250+ Million Acres of Public Land Could Be Sold Under New Budget Bill

I'm against selling it or leasing it. I'm fine with oil and gas exploration as long they do minimal damage during extraction and fix the land after they are done.
I agree... in theory. I live in gas country and I can assure you that turf will never be the same. Whether we like it or not, oil and gas exploration in fact does make irreparable changes to the land, most of which not for the better. So does wind, solar, anything. I've seen it in my own area in a very significant way.

Public land was set aside with a large intent of conservation of wilderness. True wilderness is difficult to come by in the continental US, even with a robust public land program in the west. I fear this is only going to make matters much much worse for the outdoorsmen of all sorts.
 
I agree... in theory. I live in gas country and I can assure you that turf will never be the same. Whether we like it or not, oil and gas exploration in fact does make irreparable changes to the land, most of which not for the better. So

My understanding is that with the state of the art drilling technology, they can drill horizontally surprisingly far and minimize the footprint on the land.

I realize it won't be possible to put it back to how it was, but you can as least make it something acceptable and compatible for the surrounding wilderness area.
 
My understanding is that with the state of the art drilling technology, they can drill horizontally surprisingly far and minimize the footprint on the land.

I realize it won't be possible to put it back to how it was, but you can as least make it something acceptable and compatible for the surrounding wilderness area.
Yes and no (in my respectful & unprofessional opinion). I agree it’s better than technology prior, but not great. They did some pretty substantial horizontal drilling right next to my house. You can easily walk to the next horizontal pad down the road, they’ve improved the technology but we aren’t talking vast distances between rigs now.

On top of that, oil must be pumped leaving behind big jacks - gas must be compressed which requires MASSIVE compressor stations. The compressor near my place must have 8-10 generators so large the exhaust/muffler pipes are 15-20ft tall. They’re noisy and run 24/7. They can be heard miles away on a calm evening. Even the network of roads and construction/excavation is tremendously interruptive. Then we gotta dig massive pipelines to transport the energy out.

I agree the tech is better, but it’s not still not suitable for a wilderness area. What once was designated for wildlife and was enjoyed by hunters/fishermen/hikers would become a labyrinth of access roads, pipelines, drill sites, jacks and compressor stations the size of shopping malls.

They’ve been in my region the past 20yr and say there’s enough oil and gas here to keep them busy at least a century. It’s not a quick in-and-out operation.

It would be a disaster for the wildlife in such diverse ecosystems as the abroska mountains & Teton national forests (regions included in the proposed bill), and for everyone else who elects to enjoy these places responsibly.

I was camping out in a few of the regions proposed to be opened for either sale, lease, logging/OGM last summer. I was able to enjoy hiking and camping in this place 100% free of charge being a public land. I can’t hardly imagine this sunrise view being peppered by construction, roads, pipelines and drilling sites/rigs.
IMG_0110.jpeg


I really hope you don’t take it the wrong way, I’m not the leading expert on the matter & I hope I don’t sound like I’m pretending to be one. I’m just trying to convey my personal experience with these issues. I’d agree if there was a solution as you stated: “acceptable and compatible for the surrounding wilderness area” however I’m afraid the two are mutually exclusive.

Respectfully,
Newbie
 
Senator Lee of Utah has been trying to g to find a way to privatize public lands forever. He finally found his chance. There is an entire process for disposing of public lands that has existed for a loooooong time. It includes public comment and hearings and all. Doing it under budget reconciliation circumvents all of those processes. I emailed my Senator and told him if I see that he votes for this, he has lost me and every war I can convince for the rest of my life. Notice they left out any land in Montana? Not a coincidence. Those Senators have already expressed that they won’t vote for anything effecting Montanans. Garbage… What a crooked thing to do. Republicans are getting worse. Add it to this meme from the other day and it is becoming clear we’ve been took.
80bfd07b2818a06d91be8d83c5a0f2d0.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think we should retain the land. I am open minded to leasing and exploration. Obviously, some ground is more precious than others. There is lots of leasing for grazing, logging, etc. already. I'm all for more leasing in lucrative areas such as oil/gas if it was a compromise to prevent sale.
 
