I support you Senator Lee, you have Utah in mind. I want Utah to have the say
on our lands, not the federal government.
SoonerCouger and Red Smith could use a refresher course in US land policies. I
suggest they start about 1785 and review the various congressional acts relating
to land ownership. It would probably come as a huge surprise that their
assumptions are only about 180° off what actually happened.
Thank you, Senator Lee for looking out for our state's REAL interests.
I'm glad that Senator Lee is standing for the rights of the Citizens of
Utah. I hope Senator Romney will do the same. We should go back to the founding
idea's of the Nation and forbid the government from owning land. Any step
in that direction is a good one.
A lot of silly comments here. I'm new to Utah. I CHOSE to move here because
of the scenic beauty of a (relatively) unspoiled state. I enjoy the skiing, and
the parks.A huge portion of Idaho (the Wilderness Area) is preserved
and left wild. Utah's scenic treasures are more exposed. Preservation is
necessary. I say preservation, not development. Dirt bikes, Jeeps, etc. are fun,
and I love my Jeep, but we can set land aside for Jeeps and bikes.I'm sorry, Mike, I just don't agree with your pillaging point of
view. Once we've destroyed a special locale, it is destroyed. It is gone.
We'e better than this.
Each 50 states should be equal in federal land ownership on a percentage
basis.New Jersey has 3% federal lands. Utah has 69% federal lands.
The issue is inequality among the states.The old states don't
treat the young states equally. That's the problem. We need federal
laws making federal ownership of land equal pro rata amount all states.
That's the American way.
Someone wrote, "It [federal land] belongs to the United States government
and by extension the American people." That's where the disconnect
occurs: "by extension the American people". Has anyone here
ever dealt with federal bureaucrats on the use of federal land? They don't
manage the land for the American people; they manage it like the King's
huntsmen, with no thought for anyone but him. The trouble is, in this country we
have no king. But that doesn't stop them from managing the land as if we
@imsmarterthanyou:"I intend to ride my ATV over every inch of
this state that doesn't have a structure on it or is covered by water.
I've already covered a lot, but I'm getting ready to do a LOT more
this year."Does that include private property? Does that
include your neighbor's front yard?Remind me again how
conservatives are out to protect people's private property rights......?
I really enjoy trail riding on my razor & my mountain bike in these areas.
I am afraid that if they restrict these areas, like bear ears, only a few
thousand people will ever go here, vs. opening these areas to the public for
recreational activities. Rarely have I seen people damage these areas, and both
people and animals can co-exist and enjoy being outdoors!
"The founding fathers of our country EXPRESSLY stated that government should
NOT own the land."No, very clearly they did not say that. It doensnt
matter how many times you say it will not make it true. You and the Bundys can
make all the claims you want but you will still be wrong.
water rocket: " The founding fathers of our country EXPRESSLY stated that
government should NOT own the land." Just where did you get that?
Okay, Senator Lee, I'll bite. What work did you do to shape this bill as
it advanced to the Senate Floor? What amendments did you offer to represent
Utah's interests (as you see them)?What work have you done on
this issue, besides taking your ball and going home? Your
constituents are curious.
There are National Parks in the original 13 states. They are not the size of
Western parks but they exist. Please provide a citation for the
claim that the proposed law has any influence on the issue of radioactive waste
storage. Although Lee specifically denies it, it sounds like
he's making perfect the enemy of good to me.
To Thomas Jefferson, you say "These are not now nor have they ever been
'Utah lands'. The land we are talking about belong to the American
people. The Utah constitution expressly forbids Utah from ever making claims to
these lands." For someone with your post name perhaps a refresher course on
history is in order. The founding fathers of our country EXPRESSLY stated that
government should NOT own the land. Fast forward to when the west was being
settled and we see how the federal government changed the rules and TOOK
ownership as a precondition to statehood (whereas eastern states had no such
requirement). Today we have seen blatant disregard for the public and forced
changes in land use by (mostly) Democratic administration edicts, prompted by
one activist interest (so called environmentalists) who have stated that had
they been here before the pioneers, Utah would not have been allowed to be
settled at all. I believe that all we want is to be treated as an EQUAL partner
state in this great nation. By the way, the feds are still trying to force us
to accept nuclear waste from those states that are not "public land
states". What is fair for one should be fair for all.
Please. Would Lee, Bishop, Hatch (in the past) quit calling it a "land
grab." It is a misnomer. Land that already belongs to the federal government
cannot be stolen by the federal government. You cannot steal land that already
belongs to you. It belongs to the United States government and by extension the
American people. The land can just have different statuses - BLM, national
forest, national wildlife refuges, national recreation areas, national historic
sites, national monuments, national parks, etc. Changing that status under the
Antiquities Act is not, I repeat not, a land grab. It did not belong to Utah or
its citizens as private property in the first place.
Excellent job Senator, I am against any law that limits my use of the land. I
intend to ride my ATV over every inch of this state that doesn't have a
structure on it or is covered by water. I've already covered a lot, but
I'm getting ready to do a LOT more this year.
Utah forever ceded it's rights to Federal lands when it became a State and
signed the enabling act. But, as we all know, most Utah politician's words
don't stand for much. It's not just Lee. Utah's GOP leaders have
been trying for decades, and will for decades longer, to steal public lands, not
just from Utahn's, but all Americans. We know Lee doesn't care much
for contracts, like his mortgage, but to allow him to work on laws that effect
all of our lands is not very smart. We all know how the story ends.
