anderson750
I'm working on it Rose
- Location
- Price, Utah
Utah Legislature passes historic lands bill
- Thread starter anderson750
- Start date
- Status
Houndoc
Registered User
- Location
- Grantsville
As much as I disagree frequently with federal land management, I think these land bills are overall a really bad idea.
Why?
Utah can not afford to properly manage the huge tracts of land that are currently federally managed. If the state struggles to keep state parks open, how do they think they can afford to take over for the forest service and BLM?
So, if Utah can not afford to manage massive areas of public land, what option do they have? Yup- sell it. This is no surprise anyway, selling land to tax it is one of the stated purposes of the bills.
But what happens when public land becomes private? You got it, no more public access. How is that better than trying to stop wilderness designations?
I also think the legislature is out of their collective minds if they think there will be a huge demand for most BLM land. I read one article where they compared what Utah is paid by the feds for the BLM holdings compared to what a private rancher would pay in taxes. But how many ranchers have the cash buy up vast new land holders or would want to knowing it would raise their tax bill? Not much incentive, considering they use the land under current law.
The only lands that may be more in demand are those closest to urban areas, which are some of the most used for recreation and the most vital to wildlife (esp. wintering grounds.)
In my opinion, we are far better off fighting the current battles over land management that dealing with the disaster that a transfer to the state would become.
Why?
Utah can not afford to properly manage the huge tracts of land that are currently federally managed. If the state struggles to keep state parks open, how do they think they can afford to take over for the forest service and BLM?
So, if Utah can not afford to manage massive areas of public land, what option do they have? Yup- sell it. This is no surprise anyway, selling land to tax it is one of the stated purposes of the bills.
But what happens when public land becomes private? You got it, no more public access. How is that better than trying to stop wilderness designations?
I also think the legislature is out of their collective minds if they think there will be a huge demand for most BLM land. I read one article where they compared what Utah is paid by the feds for the BLM holdings compared to what a private rancher would pay in taxes. But how many ranchers have the cash buy up vast new land holders or would want to knowing it would raise their tax bill? Not much incentive, considering they use the land under current law.
The only lands that may be more in demand are those closest to urban areas, which are some of the most used for recreation and the most vital to wildlife (esp. wintering grounds.)
In my opinion, we are far better off fighting the current battles over land management that dealing with the disaster that a transfer to the state would become.
Wicked Monkey
Banned
- Location
- Utah
Dont think for even one second that the state of Utah is hurting for money! Its not! The problem is poor money management! They keep giving themselves raises and hiring friends and family. Putting money in non useful programs. Etc... The list of corruption goes on and on.
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
I fully agree with you. It would take to the tune of $300+ million to manage public lands in Utah, all from a state struggling to keep its State Parks in repair and open. There would be economic windfalls in the obvious form of land sales, leases and mineral extraction, all of which offer little in the form of good for the OHV community.
I am interested and willing to hear more sides to this equation but its seems like we are are being presented a bill with no chance of happening thus the legislators have vested zero time in investigating the logistics of it happening let alone budgeting for it. A bad fire year could bankrupt our public lands.
Who remembers how we lost Lower Helldorado, Proving Grounds, & Dump Bump/Lions back? The State of Utah selling lands
Who remembers routes being close on other state parcels as they were damaging the future real estate value of said land? Now I'm fully supportive of the States need/right to sell off lands to fund the public school systems but on the other hand I don't feel it represents the best interest of the OHV community. A conundrum for sure, one that will likely end it taxpayers dollars tossed at litigation and little/no change on the ground and a federal government looking to reign in that rogue State of Deseret 
I believe you can get a map of current SILTA lands that are designated as such and which will be going up for auction in the future. It sucks those places were on SILTA land but of course they won't choose undesirable land to designate as such because they'd never sell it. Frustrating.
That said, the fed doesn't have the money to manage the lands either. The only difference is that they are able to borrow their budget from the private print shop + interest.
Questions I have:
Would this open up new opportunities for volunteer land management without having to deal with giant bureaucracies?
Would the decisions of whether land goes up for private sale or lease be left to public panels? If they are claiming the land back in the name of "Utah land" then it should be the citizens who have the say, with proper studies of course.
I know you can't trust a politician as far as you can throw them, but I have a feeling that we are more likely to have an influence over our Utah public lands if the control was localized rather than nationalized. And if not, we have a much better chance at voting our elected officials out if they don't listen. Good luck with that on a national level.
I'm trying to be optimistic.
That said, the fed doesn't have the money to manage the lands either. The only difference is that they are able to borrow their budget from the private print shop + interest.
Questions I have:
Would this open up new opportunities for volunteer land management without having to deal with giant bureaucracies?
