DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Lands and Private Recreation Enterprise: Policy Issues from a Historical Perspective

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Lands and Private Recreation Enterprise: Policy Issues from a Historical Perspective United States Department of Public Lands and Private Recreation Agriculture Forest Service Enterprise: Policy Issues from a Pacific Northwest Research Station Historical Perspective General Technical Report PNW-GTR-556 September 2002 Tom Quinn Author Tom Quinn is a policy analyst, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Policy Analysis Staff, 201 14th Street at Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20250. Abstract Quinn, Tom. 2002. Public lands and private recreation enterprise: policy issues from a historical perspective. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-556. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 31 p. This paper highlights a number of the historical events and circumstances influencing the role of recreation enterprises on public lands in the United States. From the earliest debates over national park designations through the current debate on the ethics of recreation fees, the influence of recreation service providers has been pervasive. This history is traced with particular attention to the balance between protecting public interests while offering opportunities for profit to the private sector. It is suggested that the former has frequently been sacrificed owing to political pressures or inadequate agency oversight. Keywords: National Park Service, USDA Forest Service, concessions, recreation, public lands, public good, public utilities. Contents 1 Introduction 2 The National Park Idea (1870–1915) 3 The Entrepreneurial Spirit 6 The Dawn of Forest Management (1890–1910) 9 A New Management in the Parks: The National Park Service (1916–1930) 11 The Emergence of Regulated Monopolies in the Parks 12 Recreation Use Grows in the National Forests (1915–1960) 15 Ski Areas on the National Forests 17 The National Park Service (1930–1960) 21 Turbulent Times for the Forest Service (1960–2000) 23 Park Service Policies and Politics (1960–2000) 27 A Continuing Agency Role 29 Conclusion 29 References Introduction The role of the private sector in providing recreation goods and services on federal lands is a subject of considerable contemporary debate. This debate has generally focused on the two primary providers of public land recreation, the USDA Forest Service and the USDI National Park Service, although the issues are equally valid for other agencies including the USDI Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Some critics have contended that the agencies responsible for our public lands have not sufficiently encouraged private investment in recreation de- velopment to accommodate growing public demand. Conversely, others have rallied behind a cry of opposition to “commercialization, privatization, industrialization, and ‘Disneyfication’” of their national parks and forests. The agencies themselves wrestle internally between the need to supplement meager federal appropriations for recreation and the underlying goal of natural resource pro- tection. Pricing concerns, social equity, and perceived excessive development and commercialization are but a few of the issues agencies need to address as they weigh the pros and cons of increased privatization. These are not new issues. Indeed, they have been at the forefront of public land recre- ation management for nearly 130 years. This history indicates that private investment is neither inherently good nor evil, but that it does come with attendant governmental obligations to safeguard the greater public interest. Agency recreation policies need to be evaluated with attention to these obligations as well as to the lessons of the past. The history of the national parks and the National Park Service has been well covered in the literature (see for example, Everhart 1983, Foresta 1984, Ise 1961, Runte 1979, Sellars 1977, Shankland 1951). In most cases this past work has, by necessity, at least touched on the role that private business has played in the development and management of the parks. Quite simply, the history of national park concessioners and the history of the parks themselves are so intertwined as to be inseparable. Such is not the case with the national forests and the Forest Service. Although ac- counts of the agency have been written (see Pinchot 1947, Robinson 1975, Runte 1991, Steen 1976, Williams 2000), the forests’ historical ground has been plowed with neither the depth nor frequency as has that of the parks. Specifically, there is a notable lack of reference to recreation service enterprises in the national forest histories. This is not especially surprising given that recreational use of the forests was not explicitly mentioned in the establishing legislation (Forest Reserve Act of 1891) or in the 1897 Forest Management Act directing forest management and administration. Although it is not my intent to present a detailed review of the two agencies’ historical development, it is necessary to trace that general history as it relates to the provision of recreation goods and services; the answer to why we are where we are is largely found in where we have been. Finding balance between recreation service provision and protection of natural re- sources has never been easy. It will be shown that the magnitude and form of com- mercial development on our public lands is an area of long-standing concern. Further- more, the societal benefits of public land recreation have frequently entered the policy debate. The “public good” aspect of recreation has long been recognized, and the desire to provide recreation services at a “reasonable price” has often been expressed 1 throughout the history of the public lands in the United States.1 There are some indica- tions that these public good considerations are receiving less attention in recent years; implications of such a shift should be evaluated in light of economic theory, public opinion, and historical context. This paper will trace each agency’s relevant history through a series of significant eras in the development of recreation enterprise policy. These time blocks are pre- sented alternately for the Park Service and the Forest Service to allow for concurrent historical review. This is followed by an analysis of where the Forest Service is today in the debate. The National Park Some have argued that Yosemite warrants the title of America’s first national park, Idea (1870–1915) and it very nearly was so. However, when Congress set aside the wonders of the Yosemite Valley in 1864, it did so by cession to the state of California for use as a state-managed park. (It was in 1890 that Yosemite National Park was officially estab- lished; the return of the valley to the federal government did not occur until 1906.) Thus, the claim to being the first national