Wyoming is backing an effort by Utah to wrest ownership of U.S. Bureau of Land Management land from the federal government, arguing that states could “develop the land to attract prospective citizens.”
In an amicus brief filed Tuesday, Wyoming, Idaho, Alaska and the Arizona Legislature expressed support for Utah’s quest to take its case straight to the U.S. Supreme Court. Utah wants to own BLM land that’s currently the property of all Americans, saying among other things that the federal holdings deprive the Beehive State of an equal footing with other states.
Gov. Mark Gordon announced the Wyoming plea this week. Wyoming’s U.S. Rep. Harriet Hageman lent her name to a separate amicus brief supporting Utah, teaming with U.S. Sens. Mitt Romney, Mike Lee and other Western members of Congress.
Twenty-six Wyoming legislators also asked Tuesday to join the action if the Supreme Court agrees to take up the issue. Those 10 state senators and 16 representatives (see list below) say they might not stop after gaining state ownership of BLM’s property which is largely sagebrush and desert prairie steppe.
Wyoming legislators’ could extend their claims to “all former federal territorial lands … now held by the United States … [including] parks, monuments, wilderness, etc.,” their brief states.
The federal government has until Nov. 21 to respond to what conservationists call a “land grab.”
“This lawsuit is as frivolous as they come and a blatant power-grab by a handful of Utah politicians whose escalating aggression has become an attack on all public lands as we know them,” Jocelyn Torres, an officer with the Conservation Lands Foundation, a Colorado nonprofit, said in a statement.
Unappropriated
Utah and its allies argue that BLM lands are “unappropriated” and should be the property of Western States. Because of the federal government’s “indefinite retention” of 18.5 million BLM acres, “Utah is deprived of basic and fundamental sovereign powers as to more than a third of its territory,” its bill of complaint states.
Sagebrush rebellion efforts like Utah’s legal gambit have popped up — and fallen short — repeatedly since the movement arose in the 1970s. They’ve been countered in part by western states ceding — in their constitutions at statehood — ownership of federal property to the government and all Americans.
“The people inhabiting this state do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof,” the Wyoming Constitution states. Further, Western states received federal property at statehood — two square miles in many surveyed 36-square-mile townships in Wyoming — to support schools and other institutions.
“Only Congress can transfer or dispose of federal lands,” the Lands Foundation said.
Gov. Gordon sees it differently.
“Wyoming believes it is essential for the states to be recognized as the primary authority when it comes to unappropriated lands within our borders,” he said in a statement Thursday.
The BLM manages 28% of the land in Wyoming, the brief states, most of it “unappropriated.”
Leaving vexing legal complexities to Utah, Wyoming’s brief focuses on “harms that federal ownership of unappropriated lands uniquely imposes on western States on a daily basis,” the amicus filing states. “In short, western States’ sovereign authority to address issues of local concern is curtailed, and billions of dollars are diverted away from western States.”
A ruling in favor of Utah would “begin to level the playing field … and restore the proper balance of federalism between western States and the federal government,” the brief states.
If Utah prevails, Western states “would then have a fair chance to develop the land to attract prospective citizens,” Wyoming contends. Ownership of federal BLM land would let Wyoming and its allies “use and develop land … and reinvest more of the revenue generated.”
Wyoming’s 29-page brief concludes with the assertion that “[g]ranting the relief requested in Utah’s bill of complaint would make clear that western States are not second-class sovereigns.”
Legislators may want more
Wyoming lawmakers say that Wyoming expected at statehood that Congress would some day “dispose” of the BLM lands in question as it had done with other states. Instead, lawmakers argue the federal government is exercising an unconstitutional police power in holding onto the property.
Turning the BLM land over to Wyoming would create a boom, lawmakers assert. “Developing natural resources in Wyoming could create thousands of jobs, generate billions of dollars in economic activity, and significantly boost the State’s economy,” the 10-page brief states.
Hageman and her D.C. legal allies say the U.S. Supreme Court has no choice but to hear the case.
The federal government denies Utah “basic sovereign powers,” Hageman and the other states’ congressional delegates say.
