Letter from Senator Mike Crapo on Selling My Public Lands

[JoseCuervo]

Good news is "public lands should remain public".

Bad news is he didn't say "FEDERAL public lands should remain FEDERAL public lands".

Not sure what "all Idahoans should enjoy REASONABLE access" means. Should not be limited to "Idahoans" (splitting hairs, perhaps) and the term "reasonable" is an interesting legal term.


AGain, this letter was generated in response to the 45 seconds I spent on http://sportsmensaccess.org/ filling out the TRCP form.

Dear Jose:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the management and ownership of our public lands. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.
I agree with you that, put simply, public lands should remain public. Their values should be preserved and enhanced, and all Idahoans should be able to use and enjoy reasonable access to them. However, in too many cases the federal government is not doing a good job in managing lands under its ownership, and many Idahoans can point to specific examples they have personally experienced or witnessed.

State and federal lands management laws and processes too often drive us to conflict and litigation, and should be reformed to allow more participation-in and influence over management decisions by those closest to the land. State government, local officials and private stakeholders should be empowered to more meaningfully participate in the decision-making processes pertaining to our public lands. Outcomes from this collaborative, consensus building approach will be better for both the environment and the natural resource based economies of Idaho. These outcomes can result in administrative and/or legislative action on the public land in question. The Owyhee Initiative is an example of the kind of collaborative approach that respects the needs of all affected stakeholders by building on the knowledge that local communities have about the public lands that literally comprise their backyards.
The land management challenges facing Idaho and western states did not happen overnight. As such, it will take time, dedicated efforts and robust public participation to achieve the outcomes we all seek. I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress to enact federal land management policies that maintain public access and ensure resilient, self-sustaining economies for our rural counties for years to come.

Again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to contact me in the future on this or other matters of interest to you. For more information about the issues before the U.S. Senate as well as news releases, photos, and other items of interest, please visit my Senate website, http://crapo.senate.gov.

Sincerely,
US SenatorSenator Mike Crapo
Mike Crapo
United States Senator

MDC:AE

(Still missing in action for responses: Rep Labrador, and Sen. Risch.)

 

[quarterhorse]

Typical and well written political response from Crapo. Sort of agree with the persons concern, try to placate them, dance around the issue and commit to nothing. Labrador's response, if you get one, will be much different. He is more direct and just simply states that it should be sold.

 

[smarandr]

I got a similar response from him a while back. My feeling on Crapo is that he knows being pro transfer is a bad thing so he stays intentionally vague. However, when it comes time to vote my bet is he'll sell out.

 

[Big Fin]

Help me here. What the hell did he say in those words? Is that Idaho-English or just the Idaho variety of Congressional-English.

 

[smarandr]

Help me here. What the hell did he say in those words? Is that Idaho-English or just the Idaho variety of Congressional-English.

Got to be the Idaho variety of Congressional-English. He's been in Washington so long I doubt he remembers how to speak good ole Idaho-English.

 

[JoseCuervo]

If you futz around on Crapo's website, he lists his Top 5 issues he is getting letters/email about.

His Top 5 issues this week are:

Environmental policy
Health care reform
Public land ownership & management
President-elect Trump's cabinet nominees
President-elect Trump's EPA nominee​

So, if you are wondering if you are a lone voice, you can see that Crapo is hearing from voters on Public Land Issues.

And, eventually, you find the text that was in the letter he sent to me. Verbatim.

Put simply, public lands should remain public. Their values should be preserved and enhanced, and all Idahoans should be able to use and enjoy reasonable access to them. However, in too many cases the federal government is not doing a good job in managing lands under its ownership, and many Idahoans can point to specific examples they have personally experienced or witnessed.

State and federal lands management laws and processes too often drive us to conflict and litigation, and should be reformed to allow more participation-in and influence over management decisions by those closest to the land. State government, local officials and private stakeholders should be empowered to more meaningfully participate in the decision-making processes pertaining to our public lands. Outcomes from this collaborative, consensus building approach will be better for both the environment and the natural resource based economies of Idaho. These outcomes can result in administrative and/or legislative action on the public land in question. The Owyhee Initiative is an example of the kind of collaborative approach that respects the needs of all affected stakeholders by building on the knowledge that local communities have about the public lands that literally comprise their backyards.