Oh boy. Gird up. I’m gonna rock the boat. Hang tight. I’ll be back soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Senator Lee of Utah has been trying to g to find a way to privatize public lands forever. He finally found his chance. There is an entire process for disposing of public lands that has existed for a loooooong time. It includes public comment and hearings and all. Doing it under budget reconciliation circumvents all of those processes. I emailed my Senator and told him if I see that he votes for this, he has lost me and every war I can convince for the rest of my life. Notice they left out any land in Montana? Not a coincidence. Those Senators have already expressed that they won’t vote for anything effecting Montanans. Garbage… What a crooked thing to do. Republicans are getting worse. Add it to this meme from the other day and it is becoming clear we’ve been took.
80bfd07b2818a06d91be8d83c5a0f2d0.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Crooked is an understatement. The past decade has been nothing short of a masterclass of the corporate and political elite stepping on the heads of the American masses for their personal gain. It seems the only dang thing either side can agree on is greed & corruption. It’s the same crap just a different color.

I pray to god the good people of this country come to realize this, put our relatively small differences aside, and work together to keep this country the greatest place on earth.
 
Crooked is an understatement. The past decade has been nothing short of a masterclass of the corporate and political elite stepping on the heads of the American masses for their personal gain. It seems the only dang thing either side can agree on is greed & corruption. It’s the same crap just a different color.

I pray to god the good people of this country come to realize this, put our relatively small differences aside, and work together to keep this country the greatest place on earth.
I agree but unfortunately it is too late for the good people of America to save us. I still believe that America is the greatest country on Earth and we will have enough strong Senators to stand up and vote against the Big Bill. The bill is not all bad but it has several things that should not be debatable and our bad for Americans and this land grab is differently one of them. The House did not stand up, will the Senate? I bet if you let the good people of American that you speak of vote on this land grab and selling our national forest they would overwhelming vote to keep the land in the public domain. So I think our senators our smart enough to realize this fact and enough of the strong ones will vote against the Big Bill. We will see
 
I understand much of the sentiment said above.....and mostly agree with keeping our national lands just as they are. However, as our population is growing I somewhat doubt that will be possible "forever".

Case in point is raw land in countries like Germany....and their Black Forest. From what I know most of that land is owned by individual land Barrons....and they are somewhat limited in what they can do with it. Most of these areas have forestry managers....and are almost manicured compared to land in our west. If a stick falls down....someone is there to pick it up the next day.

If you want to get a hunting license in Germany.....you have to first belong to a hunting club or be willing to join one. Otherwise.....you do not have a place to hunt....and so no license for you. Sucks to be poor.

OTOH....the government does not need to provide for management costs and can enforce that the owner keep the land at the best interest of the public.....and will tax you for the enjoyment of owning the land. Dunno the right or wrong of these things. Only know what I have witnessed.

I suppose it's a matter of time before more development is done on "some" of these national lands. Not sure the government has all the answers in managing those lands now. Interesting the maze of trails though the back country of our west. Amazing actually.
 
Nobody in powers give a hoot about any of us having a free place to hunt. This is the lie they tell us to cheer them confiscating the land from development for things like growing food, resource development, or raising the next generation of farmers and non-criminals. No, instead, they take the land and turn it into a bonanza for corporate and special interest greed. Here are just a few examples of public resources stolen from the little guy that was supposed to always have equal access to those lands:




Further, understand that resource extraction here is infinitely cleaner than anywhere else on earth. In North Dakota, oil and gas drillers have a mandate to spill not one drop on the soil. By the end of this year or next, they will also be at zero flaring of natural gas biproducts.

In coal extraction, it is surfaced mined here, and money is set aside to completely reclaim the land, including, those reclaimed lands need to be farmed for ten years to prove successful reclamation. You could drive from Bismarck to Minot and see no mining scars anywhere.

I'm gonna be coarse here, but I'm afraid it's called for. To cheer for the government to own all the wildlands is a losers wish. Here's the slush fund to push the dream of any of you from ever owning public land. The state of MN in 2025 from just LSOHC alone will spend $165 million shrinking the supply of private wild lands in MN.


When you add in all the programs and the federal dollars, MN is usually around $1 billion dollars a year gobbling up private wild lands. Good luck trying to save money to buy your own piece of private land when the state is draining the land supply to the tune of nine 80 acre parcels every single day. And your do-good orgs are feeding it to them, like DU, PF, MDHA, Sierra, Nature Conservancy, etc.

Northern MN is covered in public lands, to the tune of most counties in the northern forest are 85% publicly owned, and the hunting and resource management is so bad up there, nobody hunts there. If you plopped a thousand private 40-acre parcels into the arrowhead region I guarantee you the wolf problem would be gone, moose would return, and there would be deer again.

