Comments about ‘Public lands coalition plans to 'Take Back Utah'’

The Governor does not have political savvy. He will sell us out to further his political ambitions. He lacks principles and governs based on pandering to the SL media.

History shows that Utah joined the Union, you know, the Union. The US of A. America. The power sits in Washington, D. C. Check your 4th grade history and political science book to see that fact again.

History shows that Utah has sucked at the federal chest for years in order to have income, growth, and money for the big cats. Think hiways and HAFB and the Air Material Area.

History shows that Utah has a bunch of greedy people, like all of the states. But the rest of the nation has realized that we are a republic, a union of one, not a bunch of whinny little powers scattered here and there.

History shows much if one is willing to look. But people are not willing to look if money is involved, and power. And if you are so stupid as to be manipulated by the "leaders"!

PS -- I see where the Utah Farm Bureau has finally come clean as a voice for the rich, big farming interests. For decades their national record shows that they only care about the big guy. It is the only surprise in the news article. They finally came out of the closet.

History shows he doesn't know anything about the founding fathers organization of the government, rural Utah or the Farm Bureau and who they do business with.

To that guy who posted earlier claiming all the power resides in Washington, you are very confused and incorrect on your understanding of federalism. The Constitution gives only specific, carefully limited powers to the federal government. If a federal governmental power is not spelled out in the Constitution, then the federal government DOES, NOT, HAVE, IT. Let that truth bore down into your cerebral reservoir. Read the 9th and 10th Amendments. All powers not specifically delegated to the federal government are retained by the States and the people, and the federal government cannot mandate that the States do anything. What, are you trying to deny the reality of the 9th and 10th amendments? Get a life and start reading those amendments.

The Constitution does not give the federal government the power to permanently hold on to vast tracts of land. Rather, Article I Section 8 says Congress may own land sufficient for the District of Columbia, and other needful buildings, forts and magazines. Period. And that only upon the consent of a state where such buildings, forts and magazines are located.

It's about time we stepped forward and confronted radical "environmentalists," like SUWA, Bobbie Redford, and Envision Utah. There are way more of us than there are of them, and we're way overdue in taking back Utah.

In fact, these radical groups are tiny cabals of back-east carpetbaggers and east-bench elites that exercise undue influence over Utah policy primarily because of their internet prowess and an ability to play the Utah media like a cheap fiddle.

Our combined voices can -- and should -- easily drown out their shrill non-use and access denial demands.

No other state in the Union has the draconian limits on land use and access we have to deal with here in Utah. We must seek reasonable land use and access policies, or content ourselves with being converted into a large national zoo. Where we're captive and on display like a bunch of pandas.

He calls himself "History," but he is really the "anti-History." The only reason Utah has taken federal funds, is because Utah's state and local governments are unable to levy property taxes on Utah's federal public lands even though state and local governments provide basic services with respect to those lands. Also, the federal carpet-baggers come in and rape Utah of 50% of valuable oil and gas and other mineral royalties, all of which should be going to state and local governments.

So its the rape and sucking off of royalties and the hand tying of state and local governments to levy taxes on lands to which they provided gov't services, that puts Utah in a position of having to accept federal revenues.

The better, more efficient, and more Constitutionally appropriate way, is for the feds to get out of the land management business and turn the public lands over to the State of Utah to own and manage.

So History, you are the anti-History.

Unfortunately that term is an oxymoron. I like to think that I am someone who cares about the environment. I like clean air, water, and some wilderness areas that are "unspoiled". But I also understand that public lands are needed for a variety of uses, including energy exploration and production.

Ask an "environmental activist" how much public land should be set aside for things like off-road vehicles, development, and energy production. The answer always seems to be the same - zero.

History shows that Utah and the federal government are governed by the Constitution, you know the Constitution.

That pesky Constitution just blows a big gaping hole in your false claim that the power resides in Washington. Not according to the Constitution. Neener, neener.

When will Mike Noel and his buddies be satisfied? They got most of southern Utah handed to them on a silver platter in BLM's recent management plans - most of it wide open to oil leasing, with thousands of miles of designated ORV routes. Ken Salazar is right to push for a better multiple use solution.

August 8th! Got it, and I will be there.

Stand up to the Washington bureaucrats, and to the Utah politicians like Huntsman, Bennett and Hatch who have become part of the same elitist cabal, hoping to prolong their political careers.

Add to the list of grievances the overturning of the Bush Administration's changes to allow legally carried firearms in National Parks lands under the laws of the state where the parks are located. More "nanny state" intrusion that we simply should not put up with.