“[W]hat the United States is doing to Utah is not directly analogous to one sovereign nation’s physical invasion of another, the brief states.” But existing federal control is just as serious as war, the brief contends, and needs to be addressed now.
The Supreme Court has never required states “to make a showing that war is actually justified,” when considering whether to immediately address a complaint like Utah’s,” Hageman’s brief states. “Instead, the standard is whether the federal government’s actions would amount to an invasion and conquest of that land if … Utah were a separate sovereign nation.”
Here’s a list of the Wyoming legislators who filed a brief in support of Utah.
Senators
Bo Biteman (R-Ranchester), Brian Boner (R-Douglas),
Tim French (R-Powell), Larry Hicks (R-Baggs), Bob Ide (R-Casper), John Kolb (R-Rock Springs), Dan Laursen (R-Powell), Troy McKeown (R-Gillette), Tim Salazar (R-Riverton), Cheri Steinmetz (R-Lingle).
Representatives
Bill Allemand (R-Midwest), John Bear (R-Gillette), Jeremy Haroldson (R-Wheatland), Scott Heiner (R-Green River), Ben Hornok (R-Cheyenne), Christopher Knapp (R-Gillette), Chip Neiman (R-Hulett), Pepper Ottman (R-Riverton), Sarah Penn (R-Lander), Rachel Rodriguez-Williams (R-Cody), Daniel Singh (R-Cheyenne), Allen Slagle (R-Newcastle), Scott Smith (R-Lingle), Tomi Strock (R-Douglas), Jeanette Ward (R-Casper), John Winter (R-Thermopolis).
There seems to be less and less consideration for those who legally subsistence hunt in the West. much of this action would effectively block access to areas which have been traditional hunting grounds for generations. Access to affordable, healthy game meat which is non-steroidal and antibiotic free should continue to be an option for those hardy people who are willing to hunt their own food. This applies to both in and out-of-state hunters who currently pour millions into the coffers of the states, counties and towns. What this type of action actually does, is line the pockets of land developers and certain corrupt politicos with money from land stolen from the American People. My hope and that of many others is that this concept enjoys no success and that those elected officials elevated to positions of trust would begin to view public lands as a treasure belonging to the citizens of the U.S.A. and not as easy fodder to drool over.
I am extremely disappointed in Wyoming’s Freedom Caucus politicians, Rep. Hageman, and especially Governor Gordon for their support of Utah’s suit to take over management/ownership of public lands in the west. The sportsmen and sportswomen of Wyoming should be disappointed as well, if we wish to maintain our ability to have access to these lands for outdoor recreation of all kinds. This “sagebrush rebellion” talk has been going on since before I began a 40 year career with the WY Game and Fish Department back in the 1970s.
This isn’t just a state issue for Wyoming or other western states, but a national issue since the public lands in question belong to all Americans. Think of the hundreds of millions of dollars that would be needed to manage and support these lands at the state level. But maybe we’ll just have to turn over control to extractive industries so more dollars would flow into state coffers, and sell what may be left over. What kind of access to these lands would be available to outdoors people like my family when they go into private hands. Even my comfortable retirement may not enable me to purchase much.
Currently people from all over the country and even the world spend in the neighborhood of billions of tourism dollars to visit and partake of what we sometimes take for granted in outdoor riches. What would replace these dollars?
And, Rep. Hageman, comparing the federal management of these lands to WAR? How awful.
Are none of these elected officials familiar with their own constitution?
Wyoming State Constitution, Article 21, Section 26 states, “The people inhabiting this state do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof, and to all lands lying within said limits owned or held by any Indian or Indian tribes, and that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States…”
Look it up, here’s the link https://sos.wyo.gov/Forms/Publications/WYConstitution.pdf
Apparently, either willingly or out of ignorance, several federal and state elected officials from Wyoming are violating their own state constitution.
Either way it seems unacceptable and if any of them had a bit of decency they would resign immediately and apologize publicly to the citizens of Wyoming.
Anyone giving odds on those resignations?
