Reader comments
Bountiful, U.S. poised to swap land

As a long-time Bountiful resident living near the gun range, I think this land swap is a terrible idea! There is no buffer now between the range and residents. Houses and people are being hit by discharges from the shooters. The Forest Service should let the lease on the property run out and not be renewed. The gun range should be moved to a more remote, non-residential area.

Bountiful City has not been very open with its residents about this matter. The city should hold public hearings to better understand all of the problems associated with this area such as traffic safety, flooding, and environmental impacts.

As a long-time user of the Lions range, I can tell you that 25 years ago there weren't any houses anywhere near it.

But of course over the years people have chosen to move there, and of course, these same people who knowingly and willingly purchased houses next to the range now want the Government to bail them out.

How typical.

Maybe you shouldn't have build your home so high up on the hill? Then you wouldn't have to worry about it.

The range has been there for 4 or 5 times longer than the homes around it. It's not like you built your home and then they snuck in a rifle range!

The above is actually an acronym which stands for Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone. The gun range preexists ALL of the development which surrounds it. Bountiful is landlocked as it is. How does Bountiful close what is a viable part of the community and essential for public safety and move it somewhere else? Simply, there is nowhere else for the gun range except for its present place. Those who want to move it suffer from a BANANA-like condition. If the city gets title to the property, they can ensure that a buffer zone is created, they can clean up and mitigate for environmental impacts (something the USFS won't do) and they can ensure the safety and security of the site in perpetuity. There is no good reason why the gun range cannot coexists with the surrounding development. Get over it. What Bountiful has proposed to do is actually a very sensible solution.

The acronym for Not In My Back Yard...

Except the gun range was there first!!!

Maybe the gun range didn't want all of you moving into it's backyard.

(I remember we used to call it the "Turkey Shoot" growing up back in the 1960's. I used to go up with my dad to sight in his rifle for the deer hunt. We used to go there with our scout troops. It's OK, I guess if you stay, but you must of been pretty dumb to buy a house with a gun range in the backyard).

PS Bountiful city has been open with this. It's in the paper!!!

article is that Bountiful City is trying to re-zone an area next to the gun range to allow 3 homes per acre instead of one home per acre. What if the city makes the land swap then kicks the gun club out and sells the property to a developer.

If I were the gun club, I would be worried.

I guess I'd be worried too.

Unless I had been there for 50 plus years and considered an institution by all of the people born and raised in Utah, and ownd by the Lions Club.

I'd probably be more worried if I owned a beet fam. Not alot of calls for beets these days.

People are way too harsh on this issue, and are ignoring real problems and real solutions. One of the homes up there actually had a grandchild peppered with Buckshot. The City is planning to put homes even closer to the existing site (see rezoning issue above). That is not a good situation for the Lions Club or the City of Bountiful, both of whom would get sued if that happened today. Also, the lead cleanup could be very pricey, where is that money coming from? A real possible solution is when the City acquires the land from the federal government, they ought to move the shooting range further north on the bench, to the edge of the propery, modernize the facilities to include indoor ranges, and establish parkland around it, so that that these problems would not occur in the future. Lets tone down the rhetoric and look for real solutions here.