But hey, we make $1,000/ac once every 20 years logging those lands for pulp wood. So there's that. And making money on federal land leases? For what? So we can send keep killing everyone living on land israel wants?

Now, should there be no public land? Absolutely not. I think there should be public spaces everywhere, including inside the towns and cities. I think with absolute resolution the most unique lands should be protected and held publicly like Glacier, Yellowstone, The Muir Woods, The Boundary Waters, etc. But it should be balanced. I think the state and federal government should swap northern forest lands out, sell them to the people (not a foreign country or bill gates, or potato or lumber corporations) and that money should be redirected to protect lands in farm country.

I think public dollars should be spent heavily to develop habitat improvements on private lands. Imagine if there were ten thousand private fish ponds in MN. What would that do to take pressure off the 7 public lakes in MN that still have fishable walleye populations?

What do we get from industrial ag? Corn syrup (cancer, heart disease, obesidy), ethanol (shortened engine life), distillers grains fed to livestock (grossly toxic omega 6 to omega 3 fatty acids in meats that lead to heart disease and diabetes), soybean oils (which lead to cancer, heart disease, diabetes, macular degeneration, gynecomastia), soybean meal (fed to hog house pigs that are shot full of amoxicillin to keep the pigs alive, which produces pork full of drugs, toxic omega 6 to 3 fatty acid ratios which lead to heart disease and diabetes, and meat loaded with mRNA vaccines), and more tillage and chemicals to keep that system going. There are neonics in the well water all over farm country because we must plant warm season crops into 40 degree soils. But that cannot come out because there is no answer to it. So keep drinking it and keep being mystified while those cancers and autoimmune disorders rip through farm country.
 
Crooked is an understatement. The past decade has been nothing short of a masterclass of the corporate and political elite stepping on the heads of the American masses for their personal gain. It seems the only dang thing either side can agree on is greed & corruption. It’s the same crap just a different color.

I pray to god the good people of this country come to realize this, put our relatively small differences aside, and work together to keep this country the greatest place on earth.
I could be wrong, but I believe the senate increased the amount of land “eligible” for sale. House passed the bill with a fraction of the proposed. I’m not saying it’ll pass, but that’s my understanding.

Edit: I replied to the wrong post by accident here. I was trying to reply to @KY wild
 
Last edited:
giphy.gif



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I understand much of the sentiment said above.....and mostly agree with keeping our national lands just as they are. However, as our population is growing I somewhat doubt that will be possible "forever".

Case in point is raw land in countries like Germany....and their Black Forest. From what I know most of that land is owned by individual land Barrons....and they are somewhat limited in what they can do with it. Most of these areas have forestry managers....and are almost manicured compared to land in our west. If a stick falls down....someone is there to pick it up the next day.

If you want to get a hunting license in Germany.....you have to first belong to a hunting club or be willing to join one. Otherwise.....you do not have a place to hunt....and so no license for you. Sucks to be poor.

OTOH....the government does not need to provide for management costs and can enforce that the owner keep the land at the best interest of the public.....and will tax you for the enjoyment of owning the land. Dunno the right or wrong of these things. Only know what I have witnessed.

I suppose it's a matter of time before more development is done on "some" of these national lands. Not sure the government has all the answers in managing those lands now. Interesting the maze of trails though the back country of our west. Amazing actually.
I’ll take the current arrangement of the American West and public land access over the EU oligarchy style of land ownership and management all day everyday. I think our public land access is uniquely American, and to open the opportunity to disassemble that as uniquely un-American. (Not directing that toward you, just as a statement in general just to be clear)
 
I hope this is the correct place to share this, and I hope we can have a respectful and thoughtful conversation about this.

The Senate's updated version of the budget reconciliation bill (or Big Beautiful Bill) proposes increasing leasing of public land to logging and oil and gas development as well as selling protected public land. I'm sure there is going to be an array of opinions on this, but as a group of likeminded outdoorsmen, I think this is something we should all be aware of. Our elected officials are proposing a massive land and resource transfer from from the American masses to a select group of corporate elite. These lands were protected with bipartisan support over many decades, and I feel should remain in the hands of the American public.

I've been fortunate to spend time hiking, hunting, fishing, camping, etc. in many of these places, both on the East Coast and throughout the American West. I deeply love this nation and feel incredibly fortunate to be born here. Access to vast, beautiful, diverse and unadultered lands is one of the many things I love about this nation. Political affiliation aside, I desperately hope to see these lands remain protected for the enjoyment of the generations to come.