Well it’s Absolute anyone whom wants this land grab is apart of the ranching royalty of Wyoming and other western states .hate to say it but our governor is a rancher first everything else later. We need to elect someone for the people of Wyoming not just the rich ranchers.
Let me see if I have this right. The people who can’t manage our state lands properly, now want to manage the national parks? What could go wrong? I remember the state land office trying to find the lessee of a state parcel out in Sweetwater County, the search lasted for months, and it turned out to be a member of the Legislature who had been in Cheyenne during most of the search. Maybe we should look at how they treated the long-time operators of the facilities in Thermopolis. Are these really the people you want manage public lands for all Americans?
No surprise that Hageman and the “Freedom” caucus wants to waste time and money on this ridiculous issue – but Gordon! So disappointing but the writing was on the wall when he started messing with the private land deal of the Marton Ranch.
So here we go again – wasting time instead of focusing on solutions to improving our public lands, including access to landlocked areas and conserving wildlife habitat.
Montana did a study when it wanted to take over public lands. ONE BAD FIRE SEASON WOULD BANKRUPT THEIR STATE!
Just to remind everyone, J. Barrasso (self proclaimed Wyomings doctor) wants to build homes on public land. It’s called ‘getting your foot in the door’. Maybe big John should work on improving health care.
It’s our responsibility to vote the clowns out of office.
Before Gordon was elected governor and when he was campaigning, he came to Sheridan to speak to folks at the Senior Center. I was there and asked him specifically what he felt about states taking control of federal land. He told me that he didn’t support that because the state would never be able to support it financially. I admired his candor and he is the only republican I think I have ever voted for in the last quarter century. So I am really dismayed about his flip flop. There’s no doubt in my mind that the state would sell off our public lands to the highest bidders and the billionaire oligarchs would be the new owners and the rest of us would never have access ever again. Disappointing to say the least.
“Public lands” are actually that – owned by the public, you and me. These are managed by Federal agencies carrying out public laws for the benefit of the public. The “public” doesn’t just live in Wyoming, Utah, etc, as the public who live in Vermont, Virginia, Missouri, where ever – ALSO own this public land. They don’t live here but they own it too. Those of us who live here enjoy the great benefit of these areas but forget that we are stewards not owners of public land. We have our term, our time, here and then these public lands pass to the next generation – just as these were passed down to us. Placing these lands in the hands of those who reside here is stealing ownership rights from other members of the public who are not residents. It’s thievery, plain and simple and everyone knows the final outcome – the states will have “a budget shortfall,” and this public land is sold to some techbro or trust fund baby to fly in to their trophy ranch, on their private jet once a year which is now fenced off. Kiss public access and our birthright, goodbye.
Another waste of taxpayer dollars to fund frivolous ideological lawsuits.
Think of your favorite place on a national forest or on BLM-managed lands. What makes that place special to you would probably also make it attractive to some rich out-of-stater.
Now suppose Utah wins this lawsuit and federal lands are transferred to the state. The states can’t manage all that land. So they’re going to have to sell it. If the state holds an auction, who is going to be able to afford that place you love so much–you or the rich out-of-stater? And do you think the rich out-of-stater is going to grant the public access?
“War.” “Invasion.” Where do these terms come into the lexicon of the public lands debates? Of course “fight, fight, fight” Hageman would inject these comments, but why is Gordon joining the fray, and dragging Wyoming with him? Public lands, owned and managed by the Feds, have vast public support and a national constituency, as they should. Why should Wyoming’s parochial views of what these lands are good for determine their future? The tribes have better claims than the States.
For those who feel this is deeply concerning, the non-profit “Backcountry Hunters and Anglers” is a (mostly) Western based organization that focuses on preserving public lands and access. They have been key in raising awareness and engaging with lawmakers to shut down previous efforts to rob the public of their lands. Hopefully many here in the comments section will look to their webpage and fill out letters or sign petitions that are already prepared for you. Maybe even join the organization and support?
The transfer of Federal lands to state control is just a brief step before sale to private holders. Mike Lee of Utah was literally trying to move federal lands in UT to state control so they could be sold to his own family.
