Land Sale Bills Introduced by Utah Legislators

[airlocksniffer]

Borrowed from a member over at Rokslide:

Representative Jason Chaffetz (R) of Utah introduced House Bill 435 to auction off 3.3 million acres of public land in the Western States to private interests.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/435

Senator Mike Lee (R) of Utah introduced the sister bill (S361) in the Senate.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...enate-bill/361

Both are referred to committee. I encourage all Utah constituents to contact these legislators and express your opinion about these bills. this bill doesn't just affect Utah, however. It lists lands for sale in these states:

Arizona, 453,950 acres
Colorado, 93,741
Idaho, 110,022
Montana, 94,520
Nebraska, 6,615
Nevada, 898,460
New Mexico, 813,531
Oregon, 70,308
Utah, 132,931
Wyoming, 694,200

If you are a hunter concerned about your public lands, please contact your representatives and let them know how you feel.

 

[utah400elk]

At least they are now being honest. They are no longer advocating to transfer the land to the state...now they are just stating they want to sell the land.

 

[Schaaf]

HB435 was introduced on March 2nd of last year and S361 was introduced on February 4th of last year, any update on it more recently?

 

[airlocksniffer]

Oh FFS. Didn't even look at the dates, just let my blood pressure guide me. I emailed my reps anyways.

EDIT: I guess there was another scheduled reading that didn't occur. I'll keep an eye on this one and update this thread. Doesn't hurt to email your reps anyways.

 

[Chuckle]

These aren't new

Introduced last year - also tried a couple of years ago.

Last time, it was approved by the House Natural Resources Committee but failed to pass the House. The legislation was offered in response to a 1997 Clinton Administration report identifying 3.36 million acres of land in 10 western states “deemed suitable for sale or exchange to non-federal entities” to fund Everglades Ecosystem Restoration. The legislation would change the purpose of sale/exchange to budget deficit reduction.

Opponents to the legislation claimed disposal of the lands would create additional bureaucracy and spending by requiring BLM to conduct extensive cultural and environmental reviews, surveys and appraisals, etc. In addition agricultural interests opposed the legislation because grazing permittees have consistently declined opportunities to acquire federal lands when offered for sale for financial and other reasons. As a result, their disposal could make them unavailable to current permittees.