This map visualizes the 250+ million acres of public lands eligible for sale in the Senate budget reconciliation package.

View attachment 79028

Regardless of which side of the coin you land on this matter, consider reaching out to your senator to voice your opinion.
I am totally against this but, I can’t lie, the fervor over this issue reminds me what a spoiled lot we are.
 
I’ll take the current arrangement of the American West and public land access over the EU oligarchy style of land ownership and management all day everyday. I think our public land access is uniquely American, and to open the opportunity to disassemble that as uniquely un-American. (Not directing that toward you, just as a statement in general just to be clear)
Understand.....and I am mostly just supplying a "counterpoint". However I do think "some" of our national lands with unique natural resources can either be leased or licensed to exploit those resources. Those too are in the national interests.
 
Understand.....and I am mostly just supplying a "counterpoint". However I do think "some" of our national lands with unique natural resources can either be leased or licensed to exploit those resources. Those too are in the national interests.

There will have to be a balance in order for the current arrangement to persist. I worked on a ranch in NM where there was tremendous natural gas extraction. Though not completely invisible, it was established very thoughtfully. It preserved the most sought after views and avoided the truly unique areas of the ranch. It can be done. Once sold, it’s gone forever and the extraction will probably be much less friendly to the rock we live on. I told my Senator that lawmakers before him had tremendous foresight to create the system we have. He should not be so shortsighted as to believe selling even one acre will result in a lasting benefit for this country. I am anxious to see how he votes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
If MN alone would dedicate just 10% of their land grab budget to getting serious about funding Walk In Areas, that could open up 2.5 million acres to public hunting at $40/ac for the landowner.

But that isn’t a goal. It’d sure be a good and balanced use of those dollars that they tel us are for sportsmen access.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nobody in powers give a hoot about any of us having a free place to hunt. This is the lie they tell us to cheer them confiscating the land from development for things like growing food, resource development, or raising the next generation of farmers and non-criminals. No, instead, they take the land and turn it into a bonanza for corporate and special interest greed. Here are just a few examples of public resources stolen from the little guy that was supposed to always have equal access to those lands:




Further, understand that resource extraction here is infinitely cleaner than anywhere else on earth. In North Dakota, oil and gas drillers have a mandate to spill not one drop on the soil. By the end of this year or next, they will also be at zero flaring of natural gas biproducts.

In coal extraction, it is surfaced mined here, and money is set aside to completely reclaim the land, including, those reclaimed lands need to be farmed for ten years to prove successful reclamation. You could drive from Bismarck to Minot and see no mining scars anywhere.

I'm gonna be coarse here, but I'm afraid it's called for. To cheer for the government to own all the wildlands is a losers wish. Here's the slush fund to push the dream of any of you from ever owning public land. The state of MN in 2025 from just LSOHC alone will spend $165 million shrinking the supply of private wild lands in MN.


When you add in all the programs and the federal dollars, MN is usually around $1 billion dollars a year gobbling up private wild lands. Good luck trying to save money to buy your own piece of private land when the state is draining the land supply to the tune of nine 80 acre parcels every single day. And your do-good orgs are feeding it to them, like DU, PF, MDHA, Sierra, Nature Conservancy, etc.

Northern MN is covered in public lands, to the tune of most counties in the northern forest are 85% publicly owned, and the hunting and resource management is so bad up there, nobody hunts there. If you plopped a thousand private 40-acre parcels into the arrowhead region I guarantee you the wolf problem would be gone, moose would return, and there would be deer again.

But hey, we make $1,000/ac once every 20 years logging those lands for pulp wood. So there's that. And making money on federal land leases? For what? So we can send keep killing everyone living on land israel wants?

Now, should there be no public land? Absolutely not. I think there should be public spaces everywhere, including inside the towns and cities. I think with absolute resolution the most unique lands should be protected and held publicly like Glacier, Yellowstone, The Muir Woods, The Boundary Waters, etc. But it should be balanced. I think the state and federal government should swap northern forest lands out, sell them to the people (not a foreign country or bill gates, or potato or lumber corporations) and that money should be redirected to protect lands in farm country.

I think public dollars should be spent heavily to develop habitat improvements on private lands. Imagine if there were ten thousand private fish ponds in MN. What would that do to take pressure off the 7 public lakes in MN that still have fishable walleye populations?