Anyone who believes this has anything to do with states’ rights or more responsible stewardship needs to understand this is about a group of private equity grifters who are looking to expand their private holdings. Nothing more.
If we give the freedom caucus control, and they’ll sell WY out before lunch.
While many have stated there is precedent against this idea, we must remember the current SCOTUS doesn’t really seem to care about precedent. I don’t trust anything that goes before the court as the majority seem bought and paid for.
So how much money is Gordon and his cronies in the legislature going to waste on these silly law suits that we always seem to lose?
Wyoming has more than enough citizens.
well, it is a darn slippery slope ..Too far down that road, will kill the pleasure of ,”roamin thru Wyoming”
as a visitor to the panhandle of Florida,, i saw a lot of wide open beaches that were there on 1958⁵
sold off to realtors thru the years,,,, and today,, it seems like public access is limited to a few
state areas .
Oh my!! Another Sagebrush Rebellion. Most WyoFile readers won’t remember that this kind of “states’ rights” maneuvering usually doesn’t get much, if any, support from the feds. If anyone in Wyoming remembers (Democratic) Gov. Ed Herschler, the same rare folks will likely remember that the movement got some passing attention in the 1970s but accomplished little or next to nothing. Governors Calvin L Rampton and Scott Matheson, both D-Utah; Democratic Gov. Cecil Andrus of Idaho and, to a less prominent extent, Democratic Colorado Gov. Richard Lamb, all led the Sagebrush Rebellion. It temporarily raised public awareness that there was talk of taking over control and/or management of public lands in the Rocky Mountain States, but has not — and will not — accomplish that in anyone’s lifetimes. The political landscape in the eight Rocky Mountain states, is still rough and rocky, and despite the intellectual decline among the region’s Republican “leadership” the discussion will likely go on, and on, and on, with not the whisp of a chance of accomplishment.
Doesn’t anyone in Wyoming government remember the study they ordered done in 2015 about the feasibility of this exact issue? It seems both Utah and Wyoming government folks have very short memories. https://chiwulff.com/2016/11/06/the-public-lands-issue-wyoming-get-its-right-twice/
Yeah, I do, & Gordon was the State Treasurer at the time & was part of the group opposed to the transfer of public lands to the state as managing those lands would bankrupt the state
Exactly. Wyoming will waste more money on doomed legal efforts.
Gordon has proven to be no friend to the Wyoming public land user and sportsman/woman. A few examples: The disastrous Task Farce that he cobbled up with former Game and Fish Director Nesvik that tried to take away hunting licenses by giving control of our wildlife to the welfare Outfitters and Guides Association – Attempt to block the 30,000 acre + Marton Ranch sale to the BLM – supporting the running over of predators with motorized vehicles and now this attempt at a public land grab. Gordon is a bane to all public land users and has firmly cemented his spot in history as one of Wyoming’s not so good Governors. Way to go, Mark, enjoy your “legacy” because you truly earned it
Mark Gordon is a total sellout! Wyoming is now for sale to the highest bidder. Shame!
Think about the progression of this. Although the Republicans have been trying to take THE PEOPLES land for decades, there’s been some recent things that may have something to do with it. The billionaire, Fred Eshelman, lost a court case against the citizens that hunted on the publics property. Shortly afterwords our Governor hired Eshelmans attorney. Do you think that’s a coincidence. This is Gordons last term, so he’s untouchable. He’s proving himself to be a silver spoon New Yorker.
It’s a merry-go-round with new passengers every few years. The federal government obtained land from France and Mexico long before there were states. The federal government retained ownership of all that was not disposed of under various federal laws. In 1976 the federal government adopted a policy of retaining public lands, in the Federal Land Policy Management Act. That is the law. The states disclaimed ownership upon admission. That is the law. The Sagebrush Rebellion merry-go-round never succeeds and never will. Shame on Gov. Gordon for jumping on this ridiculous claim. Attorneys will make money, but they will lose.