Would the decisions of whether land goes up for private sale or lease be left to public panels? If they are claiming the land back in the name of "Utah land" then it should be the citizens who have the say, with proper studies of course.
I know you can't trust a politician as far as you can throw them, but I have a feeling that we are more likely to have an influence over our Utah public lands if the control was localized rather than nationalized. And if not, we have a much better chance at voting our elected officials out if they don't listen. Good luck with that on a national level.
I'm trying to be optimistic.
- Location
- Never Far From Nowhere
And let the lawsuits begin.
I won't rehash what houndoc and Kurt said, but this is ridiculous. This is putting Utah at the center of a battle that we cannot and will not win. I'm not one to back down from a fight, but there is no reason to pick a fight that you can't win. This will cost time and money that Utah cannot afford. Time and money that should be spent on maintaining State Parks, fighting for RS2477 routes ect.
I'm very disappointed that these went through. I was hoping that they'd just fall flat.
I won't rehash what houndoc and Kurt said, but this is ridiculous. This is putting Utah at the center of a battle that we cannot and will not win. I'm not one to back down from a fight, but there is no reason to pick a fight that you can't win. This will cost time and money that Utah cannot afford. Time and money that should be spent on maintaining State Parks, fighting for RS2477 routes ect.
I'm very disappointed that these went through. I was hoping that they'd just fall flat.
JL Rockies
Binders Fulla Expo
- Location
- Draper
The Constitution: it's either the law of the land or it's not. These are the enumerated powers as provided by Article 1 Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
None of us were around when the progressives decided to get into the land management business but I wonder how vocal any of us would be if the Obama Admin pushed the creation of the NPS and BLM today instead of Obamacare? It's the same thing.
When we allow the Fed to grow beyond what the rules say, we can't pick and choose the over reach. The Fed is broke not UT. I believe this is a fight worth fighting just as I believe the fight over Obamacare is worth fighting. Either we are a Republic or we are not.... and who decides we are no longer?
I fully support any fight to protect states rights and I also support extraction oil, coal or other resources responsibly. You can dissagree but you'd be wrong. :}
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
None of us were around when the progressives decided to get into the land management business but I wonder how vocal any of us would be if the Obama Admin pushed the creation of the NPS and BLM today instead of Obamacare? It's the same thing.
When we allow the Fed to grow beyond what the rules say, we can't pick and choose the over reach. The Fed is broke not UT. I believe this is a fight worth fighting just as I believe the fight over Obamacare is worth fighting. Either we are a Republic or we are not.... and who decides we are no longer?
I fully support any fight to protect states rights and I also support extraction oil, coal or other resources responsibly. You can dissagree but you'd be wrong. :}
Last edited:
Wicked Monkey
Banned
- Location
- Utah
When i first went on The Rattlesnake trail i saw the RME sign.
My question is...
Why cant the RME community come together and Adopt certain trails with the promise to maintain them kinda like The Rattlesnake trail? How hard could it be?
Isnt that what our ancestors did? The citizens maintained the trails and roads without depending on BIG BROTHER?
Most roads were kept in existence from just simply driving on them lol! And when the trail needed repair, people would come together and fix it!
It seems to me that the old "Teamwork" word is quickly fading away like all of us hardcore extreme 4x4ers.*
My question is...
Why cant the RME community come together and Adopt certain trails with the promise to maintain them kinda like The Rattlesnake trail? How hard could it be?
Isnt that what our ancestors did? The citizens maintained the trails and roads without depending on BIG BROTHER?
Most roads were kept in existence from just simply driving on them lol! And when the trail needed repair, people would come together and fix it!
It seems to me that the old "Teamwork" word is quickly fading away like all of us hardcore extreme 4x4ers.*
- Location
- Never Far From Nowhere
You're being a literalist when it comes to interpreting the Consitution. The Constitution is what is referred to as a "living document", the mood of the times is what determine its interpritation. During the Progressive Era the mood of the country and the people in power was that of stewardship. That the government needed to take a more active role in bettering the lives of the citizenry. You can debate the merits of things like the NPS and FS, but I'd venture to argue they have been a net positive for our country.
The mood of the country now, or at least part of it, is to rebel against greater Federal control. That they have taken to much from the individual and from the states. That we need to take it back. I don't disagree, by and large. But things like these bills do not take the long view. The laws of the land are already stacked against them. They will be challanged in court and they will be reveresed. This is just an attempt by certain people in the Legislature and their special interest buddies to get attention drawn to what is happening in Utah with regards to land rights. Something good may come of it, but I tend to bet more bad will. The state will be labeled radical and land managers will be less inclined to work with us on anything. Plus, the lawsuits are going to be expensive and time consuming to fight. To point of any fight is to get in and get out as quickly as possible. These bills do not do that.