park rightly rests with Yellowstone. The debate leading up to the 1872 establishment of the park is not only fascinating from a historical standpoint, but also because it portends a philosophical rift that in many ways exists to the present time. Concerns expressed over states’ rights, private prop- erty rights, “land grabbing,” wasteful use of resources and land, and generally the role of the federal government might just as easily have come from a newspaper in Arizona, Utah, or Nevada in 2002 as in 1872. From the beginning, this debate often related to the impacts park set-asides might have on the entrepreneurial rights of citizens to profit from their public lands. This view was articulated by Senator Cole of California, in voicing opposition to Yellowstone Park designation: I have grave doubts about the propriety of passing this bill. The natural curiosities there cannot be interfered with by anything that man can do. I cannot see how [they] can be interfered with if settlers are allowed to appropriate them. I do not see the reason or propriety of setting apart a large tract of land of that kind in the Territories of the United States for a public park. There is abundance of public park ground in the Rocky Mountains that will never be occupied. It is all one great park, and never can be anything else. There are some places, perhaps this is one, where persons can and would go and settle and improve and cultivate the grounds, if there be ground fit for cultivation (quoted in Ise 1961: 16). Not all agreed with this line of thinking. Circumstances at Yosemite, after its cession to California, may actually have contributed to the successful vote on Yellowstone. Senator Trumball of Illinois: I think our experience with the wonderful natural curiosity, if I may so call it, in the Senator’s own state (California), should admonish us of the propriety of passing such a bill as this. There is the wonderful Yosemite Valley, which one or two persons are now claiming by virtue of a pre-emption [Homestead Land 1 The concept of public land recreation enterprises as a form of public utility is addressed in detail in Quinn (1996) and summarized in Quinn (2002). 2 Claim]. Here is a region of country away up in the Rocky Mountains, where there are the most wonderful geysers on the face of the earth; a country that is not likely ever to be inhabited for the purposes of agriculture; but it is possible that some person may go there and plant himself right across the only path that leads to these wonders, and charge every man that passes along between the gorges of these mountains a fee of a dollar or five dollars. He may place an obstruction there, and toll may be gathered from every person who goes to see these wonders of creation (quoted in Ise 1961: 17). How prophetic Trumball’s words turned out to be. Of course, in many cases public ownership has not prevented the tolls he grimly forecasted. Despite the formidable opposition, the bill establishing Yellowstone National Park was signed by President Grant on March 1, 1872. The Entrepreneurial Among the provisions of the legislation creating Yellowstone was an early recognition Spirit that the park would be a desirable location for tourist conveniences.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Our Public Land Heritage: from the GLO to The
    Our Public Land Heritage: From the GLO to the BLM Wagon train Placer mining in Colorado, 1893 Gold dredge in Alaska, 1938 The challenge of managing public lands started as soon as America established its independence and began acquiring additional lands. Initially, these public lands were used to encourage homesteading and westward migration, and the General Land Office (GLO) was created 1861 • 1865 to support this national goal. Over time, however, values and attitudes American Civil War regarding public lands shifted. Many significant laws and events led to the establishment of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and 1934 laid the foundation for its mission to sustain the health, diversity, and 1872 1894 Taylor Grazing Act productivity of America’s public lands for the use and enjoyment of General Mining Law Carey Act authorizes authorizes grazing 1917 • 1918 present and future generations. identifies mineral transfer of up to districts, grazing lands as a distinct 1 million acres of World War I regulation, and www.blm.gov/history 1824 1837 1843 1850 1860 class of public lands public desert land to 1906 1929 public rangeland subject to exploration, states for settling, improvements in Office of Indian On its 25th “Great Migration” First railroad land First Pony Express Antiquities Act Great Depression occupation, and irrigating, and western states 1783 1812 Affairs is established anniversary, the on the Oregon Trail grants are made in rider leaves 1889 preserves and 1911 purchase under cultivating purposes. Begins (excluding Alaska) General in the Department General Land Office begins. Illinois, Alabama, and St. Joseph, Missouri. Oklahoma Land Rush protects prehistoric, Weeks Act permits Revolutionary War ends stipulated conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • U. S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management General Land Office Records
    U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT GENERAL LAND OFFICE RECORDS Federal Land Patents Survey Plats and Field Notes Land Status Records Presented by Frances A. Hager, Librarian Arkansas Tech University Russellville, Arkansas GENERAL INFORMATION The Bureau of Land Management provides live access to Federal land conveyance records for the Public Land States, including image access to more than five million Federal land title records issued between 1820 and the present. There are also images related to survey plats and field notes, dating back to 1810. 1 GENERAL INFORMATION (CONT.) Due to the organization of documents in the General Land Office collection, this site DOES NOT currently contain every Federal title record issued for the Public Land States. LAND PATENTS Federal Land Patents offer researchers a source of information on the initial transfer of land titles from the Federal government to individuals. This allows the researcher to see Who—Patentee, Assignee, Warrantee, etc Location—Legal Land Description When—Issue Date Type of patent 2 LAND PATENTS, CONT. Types of Patents Cash entries Homestead Military Warrants Displays Basic information in table format PDF of actual document HTTP://WWW.GLORECORDS.BLM.GOV/ Header for the Bureau of Land Management website 3 SEARCHING LAND PATENTS Location State County Name Last Name First Name Middle Name SEARCHING LAND PATENTS, CONT. Land Description Township Range Meridian Section Miscellaneous Land Office Document # Indian Allot. # Survey# Issue Date 4 My Hager Family Tree I will use the “Marquess” line in my Land Patent Search. The Land Patents initial search page. 5 Search Results Screen 6 Patent Detail Patent Image that can be printed or e-mailed.