I don’t think there’s enough water to “develop” all this land. More importantly, I think Native Americans have first claim on this Federal land. Native nations were there long before even the Territories, let alone States
Instead of claiming his place as a pretty good to great Wyoming Governor, Gordon has cemented his legacy as a weak, pandering “leader” who deep down, doesn’t like Public lands. If you recall, he tried to block the Marton ranch sale to the BLM (which opened up 1,000’s of acres to the public) and now he’s fallen in line with many members of our crappy State Legislature by calling out for transfer of federal lands to the States. If this were to happen, the “new” State lands probably would only be accessible to the elite few and eventually sold off to Gordon’s cronies. What a disappointing legacy that Mark Gordon is creating for himself.
One need look no further than Nate Schweber’s book on the DeVotos to know this is a tale as old as time for the rural western US. It just takes a slightly different form with each generation. I hope everyone’s remarks in this comments section are also making it to the inboxes and desks of elected officials responsible for this selfish, myopic nonsense, too.
those wanting development of precious public land should take a drive on I15, into, past, and beyond SLC, and see the unrelenting development in this corridor. perhaps the alluring photos of utah wildlands that line the walls of slc international airport should be removed and replaced with cluttered and intense development on I15? utah, wyoming, idaho, nevada have public lands of amazing diversity, beauty, and ecological importance, of global significance and importance.
I was hoping Wyoming politicians understood the value of true public land. Wyoming, like Utah politicians, will sell the land to the highest bidding screwing all of us that use public land. People, speak up about this!
Uhm, Wyoming, a state with thousands of abandoned unreclaimed state permitted wells and mines pretends it is able to manage federal lands?! Can we sell Wyoming a bridge in Brooklyn?
This is right in line with all the ‘sovereign citizen’ insanity. I would like to think that SCOTUS will ignore this lawsuit, but the fact that Utah and Wyoming want to privatize all federal land cannot be ignored. Nothing, common sense least of all, will stop these greedy lawmakers from selling this land to the highest bidder.
I’ve said it all along. They’re after OUR public land. This is what you get when you vote for very dishonest politicians like Trump, Hageman, Barrasso, Lummis, Et al. Smarten up citizens of Wyoming and start voting them out of office right now. Who do you think will get the prime lands?
The Heart of Wyoming is its Freedom. Freedom to roam, freedom to hunt and fish, freedom to camp and hike with our families, freedom to drive and ride on our public lands. The vast majority of us are not from big ranches where owners have access to open lands…no, we wait for the weekends to take off to our favorite fishing holes, hunting spots, two-tracks or trails on our public lands. Kiss all that goodbye with this effort. Make no mistake – the state will sell off these places …(it’s been in all the bills introduced in the legislature in the past.) How quickly our “leaders” forget this part of of the Code of the West: “some things are not for sale.”
No doubt these Republicans want to sell this land to Saudi Arabia, Russia, China and Elon Musk. Say good bye to hiking and camping for free. Say good by to wood gathering hunting for free. Say hello to only the wealthy having access to pristine wilderness.
Ironically, Utah’s biggest ally for this movement to transfer or sell public lands is not a conservative state like Wyoming. The biggest allies to this cause are radical environmental groups. Their incessant lawsuits have stymied multiple use, killed so many jobs, and frustrated so many people that they are generating support for the transfer of public land.
Google “2024 Conservation in the West Poll” and you will see that in fact there is very little support for the transfer of public land and strong opposition to it. And these are polls of interior west states–not California, Oregon or Washington.
Further evidence of strong opposition to transfer (aka privatization) of public lands: a few years back Utah Congressman Chaffetz introduced a bill in the House of Representatives to transfer certain public lands to the states. He soon found there was so much opposition in his own conservative district that he apologized and said he would withdraw the bill.
These state governments are acting against the interests of their residents in filing and supporting this lawsuit. Whose interests are they representing?
The privatization of public land in Utah advocates` debate arguments have a fundamental flaw. Brigham Young and his followers had no legal claim to the land to begin with, they were squatters on land that was in use and sustained Shoshone, Paiute, Navajo (Dine`) Zuni, Ute Mountain Ute, and many other tribal Nations and further, it was claimed by Mexico in large part. Young commanded his followers to “settle” on all watered and arable land. And settle the land they did. They took the land at gunpoint, they paid no price and Young created titles of ownership out of thin air. That is at the base of Utah`s claim.