Wicked Monkey
Banned
- Location
- Utah
The simple reality is that The Constitution has Failed and our Big Brother is not doing their jobs that were paying them to do. So who else is there to get the job done?
Simple! Us! We must take it apon ourselfs to get it done! Unity!
Honestly... I perfer it that way! I love the simplicity of just getting rid of most of Big Brother and start relying on one another. Like it was in historic times! Only the strong survive!
Writing letters, protesting, etc begging for petty privileges when its already our right to travel! Public land is for the public!
Posted signs, gates, road blocks have never stopped me from executing my Devine right to travel! Travel is NOT a privilege! Its a RIGHT!
Simple! Us! We must take it apon ourselfs to get it done! Unity!
Honestly... I perfer it that way! I love the simplicity of just getting rid of most of Big Brother and start relying on one another. Like it was in historic times! Only the strong survive!
Writing letters, protesting, etc begging for petty privileges when its already our right to travel! Public land is for the public!
Posted signs, gates, road blocks have never stopped me from executing my Devine right to travel! Travel is NOT a privilege! Its a RIGHT!
Last edited:
Wicked Monkey
Banned
- Location
- Utah
To lawfully back up my claims...
CASE #1: "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.
CASE #2: "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.
CASE #3: "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.
CASE #4: "The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.
For the answer, let us look, once again, to the U.S. courts for a determination of this very issue. In Hertado v. California, 110 US 516, the U.S Supreme Court states very plainly:
"The state cannot diminish rights of the people." *
THIS ONE IS MY FAV!!!!
And in Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60,
"Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void."
CASE #1: "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.
CASE #2: "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.
CASE #3: "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.
CASE #4: "The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.
For the answer, let us look, once again, to the U.S. courts for a determination of this very issue. In Hertado v. California, 110 US 516, the U.S Supreme Court states very plainly:
"The state cannot diminish rights of the people." *
THIS ONE IS MY FAV!!!!
And in Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60,
"Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void."
Wicked Monkey
Banned
- Location
- Utah
"The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice." Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, at 24
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.
"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. US, 230 F 486, at 489.
There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights." Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.
"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. US, 230 F 486, at 489.
There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights." Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946
Wicked Monkey
Banned
- Location
- Utah
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution..."
Wicked Monkey
Banned
- Location
- Utah
Sorry yal... I've been saving that Caselaw for the right moment
I am not a lawyer... Just a man that is educating himself on the laws.
All information I have posted is to be used at your own risk and taken as educational purposes.
All Rights Reserved
I am not a lawyer... Just a man that is educating himself on the laws.
All information I have posted is to be used at your own risk and taken as educational purposes.
All Rights Reserved
Last edited:
anderson750
I'm working on it Rose
- Location
- Price, Utah
Short and simple answer to this is that the state of Utah has started a chess match and this is their first move to try and head off a federal government that wants to encroach on our states ability to have access to roads and resources. This bill is not going to change things over night and it would pointless to get to worked up over it. Right now it is time to see what move the opponent makes.
Also, Utah is not the only state working on a bill like this. Arizona, Montana and a couple others have one in the works also.
Also, Utah is not the only state working on a bill like this. Arizona, Montana and a couple others have one in the works also.
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
And there you have it folks...
TJDukit
I.Y.A.A.Y.A.S.
- Location
- Clearfield
Somehow in all the madness I missed that one. Thanks Kurt.
I will say this. Sure we have the right to Travel and you can travel wherever you want so long as it's legal. Just because you have the right to travel doesn't give you the right to travel through my backyard just because you want to.
- Location
- Riverton, UT
As citizens of this country it is our obligation to follow the law and if it is a bad law it is our obligation to change it using the law.
Wicked Monkey
Banned
- Location
- Utah
Of course you would not want to tresspass on private property with out permission. Private and Public are two seperate things. But then again...
If the land is vacant and no one lives there, you have a right to be there if used as a right. It kinda remindes me of "Squatter" rights from the Geneva Convention I believe.
The problem is that most people dont even know what their rights are! How can someone claim a right if they dont know their rights? It all comes down to the poor education in America... The Subject of Civics has been discontinued from being taught in public schools.
There is two ways one can change bad laws.
1. Beg big brother to change it by using strength in numbers with letters and protests.
2. Civil disobedience. Break the law and fight it in the courts. Those case laws I posted are prime examples of the many law breakers that fought it and won
It also brings up another prime example I have in mind.
Arizona had those cameras that would take pictures of people breaking the law and send them tickets in the mail with a picture of them caught in the act. Well... The majority of the people that got the tickets never payed them. In fact they got rid of the whole camera system because they could not afford to maintain them because no one was paying the tickets! Lol!
Last edited:
- Status