The land management challenges facing Idaho and western states did not happen overnight. As such, it will take time, dedicated efforts and robust public participation to achieve the outcomes we all seek. I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress to enact federal land management policies that maintain public access and ensure resilient, self-sustaining economies for our rural counties for years to come.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Help me here. What the hell did he say in those words? Is that Idaho-English or just the Idaho variety of Congressional-English.

I just sent a very eloquent request asking the same thing. Making sure "public lands" is the same as "FEDERAL public lands".

And also clearly pointing out HR 621.


My knowledge of Crapo is that he kind of wants to do the right thing, but he always is balancing loyalty to the Party vs. the Right Thing.

He can be persuaded.

 

[huntid73]

Big Fin, I got a similar response in a petition that the TRCP petition that I signed in July of 2016. Got a generated very similar from Mike Simpson and Mike Crapo, so I think it must be Idaho-Congressional English, since more of the hunters I know are starting to really get fired up about the public land issue. I have been hearing that Gov. Otter and some of the senators have changed their tune on federal transfer after Wyoming's report, but Labrador is very much on the land transfer bandwagon, and he will be the tough nut to crack.

 

[Elkmagnet]

I received this reply on the 31st

A Message From Governor C.L. "Butch" Otter
G
Governor C.L. Butch Otter <[email protected]>
Tue 1/31/2017 2:07 PM
Inbox
To:
[email protected];
January 31, 2017





Dear Justin,

Thank you for contacting me about the future of public lands in Idaho. I appreciate the opportunity to respond.

Idaho has an exemplary record of managing and protecting its natural resources. I truly believe that our own citizens and communities have the knowledge and civic virtue to ensure that our lands and resources are responsibly used for the economic and recreational opportunities they provide. While I am not advocating the transfer of federal lands to Idaho’s ownership or sole management, states should have the opportunity to be full and equal partners in decisions that affect the land, water, wildlife and other resources within their borders.

Idaho already is making great use of those rare opportunities where real collaboration with the states is encouraged by the federal government.

For example, Good Neighbor Authority granted under the 2014 Farm Bill invites Idaho to increase the pace and scale of forest and watershed restoration work on federal forests within our borders. Through agreements reached under the program, Idaho is playing a more active role in improving the health of our intermingled timberlands. That is reducing fuels and the threat to communities and watersheds from catastrophic wildfires, all while creating more jobs and benefitting our economies.

We should continue expanding on the efforts we’ve made so far to realize Idaho’s full potential by being active managers and local stewards without overly restrictive federal oversight.

Thank you again for contacting me, and please keep me informed of your opinion about this and any other State government issues of concern to you.


As Always – Idaho, “Esto Perpetua”
C.L. “Butch” Otter
Governor of Idaho

 

[Elkmagnet]

I also received this reply to the same letter from my local wing nut.

Thank you for your email.

Have a great night,

Representative Christy Zito


To: Representative Christy Zito
Subject: Sportsman opposing the sale or transfer of public lands


Jan 30, 2017

State Representative Christy Zito
State Capitol Building, Room EW29-12
700 West Jefferson Street
Boise, ID 83720-0038

 

[Southern Elk]

I just sent a very eloquent request asking the same thing. Making sure "public lands" is the same as "FEDERAL public lands".

And also clearly pointing out HR 621.


My knowledge of Crapo is that he kind of wants to do the right thing, but he always is balancing loyalty to the Party vs. the Right Thing.

He can be persuaded.

As a republican, he would be one hell of an ally. Let us know if you get any clarity on the public vs federal public issue.

 

[Elkmagnet]

.


My knowledge of Crapo is that he kind of wants to do the right thing, but he always is balancing loyalty to the Party vs. the Right Thing.

He can be persuaded.

This is the feeling I get by reading everything about him I can find.
He may be time/effort well spent.
Write, call and stalk him.

 

[RunWilderness]

I recieved the same response from Otter.

My concern is that I feel the term local stakeholders is often going to translate into local special interests or powerbrokers.

I've noticed that on social issues or even things like paper vs plastic bags, the same folk that spout local governance suddenly start pushing the supremacy of the state legislature as soon as a local government tries to pass an ordinance they disagree with.

I'm all for local input and will fight for it if either the Feds or the States try to shut us out. But I worry Otter and Crapo or Risch are more interested in the few they know rather than the good of the many.

 

[JoseCuervo]

I recieved the same response from Otter.

My concern is that I feel the term local stakeholders is often going to translate into local special interests or powerbrokers.

I've noticed that on social issues or even things like paper vs plastic bags, the same folk that spout local governance suddenly start pushing the supremacy of the state legislature as soon as a local government tries to pass an ordinance they disagree with.