Mormon country has a history that cannot be denied. Federal holdings within State boundaries are a historical fact. The actions of the LDS church in Territorial times gave Congress substantial reason to retain ownership of large tracts of conquered lands when granting Statehood to Utah and other Western States.
I am not saying the Church of Later Day Saints members do not have sweat equity in the settlement of the West, their industriousness substantially accomplished it, but I certainly think their claims of ownership have faults in their foundations. Utah has just about as firm a claim to “public land” as Young and his church had to Native and Mexican land.
Yet, State ownership advocates are now proposing to do the same thing again with land that has a much firmer Steward. We the People of the United States of America have legal stewardship of that land now. I find it alarming and amazing that the current ownership schema already includes those who want to simply shrink the ownership pie. To heck with all those tourists who flock to see the splendor of the American West! Why should they have a say?
If “They” (UT, WY, AZ, NM, ID, NV, MT, CO, OR, WA, and CA )were proposing to pay us (the United States) a million dollars an acre and we retain the water and mineral rights, I would say that was ten times too cheap a bid. Even 10 million an acre is not enough to pay for the vistas alone! They do not even propose to buy the land! They want it to be given to them! So, why in the world should we give them another multi-trillion-dollar boon? “They” would pocket the proceeds and deny responsibility and liability for any disasters that would ensue. “They” would shunt those costs back on the United States and demand Super Fund and FEMA cover their losses.
We must retain stewardship of those lands because we cannot trust the greedy leaders and legislators of the West not to sell our American heritage to exploitive corporations and their billionaires who would put up electric fences and who would patrol their “property” with armed private security guards and who would dig up their billions in private profit, and who would thumb their noses at us Americans when We ask for taxes to be paid on those profits. Industrialists would demand that We build their roads, that We maintain the Judicial system that protects them from liability, and that We fund the Government that legislates their right to dominate us and guarantees their markets.
Then tell me those State legislatures won`t sell our land to Chinese, Canadian, Saudi, South African, or any other foreign Nation or Corporation!
Then tell me they have a bridge to sell me that leads to a job.
Yeah, right, I forgot, they think I was born yesterday and I don’t know where we came from or where we are heading.
I think Mexico’s claim can be disregarded because the USA won that war for the land. Mexico is another political descendant of the Spanish empire, “New Spain.” It’s the Native Americans who have the first claim on “excess” Federal land. I’m pretty sure there’s a statute to that effect.
The folks behind this land grab will never speak honestly of their real intent.
Let them address the issue with integrity and see what happens. I cannot think of any worse stewardship awarded to a more short seeing and dishonest group of individuals with only one thing in mind. Money.
“Only Congress can transfer or dispose of federal lands,” the Lands Foundation said.??
Show me – When did Congress get appointed ANY sayso over anything but fiction? They have no jurisdiction over land and soil OR the living people – that is one of the many unenumerated rights of the people to hold the land by way of the Ninth Amendment. The “property that belongs to all Americans” will still belong to ALL Americans if the People would just pull their collective heads out of whatever snowbank they got stuck in.
Fools conveniently forget there are FOUR branches of government and The People are that fourth branch.
Frankly, nether the State nor the Federal Government own any land, just the territorial aspect by way of titles which are nothing but paper – fiction from on end to the other. Why do you think every new bill that passes is called “An Act”? God owns the land and the land is not to be sold. Government only owns fabricated titles and certificates and they are very welcomed to take them back and clutch them tight.
The land was given for use of the people and no man can take away that right, even though the masses are completely indoctrinated and think all they need to do is go out an vote or some new corporate leader every couple years –
People are their own worst enemy due to lack of basic knowledge.
