When the Union was formed with the original 13 states, the promise was given
that when other states were added to the Union, they would come in with the same
rights and standing. This has not happened in the West where the Federal
Government has withheld the right to the LAND of the states. It would not have
been tolerated in the original states. It should not be tolerated by our Western
states! GIVE US OUR LAND, which we have never had! There should be a national
law passed that the Federal government cannot own more than 15$ of any state! At
68% ownership of Utah, we have not received our equal footing rights as
promised. Thanks to Governor Herbert and other Western states Governors and
Legislators for standing up for OUR RIGHTS AS STATES!
And what will Utah do with the public lands once the state gets control of them?
It costs the Feds $300 million/yr to manage them now--where will Utah get the $
to do it? What will happen to public access to those pristine lands once the
state sells them off? What will happen to fragile landscapes once the rights to
exploit are sold to the highest bidders, the lands are fenced and the drillers
and miners and grazers move in? Does anyone really believe that our Republican
leaders have any interest whatsoever in preserving the environment? Really? Do
you really? Experience teaches us otherwise, as the Republican Party has fought
every single environmental conservation measure you can name. Every. Single.
It's about time that the western states organize and legally pursue
repossession of the lands within their borders that was promised to them at
statehood. Until this is accomplished these states suffer a handicap in
competing with their sister states that had public lands turned over to them
This definitely should of happened a long time ago....but better late than
Feds can"t even balance a checkbook, or run a decent education system.Why allow them to control state lands?
I cannot believe that anyone would want to give up the federal land in their
states to the states to manage. All that they will do is sell it off to the
ranchers and miners and who knows who else and then we will all be locked out of
everything. Does anyone really think that state leaders have anyones best
interest in mind here but a select few?
Turning over Utah's wild lands to eco-vandals with OHVs seems like a bad
idea. Utah's parks and wilderness areas do not belong to and cannot be
trusted to the residents of the counties in which they occur. They have not
demonstrated the ability to be wise stewards or consider future
generations' opportunity to enjoy our heritage.
Why was this meeting held behind closed doors? Anything being planned?
Proceed with caution. Many private landowners won't even allow fishing
from a riverbank of a public stream or river. When the courts ruled against
them the legislature circumvented the judicial branch and ruled in favour of
the private property owners. Sean Hannity says it all. 'Drill Baby
Maybe they should turn it all over and take the money with them. Close down the
base and all the other fed installations. Utah gets 40% of it's revenue
from the US government. Be careful what you wish for.
Oh, the blatant blind hypocrisy in this statement is beyond comprehension:"They used to do a good job, but they are hamstrung now with
conflicting policies, politicized science and an extreme financial crisis at the
national level. It makes it impossible for these federal agencies to manage the
lands responsibly any more." 1) "Conflicting policies" -
It's because of continual mindset of the robber barons, starting before the
Teddy Roosevelt administration up through today including those who support this
transfer of the public estate to private hands, along with exponential increases
in the U.S. population that have strained our public lands far beyond their
carrying capacity that have resulted in more stringent regulations on our public
lands. 2)"Politicized science" -No entity is guiltier of
politicizing science than the far right. Whether contorting or denying the
science behind climate change, wolves, sage grouse, water, etc., the far right
is the guilty party.3) "Financial crisis" -If the land agencies
don’t have the $$ to properly manage public lands, it’s directly a
result of conservative members of Congress who purposely starve the agencies so
they can indeed make this claim of failure.
Utah has not even been able to maintain and fund state parks, and has even had
to close some. The idea that states will be able to manage and preserve public
lands is a pipe dream. The move to get control is mostly the state's
wanting to exploit the resources on those lands, benefit a few who have the
connections to get contracts or permits for that exploitation, and gradually
diminish the pristine nature of these scenic and natural lands. I am amazed that
it seems the general American public care more about these lands as national
treasures than state governments and the locals who live there and only value
them for their exploitable treasures.
I am sick to death of people suggesting that those who want Utah to control
their own land are out to destroy Utah's "pristine" wilderness.
Sure Utah does have some pristine wilderness but much, if not most, of Utah is
ugly plain barren desert. Development of this wasteland for oil or mineral
deposits would be an improvement on the landscape. Why should Wyoming, Alaska
and countless other states get to control their lands and mineral royalties and
Utah not? Why should we be denied the right to tax royalties for the education
and employment of our people? Why should we be second class Americans? We do not
have to touch the Pristine only the barren wastelands.
@spudlydorightExactly; miners and ranchers actually use land,
produce product, and make profit. Rather than wasting federal tax dollars
maintaining land that the federal government largely doesn't use and paying
them to steal ranchers' cattle, these western states can make greater use
of their resources, generate more revenue, and increase GDP.
While managing America’s federally protected wild horses and burros is
unlikely to be at the top o these governors’ priority list, they will be
better informed if they realize that it is the history of the federal
agencies’ mismangement of wild horses and burros, both those protected by
the 1971 PL 92-195 (30 USC 16, 1331-1340) that is one of the most instructive
red flags they have to work with. It is no secret that many in the West were
not happy when Congress gave the right to manage America’s wild horses and
burros to the federal government and there were a number of attempts fix this
mistake. However, the alliance that eventually succeeded after 40 years of
failed attempts is the one among members of FWS, The Nature Conservancy, and
TNC’s shared experts that are also members of the Internation Union for
the Conservation of Nature and NATURAL RESOURCES. According to 1993 OTA Report
F-565, after FWS failed to implement President Carter’s Exotic Species Act
(EO 11987), the IUCN’s legal team decided to write it into what became the
1992 UN Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 8 (h).
What a lot of people don't realize is that you can't "take
back" what you never owned. Neither the State of Utah nor the Utah Territory
ever owned the vast majority of the public lands in the state. The Federal
Government acquired clear and undisputed title to the land in the Treaty of
Guadalupe Hidalgo in February 1848. This land came into the possession of the
United States government with a clear and undisputed title. No state contested
title, and no private rights had been established previously.Considering the fact that the Utah Territory was formed more than two and a
half years later, it is clear that Utah never owned the public lands. They
clearly belong to the Federal Government.Furthermore, both the
Enabling Act and the State Constitution contain clear language stating that the
State forever gives up any claim to the public lands. "Forever" is a
long time.Furthermore, contrary to what some have claimed, there is
no "promise" in the Enabling Act that requires the Feds must relinquish
title to the State, other than in certain limited cases, such as the trust
lands, which were in fact given to the State.