I know, shocking, right?
In case you’ve missed it last year, we had an election. Among the many changes has been a resurgence of wrestling lands out of federal hands and transferring them to state and local control.
While I can certainly understand the desire to do so mainly because any bureaucracy is large and (ahem) bureaucratic there are consequences mainly fee increases, and closures.
One of the biggest consequences of this transfer is cost. One of the reasons why park access and user fees are as low as they are is the injection federal dollars. As unpopular as it is to speak favorably of the federal government nowadays at least there is that much to be thankful for.
Like all land access issues, the proposed transfer is complex and contentious.
One of the surprise groups that are opposing the transfer of federal lands to state and local control are hunters.
This would be a very long post if every single aspect and every nuance were discussed so if you would like to explore this issue more in depth please check out the articles posted below:
Randy Newberg and the TRCP Scrub Out Public Land Transfer Myths
U.S. House changes its rules to ease federal land transfers: The Western movement to transfer federal lands scores an early victory in the new Congress.
Hunting group opposes federal land transfer.
Change in how land transfer values are calculated sparks a spirited
Land management is an important issue.
For more on the issue please follow the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, US Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Land Management, US Forestry Department, and not to mention your local parks and recreational departments and your local mountain bike advocacy groups.
No comments:
Post a Comment