Federal Article III – Sovereign Judicial Power reminds us: … citizens of the District of Columbia were not granted the privilege of litigating in the federal courts on the grounds of diversity of citizenship. Possibly no better reason for this fact exists than such citizens were not thought of when the judiciary article [III] of the federal Constitution was drafted … citizens of the United States … were also not thought of; but in any event, a citizen of the United States, who is not a citizen of any state, is not within the language of the [federal] Constitution. [Pannill v. Roanoke, 252 F. 910, 914] d.c. VA 1918]. The de facto federal government and ANY “State OF ______” that signed up to become a territory of that foreign agency known as District of Columbia has zero jurisdiction of the sovereign people, so this entire article is a smoke screen.
The State only owns the Legal Name folks – not you the verus being. Give back to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s. This bogus conflict will be resolved by nothing more than the people taking back their unalienable God-Given rights and reminding this foreign agency that pretends to be a “government for the People” that they are the servant, but ya’ll better figure out who your are in order to take your stand.
Well I’m gobsmacked. Ranchers and mineral companies have been eyeballing public lands for decades. Dang. Who woulda guessed?
I knew our state representatives lacked a moral compass but until now I held out hope for Gordon.
What’s ironic is that the state trust lands under supposedly state management are the worst manage lands in our state bar none! If you are naive enough to think the state will improve access and manage these lands better than the federal government, I want some of what you’re smoking!
Maybe the state can grant Prism Logistics more limited mining permits
Uh, great idea. Maybe the Feds should hand the firefighting Bills from the latest National Forest fires to Guv Gordon and tell him to write a check. It’s no surprise to see the names of our usual suspect crackpots backing this insane land grab, but Governor Gordon? I thought that guy had some decency to him.
Drill and mine it all and let God sort it out.
Just the thought of it happening is horrifying. Giving Wyoming government authority over federal lands is nuts. The lands would be trash in no time. With the Trump scum on the Supreme Court, anything could happen. Maybe I will live to see a real revolt in this pathetic, sad country.
This has been an eye-opening read for me.
Public Land users BEWARE!!! The state’s want to take YOUR public lands. Forget your freedoms of usage and access of YOUR public lands. State owned lands are not public lands.
No surprise to see “Trump- Endorsed Harriet Hageman” supports Utah in this effort. She also wants to pull the US out of the UN, out of NATO and wants to censure Joe Biden for election interference for dropping out of the race a few months ago. But Governor Mark Gordon? I used to have some respect for him.
Yet the Wyoming public will vote her back into office.
The largest economic sector in terms of employment in Wyoming is the tourism and recreation industry. This same industry is the 2nd largest in terms of economic benefit to the state. This critical economic sector relies on public access to federal lands for recreation. If these lands are transferred to the states, they will end of being sold or disposed because the states cannot afford to keep them. They will be sold to the highest bidder, not to the local rancher that has leasing and grazing on them for years. The super rich, like Bezos, Musk, and Gates and their ilk will end up with all of it. Wyoming and American citizens will be locked out. No hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, or any other recreation will be available to everyone. Nevermind, that all previous generations were able to utilize and enjoy these lands. Now all that matters is unfettered development for the economic gain of a very few. I expect this crap from Hageman and the Freedom Caucus loonies. But, now Governor Gordon? My business and my entire lifestyle relies on access to public lands. I know a vast majority of Wyoming residents feel that way too. Just look at how popular our National Forest, National Parks, and other public lands are, and how many people utilize them to recreate. If you want to take that away, expect a fight. You don’t like public lands then move to Texas or Oklahoma. Leave Wyoming as it is.
I live in Oklahoma I am very pro business free enterprise but I feel that public lands like Wilderness forests Wildlife refuges national parks lakes etc are for all us citizens to enjoy I feel if Wyoming or any state wants to sell or give any of it away for private enterprise or business use they should let citizens of that state vote on it voters should have say on public land use not special or private business interests
Your words ring true.
State ownership of public lands is a pathway to corruption and loss of access.
Right on Luke! The people supporting this land grab have not thought things through.