    [Show full text]
  • How Did Public Lands Come to Be?
    Module 2 How did Public Lands Come to Be? Main Takeaways Public lands in the United States were created within the context of complex social and historical movements and mindsets. A more complete understanding of public lands requires acknowledgement of the people and cultures who have been negatively affected throughout the complex history of public lands. © Kevin McNeal This module will examine the history of public lands in the Historical Overview United States. It is important for people to know the history of public lands so that we can understand the perspectives of Time Immemorial others who have different types of connections to these places. When conservationists talk about the establishment of public lands in the United States, they sometimes focus on governmental decisions to protect land for future generations. However, the protection of lands as public did not occur in a vacuum. The conservation of these places reflects the larger social, cultural, and political forces and events of United States history. These influences are as diverse as the lands themselves. With this module, we try to provide a more comprehensive history of public lands. In doing so, we try to include the stories of some of the people and communities that have been History is conveyed in different ways by different cultures. For left out of the traditional Euro-American narrative. As we the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas, history begins with move forward enjoying, sharing, and preserving our public time immemorial - time before the reach of human memory. lands, hearing these stories and understanding the broader The history of connection to the land before memory is passed historical context can help us act more intentionally and work on through oral tradition.
    [Show full text]
  • General Land Office Book
    FORWARD n 1812, the General Land Office or GLO was established as a federal agency within the Department of the Treasury. The GLO’s primary responsibility was to oversee the survey and sale of lands deemed by the newly formed United States as “public domain” lands. The GLO was eventually transferred to the Department of Interior in 1849 where it would remain for the next ninety-seven years. The GLO is an integral piece in the mosaic of Oregon’s history. In 1843, as the GLO entered its third decade of existence, new sett lers and immigrants had begun arriving in increasing numbers in the Oregon territory. By 1850, Oregon’s European- American population numbered over 13,000 individuals. While the majority resided in the Willamette Valley, miners from California had begun swarming northward to stake and mine gold and silver claims on streams and mountain sides in southwest Oregon. Statehood would not come for another nine years. Clearing, tilling and farming lands in the valleys and foothills and having established a territorial government, the settlers’ presumed that the United States’ federal government would act in their behalf and recognize their preemptive claims. Of paramount importance, the sett lers’ claims rested on the federal government’s abilities to negotiate future treaties with Indian tribes and to obtain cessions of land—the very lands their new homes, barns and fields were now located on. In 1850, Congress passed an “Act to Create the office of the Surveyor-General of the public lands in Oregon, and to provide for the survey and to make donations to settlers of the said public lands.” On May 5, 1851, John B.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Public Lands Not for Sale Your Lands, Your Future
    OUR PUBLIC LANDS NOT FOR SALE YOUR LANDS, YOUR FUTURE YOUR PUBLIC LANDS YOUR FUTURE As a citizen of the United States, you are part owner of the largest piece of public real estate in the world: California’s Sierra Nevada; redrock canyons and arid basins of Utah and Nevada; the Cascades of Oregon and Washington; the Rockies of Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho and Montana; the tundra and rainforests of Alaska; vast stretches of the Appalachians and the North Woods of the Midwest and New England. They belong to you. White River National Forest, Colorado. Jodi Stemler When you and your family grow weary This is particularly true out West: Yet today, forces are at work to dismantle of your job or urban living, you are free More than two-thirds of this legacy. In doing so, they would to pack up your gear and wander in a also undermine the very foundation of way that is utterly unique in the modern hunters in the 11 western America’s outdoor heritage. world. states depend on public We cannot let that happen. Relying on public lands and waters, you lands for all or part of their may catch big bass in Florida, hunt elk in Idaho, call for wild turkeys in Tennessee hunting. This includes both Without public land we would or chase ruffed grouse in Maine. Not resident and non-resident be out of business, in fact, everyone in the United States can afford we would have never gotten to own a private ranch or a membership hunters. into business because there in an exclusive hunt club.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Lands Foundation