What do we get from industrial ag? Corn syrup (cancer, heart disease, obesidy), ethanol (shortened engine life),
^ Wow. Don't hold back SD....tell us how you really feel. lol There is no "short" answer to this situation IMO. I really think it's state by state and county by county to decide how to control these lands. Some areas are screaming for development (like mining in select areas of Northern
Minnesota). While other areas, not so much. But we cannot understand all those issues across this country in a few paragraphs. It takes local involvement.
 
Nobody in powers give a hoot about any of us having a free place to hunt. This is the lie they tell us to cheer them confiscating the land from development for things like growing food, resource development, or raising the next generation of farmers and non-criminals. No, instead, they take the land and turn it into a bonanza for corporate and special interest greed. Here are just a few examples of public resources stolen from the little guy that was supposed to always have equal access to those lands:




Further, understand that resource extraction here is infinitely cleaner than anywhere else on earth. In North Dakota, oil and gas drillers have a mandate to spill not one drop on the soil. By the end of this year or next, they will also be at zero flaring of natural gas biproducts.

In coal extraction, it is surfaced mined here, and money is set aside to completely reclaim the land, including, those reclaimed lands need to be farmed for ten years to prove successful reclamation. You could drive from Bismarck to Minot and see no mining scars anywhere.

I'm gonna be coarse here, but I'm afraid it's called for. To cheer for the government to own all the wildlands is a losers wish. Here's the slush fund to push the dream of any of you from ever owning public land. The state of MN in 2025 from just LSOHC alone will spend $165 million shrinking the supply of private wild lands in MN.


When you add in all the programs and the federal dollars, MN is usually around $1 billion dollars a year gobbling up private wild lands. Good luck trying to save money to buy your own piece of private land when the state is draining the land supply to the tune of nine 80 acre parcels every single day. And your do-good orgs are feeding it to them, like DU, PF, MDHA, Sierra, Nature Conservancy, etc.

Northern MN is covered in public lands, to the tune of most counties in the northern forest are 85% publicly owned, and the hunting and resource management is so bad up there, nobody hunts there. If you plopped a thousand private 40-acre parcels into the arrowhead region I guarantee you the wolf problem would be gone, moose would return, and there would be deer again.

But hey, we make $1,000/ac once every 20 years logging those lands for pulp wood. So there's that. And making money on federal land leases? For what? So we can send keep killing everyone living on land israel wants?

Now, should there be no public land? Absolutely not. I think there should be public spaces everywhere, including inside the towns and cities. I think with absolute resolution the most unique lands should be protected and held publicly like Glacier, Yellowstone, The Muir Woods, The Boundary Waters, etc. But it should be balanced. I think the state and federal government should swap northern forest lands out, sell them to the people (not a foreign country or bill gates, or potato or lumber corporations) and that money should be redirected to protect lands in farm country.

I think public dollars should be spent heavily to develop habitat improvements on private lands. Imagine if there were ten thousand private fish ponds in MN. What would that do to take pressure off the 7 public lakes in MN that still have fishable walleye populations?

What do we get from industrial ag? Corn syrup (cancer, heart disease, obesidy), ethanol (shortened engine life), distillers grains fed to livestock (grossly toxic omega 6 to omega 3 fatty acids in meats that lead to heart disease and diabetes), soybean oils (which lead to cancer, heart disease, diabetes, macular degeneration, gynecomastia), soybean meal (fed to hog house pigs that are shot full of amoxicillin to keep the pigs alive, which produces pork full of drugs, toxic omega 6 to 3 fatty acid ratios which lead to heart disease and diabetes, and meat loaded with mRNA vaccines), and more tillage and chemicals to keep that system going. There are neonics in the well water all over farm country because we must plant warm season crops into 40 degree soils. But that cannot come out because there is no answer to it. So keep drinking it and keep being mystified while those cancers and autoimmune disorders rip through farm country.
I appreciate the view point, you can see why I am blind to this because 95% of land in Ky is privately owned and the state government does not actively try to increase public land
 
I could be wrong, but I believe the senate increased the amount of land “eligible” for sale. House passed the bill with a fraction of the proposed. I’m not saying it’ll pass, but that’s my understanding.

Edit: I replied to the wrong post by accident here. I was trying to reply to @KY wild
I did not know, I hate to hear this
 
Back
Top