I had high hopes when Mark Gordon initially ran for governor. I hoped that he would represent all the citizens of Wyoming fairly and equally in a nonpartisan manner. Thought he might be remembered as a great Wyoming governor like Sullivan or Freudenthal. Boy was I wrong. The first time he was accused of not being conservative enough by the Trumpians, like a scared little puppy he put his tail between his legs and ran and jumped on the Trump Train and he has never looked back. Governor Gordon has proved to be such a disappointment for those of us who chose to live in Wyoming because of its vast public lands that we enjoy for hunting, fishing and recreation. Don’t forget that anti-public lands Mark Gordon also formally objected to the private sale of the Marton Ranch on the North Platte River near Casper which opened up vast amounts of public fishing access on the Platte River blue-ribbon fishery. I’m thrilled that Governor Gordon is term limited. Will be happy to see him go.
State lands often have no multiple use mandate, so no pesky hunters or other public interests to get in the way of mining or heck selling off the land to resort developers and other big political donors.
Sounds like a sure fire way to send Wyoming really back to the dark ages.
This no doubt this primarily benefits the minority ranchers that contribute only 2% or less to Wyomings GDP, just look at the list who signed on.
Maybe if Gordon and rest of the legislators want support they should draft up a plan on how this will be beneficial to the majority of the populous and not just the select few that don’t do anything in February and have time to run for office.
If this goes through and the statutes stay the same in regards to State owned lands, you can say goodbye to Wyoming’s recreation economy and future.
Just more proof that Wyoming is a sick state, and that the country is swirling ever more quickly down the toilet bowl.
Just an attempt to steal property that belongs to all Americans. This maneuver just proves what low lifes we send to Cheyenne. There are much bigger fish to fry, can you say *Tax Reform* issues to fix, but yet these clowns, members of the freedom for only them caucus skirt the real business of the people and try to stick it to America. The Northwest Wyoming contingency, Tim French, Dan Laursen and Rachel Rodriguez-Whatever have once again proven that they’re not quite ready for prime time down in ole’ Cheyenne. The rest of the jokers on this list are just as embarrassing.
Speaking of the ‘rugged individualist’ himself, Senator Tim French, according to the EWG Subsidy site, old ‘don’t need no government’ Tim pocketed a fat $203,947 from the government via ag subsidy checks, yet he wants to pickpocket the U.S. citizens by taking away their public lands. If you’re going to be a hypocrite, I guess you go all the way…
This Big horn Basin Trio consider themselves elites but in reality, you have a woman who wants to control other women, a subsidy grabbing hayseed and a whacko who wants to abolish daylight savings time. Sure, they’d love to take control of federal lands that would then only be accessible to a chosen few. The unfortunate minority who voted these people in office expect results in Cheyenne, not land grabs and lunatic behavior
Well stated.
Yea, I get it “property that belongs to all Americans”. Just one question where is the 47% of all the states east of Montana Wyoming Colorado and New Mexico that belongs to “all Americans” that i can go recreate on? New Hampshire, at 13% federally controlled has the most federal land but virtually all eastern states are in the single digits.
Also it’s disingenuous to say there will be no hunting fishing etc because most state land even though it isn’t “public” virtually all of it is open for recreation.
Miles, you cannot disperse camp on state lands, only at specified state parks with a fee. The state lands I’ve hiked on that checkerboard with BLM are terribly managed (really no management). Even their AUM fees are about 5 times higher than Federal lands fees. Wyoming law states that those lands must be used for monetary purposes for schools. It’s pretty clear Wyoming would just sell off what they could to the highest bidders.
Just look at the whack-jobs who are supporting this. Another Freedom Caucus stunt to secure free land and “freedom” for only their little buddies. This movement, like the past other failures will do accomplish nothing but embarrass the State of Wyoming
Hunters line up to vote for these people that want to remove access from public lands, these lands belong to all of the American People
I agree. Hunters, campers, fishermen, speak up!
I fail to see why the states should get these lands given that there are previous claimants with a more valid right to possess them. To wit: the indigenous people of the west. That’s who these lands should really go to.
I just want to be clear what you mean by “indigenous people”. Do you mean the occupants of the land immediately before Europeans arrived or the people who they killed to take the land or maybe the people before them? Exactly how far back are we going in the history of “ownership” of these lands? How will we identify the true original owners/occupants?
Excellent point!