I'm all for local input and will fight for it if either the Feds or the States try to shut us out. But I worry Otter and Crapo or Risch are more interested in the few they know rather than the good of the many.

1990 Butch Otter would not recognize 2017 Butch Otter. He has evolved and tempered much of his anti-Federal rhetoric. He is not the advocate/cheerleader we want and need in the State, but, he is not the enemy, either. I guess the good news is Politicians can change over time.

But, in no way can we relax. His term is nearly up, and rumours are Labrador wants to think about running, also Lt. Gov Brad Little, also the richy-rich Trump-wannabe building developer Tommy Ahlquist is thinking about it, along with former State Senator Russ Fulcher.

So, while there is a need to work on Otter, the bigger dangers are lurking in 2018.

 

[idnative1948]

I just sent a very eloquent request asking the same thing. Making sure "public lands" is the same as "FEDERAL public lands".

And also clearly pointing out HR 621.


My knowledge of Crapo is that he kind of wants to do the right thing, but he always is balancing loyalty to the Party vs. the Right Thing.

He can be persuaded.

Very well put, Jose. My feelings as well, considering my response from him was exact same thing.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Very well put, Jose. My feelings as well, considering my response from him was exact same thing.

He is the only one of the delegation I have never met, so, perhaps that is why I have optimism and hope in him.

I think he kind of tempered some of his ambition/rheteroic when he was the first sitting Senator and member of the LDS church to get a DUI.... He now has more empathy.... I hope.

 

[brymoore]

He is the only one of the delegation I have never met, so, perhaps that is why I have optimism and hope in him.

I think he kind of tempered some of his ambition/rheteroic when he was the first sitting Senator and member of the LDS church to get a DUI.... He now has more empathy.... I hope.

I've met Carpo once at an event where he spoke. I walk into the restroom and he comes out of a stall. I start a Larry Craig joke but stop when he scowled at me.

 

[JoseCuervo]

I've met Carpo once at an event where he spoke. I walk into the restroom and he comes out of a stall. I start a Larry Craig joke but stop when he scowled at me.

I was standing in front of a Beer booth at a local, well known event, and Senator Risch and crew came up. I asked if Crapo was going to be needing a beer, also..... Two of Risch' staffers spit beer out....

 

[JoseCuervo]

Things are now getting weird.

Two possibilities here:

1. There is a secuirty concern, and that is bad, and concerning, I hope not
   
2. GOP Risch is getting tired of hearing from constituents, that is bad, and I hope that is not the case.

 

[huntid73]

I received this letter this morning from Senator Jim Guthrie:

Zack,

Thank you for the email. I would not be in support of any land transfer situation that allowed the state to then sell that land to the wealthy. I agree with you that we would lose much of what we love in the west. The reason this issue is even up for discussion is really two fold.

1. Idaho is 63% owned by the federal government and in some Idaho counties the federal government owns well over 90% of the land. This gives the local taxing districts very little revenue from property tax and makes meeting their budget needs extremely difficult. Granted the federal government offers a payment in lieu of taxes or what I'm sure you have referred to as PILT as a substitute but this is a very unstable revenue source and has been cut at times. The thought of some is that if the land was state owned some of those funding instabilities could be mitigated.

2. The federal government in the opinion of many, mine included, does not manage the federal lands in the most effective manner. The heavy handed regulatory mindset really makes utilizing the land to the best benefit difficult at best. Timber is allowed to rot and die from disease instead of being managed and harvested in a timely manner. This also contributes to our fire problems. The same occurs with some of the grazing. Instead of grazing the forage off it is allowed to grow further compounding the fire issue. Mining also faces stiff permitting issues with some permits taking more than a decade and millions of dollars in order to open or expand a mine operation.

I realize we must be sensitive to nature as we manage our natural resources but there has to be better balance that what we have now with our federal partners. So ultimately my thoughts.......

In a practical sense I do not believe the state could ever take over all federal lands in Idaho. The sheer nature of that management task would be overwhelming and ultimately the state would be tempted to sell lands off for financial reasons, if nothing else. We could not afford the management costs, with fires being the single biggest example. That said I think we do have an opportunity to pressure the federal government to be more reasonable with their regulatory approach. I also believe we could do some pilot projects where the feds would allow the state to take a more active management role in some cases.

All that said I would reiterate that I would not support any land transfer situation that would result in the state selling off the land.

Jim