling/transferring publicly accessible land.



Please let me know if you have further questions.



Best,

Kaden McArthur