Utah needs to get with the other states and demand adherence to the 10th Amendment limiting the power of the federal government to those specifically enumerated in the Constitution, not whatever silly schemes a majority of 535 idiots on the Potomac suddenly endorse.

Less government, lower taxes and less spending!

Bring ice tea, it will be hot in August.

Hardly any of Texas is public land. Utah is 2/3 public land. I wish someone would examine closely what happened in 1896 that allowed that to happen. This website's recent article on that question gave a UTAH HISTORY ENCYCLOPEDIA land summary that did not explain this at all. That original statehood "deal" should be revisited by Utah officials and even challenged in court. The feds wronged us then and we've paid for it ever since. This 2/3 "crime" explains why Utah can't fund education. UEA, of all people, should be mad as hornets about that.

As a citizen of the USA I have a stake in those lands (along with every other citizen else). Nobody better try to appropriate them for thier private, selfish, shortsighted purposes. The lands belong to the people of the USA and are therefore managed by the government of the USA.

The State of Utah entered the Union by an act of Congress. Selective reading (misreading) of history and the US Consitution doesn't change reality.

The Sage Brush Rebellion crowd is just one step (or less) removed from Timothy McVeigh.

The state of Utah has more private and/or state owned land than several of the states of the union. Its economy seems to be doing quite well under the existing arrangement.

Don't be fooled. The Sage Brush Rebellion is really about a land grab by a few selfish, greedy, and/or misguided people.

Sign me up for the coalition! As the article states, the majority public land in Utah is controlled by the federal government which in turn has it policy directed primarily by special interest groups who have very little tie to Utah or Utahns. If one were given access to the funding sources of groups like SUWA, it would quickly be discovered that organizations and individuals with leftist/socialist agendas are the primary benefactors those who eschew government for the people, by the people and of the people in favor of government of the people by the big government of self interest.

As a state, Utah (governed by Utahns) should have the right to determine our own policy. Anything less is in direct conflict with the states rights that our founding fathers envisioned and laid out in our foundational charter.

They will be satisfied when every extractable resource is extracted-when every wildlife species only has value if it can be ranched or hunted. The bottom line is money, and for all their rallying cries to the gullible, the citizens of Utah will be the last to dip their fingers in that pot. Guess who gets to clean up the mess?

The U.S. is divided into 1 mile square parcels. 1 of every 36th of those are set aside as "school trust lands", and the procedes from the sale or lease of those lands are to go to fund education. Except the federal government is in effect appropriating those lands without compensation when they rule against development of those lands.

Way to rob the kids of Utah, Salazar.

So Noel and his buddies want to "take back Utah." It always amazes me how people whine about the government "locking up" lands in Utah; but if you want to see lands that are really locked up, complete with fences and security guards, go to the west side of the Salt Lake valley and try to hike in the Oquirrhs. Wake up, you bunch of sheep; it's not the government, it's the greedy fatcats like Noel and the rest of them who are using you to get rich. Noel doesn't care about your access to public lands, he'll use your anger at whatever to "take back Utah" so he can turn around and sell it to his rich friends.

utah is trashed out enough, this land is ours(all america) and i want it there, i get there ..not no cow paddy and somanelli floating down the stream...!

after reading all the post. I just dont care anymore.

Just read Matthew | 8:15 a.m. April 21, 2009. This is exactly the kind of mentality that allows some moron in Massachusetts or Vermont, who will likely never set foot in Utah, to drive policy that impacts me and every other citizen of Utah.

If I recall history correctly, there was once a rebellion fueled by taxation on a group of people without meaningful representation in the formulation of policy. (Personally, I like the outcome of that rebellion.) Is the determination of land use policy without meaningful representation really any different?

Furthermore, I take offense to Matthews classification of this movement as being less than one step away from Timothy McVeigh. This kind of positioning by leftists is designed to divert meaningful discussion of substance by promoting fear. I wonder if Matthew makes the same judgement about anti-war protestors or Rocky Andersons public rants against G.W. Bush?

Ask the question, WHY. I want to keep public lands open for multiple use so I can drive on existing roads and trails, see old ghost towns and mine sites, hike and camp in the mountains and desert, drill for oil and gas so we have power and are not dependent on foriegn imports, have access to low sulfur coal (Escalante)to produce cleaner power, have open range for cattle raising, and have a tax base for public schools.
Now ask the question WHY do some people want to close the land to these benefits?
Why some people will spend millions of dollars to save the whales, snail darter, spotted owl or a cactus but we kill thousands of human babies each year is unfathomable.
Now ask yourself the question WHY and be at the Rally August 8th.