Re: "Why give more land to oil and gas to just sit on, not producing
anything. Why do we have welfare ranchers?"It's exactly
this kind of elitist blather that is used to suggest that only hands-off
"King's Forests" are properly "protected."The
fact that oil and gas leases produce nothing today in no way affects the other
multiple uses of public lands. Rather, it provides need income to Federal
landlords that could enable other important public uses of the lands."Welfare ranchers?" Just remember that foolish epithet, whenever you
bite into a filet served at your black-tie dinners for moneyed donors. If
you'd like to see what life's really like for "welfare
ranchers," I invite you to join me on a "quick" tour of Western
Utah/Eastern Nevada ranches. Quick's a relative term, it takes 4-5 hours,
on mostly dirt roads, to travel the 90 miles from East Bench mansions. You'll quickly appreciate that "welfare ranchers" earn every
nickel -- and then some -- they can grub out of some of the least productive
ranch land in the Nation. If they had to pay TX grazing fees, not even you could
afford a filet.
Senator Lee's thoughtful analysis is spot on.I hope that he can
convince his good friend from Massachusetts occupying Utah's other senate
seat to go along with him.
Senator Lee has gone above and beyond his harmful humble beginnings as a lawyer
for Energy Solutions to a truly deleterious influence on public policy for
public lands. Senator Lee’s relationship to the land seems always to be
informed by how the land might benefit him either financially or politically.
He is not a source to which I would give any credence when it comes to
stewardship of our public lands.
An Associated Press computer analysis of Bureau of Land Management records found
that:80 percent of federal lands leased for oil and gas production
in Wyoming are producing no oil or gas. 83 percent of the leased
acres in Montana, are producing no oil or gas. 77 percent in Utah,
are producing no oil or gas. 71 percent in Colorado, are producing
no oil or gas. 99 percent in Nevada, are producing no oil or gas.
Why give more land to oil and gas to just sit on, not producing
anything.Why do we have welfare ranchers? In places like Texas where
there is very little federal land the ranchers have to own the land or lease it
from the owners for considerably more that $1.50 a head per month, how is that
fair market if Utah supplements their ranchers?It creates
entitlement for some like the Bundy's who mistakenly believed that they are
entitled top public lands, cause, they've alway used it without proper
Re: "The principle of multiple use carries with it responsibility."Yeah -- prime among them is the responsibility of Feds to actually
permit reasonable multiple use. Unless use includes reasonable agricultural,
recreational, minerals extraction, and energy production uses -- it's NOT
multiple use.For too long, local BLM administration has been stymied
at every turn by absentee Washington landlords, intent on creating a
"King's Forest" rendered unavailable to the very people that have
for generations preserved public lands so well that environmental extremists now
consider them worth "preserving."Suggesting that only
distant, uninformed bureaucrats have the expertise and integrity to make
critical land-use decisions, with no reasonable consideration of the needs and
desires of those depending on and living closest to the land is callous elitism,
pure and simple.The very kind of callous elitism, in fact, that
America voted against in the last presidential election, and will likely
continue to vote against in the foreseeable future.
Sen. Lee: "Citizens must go to the federal government, hat in hand, to ask
permission for any use of the land at all — whether to dig a well, build a
road, bury a cable or do virtually anything on it."Well, I
should hope so. Is the senator suggesting it is preferable to allow unfettered
access to public lands to do any sort of activity, regardless of the damage?
The principle of multiple use carries with it responsibility. Federal land
managers have to manage public lands in a sustainable way that ensures resources
are available for future generations (stewardship). Responsible land
management means that potentially destructive activities like road building and
pipelines need to be evaluated and authorized before they begin. If Sen. Lee
wants to call that begging for permission, then fine, but it is no different
than any private landowner would require. The Statue of Liberty is on public
land. I think I 'll start a copper salvage and recycling operation on
Liberty Island. I have the senator's blessing to proceed without
consulting the National Park Service for approval.
Grateful for Mike Lee's thoughtful response to this issue. Mike continues
to demonstrate his integrity to correct principals and reasonable approach to
difficult issues. Clearly a blessing to the state and a true conservative voice
in the nation's capital. Hoping that our junior senator will follow
Senator Lee is no friend of the term PUBLIC when it comes to discussions of
land. Public lands are America's best idea.
If Lee is against it, I am for it. Mike Lee is the worst electoral mistake Utah
Lee expects us to believe he now suddenly cares abt "what's best for
Utah after he voted for the tax scam bill and voted to confirm Kavanaugh.
Don't make me laugh!
Goblin Valley is an example of a state-run park and it has severely deteriorated
during my lifetime. The goblin toppler was never the big problem - it was the
zero oversight that allowed 120 lb boy scouts to jump on the formations for
years and years. Sandstone is soft rock. I don't see many ATV trails on fed
land, either.People are the problem. It doesn't matter if they
are nice LDS boy scouts or Japanese tourists. The feds have done a better job
than the state, IMHO.I have no qualms about shooting and hunting,
except that nobody else can do anything when hundreds of people are out with
guns. It is not safe. It's a problem to always consider the hunters
first.The reality is that Utah is urban and the laws for an urban
area simply have to be different than in small towns.
Why does lee think ranchers should have automatic access to public lands?Do they own it outright? Nope. So it seems they need to either buy the
land or move to where they can buy land.
These are not now nor have they ever been 'Utah lands'. The land
we are talking about belong to the American people. The Utah constitution
expressly forbids Utah from ever making claims to these lands.
Yeah! We're the only ones who get to grab land. After all, we live near
it, and we want it. That makes it ours!