Sagebrush Rebellion II

Facebook 0
LinkedIn 0
Reddit 0
StumbleUpon 0


A perennial issue in the West is the amount of land owned by the federal government and the Clive Bundy confrontation, go here to read all about it, has brought it to the fore:


There’s a modern tea party political element to it, but it goes much farther back to when many western territories achieved statehood in the 19th century, working out deals with Washington (as Mormon Utah did over what adherents at the time called “plural marriages”).

The map accompanying this article shows the difference between the West and the rest of the country. Here’s a list showing percentages of federal land by state, according to the Congressional Research Service. It includes the US Bureau of Land Management, the US Forest Service, National Parks, and military bases: Nevada 81, Alaska 62, Utah 67, Oregon 53, Idaho 62, Arizona 42, California 48, Wyoming 48, New Mexico 35, Colorado 36.

State lawmakers say they’re better prepared to manage such lands, both for the environment and for regional economies.

“There is a distinct difference in the way federal agencies are managing the federal lands today,” Sen. Fielder said. “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 anymore.”

Utah has led a legislative charge to demand relinquishment of title to certain lands that exclude national parks and wilderness study areas, reports the Deseret News in Salt Lake City.

The “Transfer of Public Lands Act,” signed into law by Utah Gov. Gary Herbert in 2012, set the stage for a formal showdown with the government by demanding action under threat of lawsuit, the newspaper reports. Other states are exploring similar options.

Often, the political fight centers on some hapless species of plant or animal threatened with extinction and protected under federal law – like the northern spotted owl in Oregon or the desert tortoise in California, Nevada, Arizona, and Utah. Sometimes federal agencies are caught in the middle, trying to apply the “multiple use” doctrine to lands in dispute.

Go here to The Christian Science Monitor to read the rest.  The argument that these lands need to be retained by the Federal government for the benefit of the entire country is so much hog wash.  Land necessary for military bases and national parks are only a small fraction of the land currently in the iron grasp of the Feds.  Most of the land now is blocked off from development by radical environmentalists, a cult rather than a political movement, who prefer land to be devoid of humans, unless the humans are part of their cult who wish to worship “pristine” nature.  Time, past time, to transfer these lands to local control in the states and open them to development rather than have them perpetually serving as sanctuaries for the substitute religion of the “First Church of Gaia”.

More to explorer


  1. I am not sure why the Federal government should own any of it, unless it is something like a military base, etc. Even the parks like Yosemite, Grand Canyon, Isle Royal, etc. Surely they can be managed better by the State governments. (I am not sure they would do worse.)

  2. Observation from the lower classman; It seems to me that the government can and has been used by shameful individuals to financially support their own agendas. F D A with Monsanto exec. (formerly) then posted as FDA czar. This lack of oversight relating to conflict of interest is a NORM in D.C.
    Could it be happening in this rancher case and the “China” interest?

  3. Even the land that we do own is subject to so many Federal regulations that if that really want it, or want to keep you from using it the way you want, they can go after it and cause you all kinds of problems.

  4. Government of the people, by the people and for the people is more than poetic allusion. Why does the government not pay taxes? Because the government constituted by the citizens operates at the will of the people, for the people, and by the people.The government, all government is created to serve the people as set forth in the Preamble to The Constitution for The United States.
    “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
    “We, the people “provide for the common defence”. We, the people own the government , federal, state and local. We, the people own the military bases made up of our citizens, operated by American citizens and paid for by the people.
    However did the federal government, itself a creature of the people, create bureaucracy and laws that violate the real property of the people? And without the people’s consent?
    The real estate, as opposed to authority and/or sovereignty, belongs to the people. This fact ought to have been included in the by-laws of every bureau. Every function of the government proves this fact. Criminal prosecution must be done where the crime is committed, not only because the state must punish the wrongdoer but because the state and its people did not prevent the crime, therefore, the people of the state must prosecute the crime.
    If someone comes into one’s home and tells them how to operate their home, that person has transgressed himself and the home. The government and all of its created agencies operates at the will of the people.
    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.” From The Declaration of Independence.
    The above citation is represented here for finer interpretation especially for those office holders in government who choose to abuse their elected office.
    The trouble with Gaia is that she, or it, or whatever, is not a real person, but the construction of another person’s imagination. Kind of like Mickey Mouse or Minnie or Zeus. It is important to recognize that our God is three Persons in one Supreme Sovereign Being. Jesus Christ is the Revelation of the Person of God.
    Gaia has no sovereignty. Any sovereignty over persons by Gaia is tyranny, pure and simple, akin to bank robbery. “You do what I tell you or I will hurt you…tyranny.”
    Aren’t public officials forbidden to use their office for personal gain? Even one dollar of gain or influence? See Abscam.

  5. Harry Reid is a person, a creation of God. Government is a creation of sovereign citizens, a creation of man. A person who cannot tell the difference between himself, as a person, and his office as his obligation and duty deserves neither.

  6. *blink*

    Well, that explains a lot of the BS I get from friends that grew up back east– they have no idea what the stupid “unimportant” regulation stuff is about.

    Oh, and according to the Western Livestock Journal from April 14th, the BLM was trying to ship the cows to Utah to auction…without any of the required paperwork.

    Hope the Utah take back the land law works out.

  7. A typical Washington bureaucrat would see it this way – that Washington should be controlling the land in the rest of the country like it does out West.

Comments are closed.