    Public Lands Foundation Position Statement: 2010­12 Land Exchanges of Public Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management August 8, 2010 Executive Summary The disposal of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) administered public lands by the land exchange process, where the federal lands are traded for private or State lands of equal value, has provided many benefits for Federal public land management— improved public access, management efficiencies, protection of environmental values— and to States and private landowners as well. However, controversy and criticism over land exchanges and land exchange appraisals have plagued the BLM for decades, primarily related to exchanges involving high­value public lands around fast growing urban areas in the western states. The problem has become more acute in recent years as increased demand has ballooned the value of public lands suitable for urban development. The issue is the BLM and the public are frequently shortchanged by the way the land exchange authority is being used for the disposal of high value public lands in urban areas. The land exchange process is flawed, and the problem will not be solved by trying to make better land appraisals. Most of the BLM land exchange problems would be mitigated or eliminated if: ­ disposals of BLM administered lands by exchange are confined to trades of lands of similar character and land use potential, and where it is clearly in the public's interest to acquire the non­federal land, and ­ high value, developable BLM lands are sold at public auction under an authority such as the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of July 25, 2000, with the money from the sale being used to purchase non­federal lands needed for BLM programs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Multiple Values of Wilderness
    TheThe MultipleMultiple ValuesValues ofof WildernessWilderness Ken Cordell, Mike Bowker, John Bergstrom and Gary Green, Forest Service Research and the University of Georgia www.srs.fs.fed.uswww.srs.fs.fed.us//trendstrends SRS Forest Service Research and Development We study public attitudes and use of the out of doors www.srs.fs.fed.us/t/trreendndss Forestry Sciences Laboratory Our Mission Provide up-to-date information on trends in public demands, values, perceptions, and benefits of natural lands and describe how demographic shifts will affect those demands. Primary Methods of Research • Surveys of the public and on-site visitors, especially studies of recreation that occurs on public lands • Broad-scale (region-wide and countrywide) assessments of societal and natural resources change • Studying the economic and resource impacts of nature-based recreation and tourism. ThisThis PresentationPresentation isis aboutabout WildernessWilderness ************** 1. Some principles important for Wilderness stewardship 2.2. TheThe emergenceemergence ofof publicpublic landslands andand thethe changingchanging worldworld aroundaround themthem 3. A big picture description of the NWPS 4. Public land and Wilderness values 5. Social Values and Group Differences 6. Economic Values 7. Ecological and Intrinsic Values SOMESOME PRINCIPLESPRINCIPLES IMPORTANTIMPORTANT toto WILDERNESSWILDERNESS MANAGEMENTMANAGEMENT • The National Wilderness System is first and foremost a national resource for the benefit of all, human society and ecosystems alike • Social,
    [Show full text]
  • Public Land Withdrawal Policy and the Antiquities Act
    Washington Law Review Volume 56 Number 3 7-1-1981 Public Land Withdrawal Policy and the Antiquities Act Richard M. Johannsen Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr Part of the Land Use Law Commons Recommended Citation Richard M. Johannsen, Comment, Public Land Withdrawal Policy and the Antiquities Act, 56 Wash. L. Rev. 439 (1981). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol56/iss3/7 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at UW Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington Law Review by an authorized editor of UW Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PUBLIC LAND WITHDRAWAL POLICY AND THE ANTIQUITIES ACT I. INTRODUCTION On December 1, 1978, President Carter withdrew fifty-six million acres of federal land in Alaska from the public domain.1 Under the au- thority of section 2 of the Antiquities Act of 1906,2 President Carter or- dered this massive land withdrawal by presidential proclamations which created fifteen Alaska national monuments. 3 The unprecedented scope of this executive land withdrawal4 invites an evaluation of the policy behind public land withdrawals5 and the vitality of the Antiquities Act as part of that policy. Public land withdrawal policy is of vital importance not only to Alaska, but also to the other western states containing large areas of federally owned land. 6 The pressures of an expanding population, an increasing 1. See Pres. Proc. Nos. 4611-4627, 3 C.F.R. 69-104 (1979), reprintedin 92 Stat.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Land Designations: a Brief Guide
    Federal Land Designations: A Brief Guide Laura B. Comay, Coordinator Specialist in Natural Resources Policy R. Eliot Crafton Analyst in Natural Resources Policy Carol Hardy Vincent Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Katie Hoover Acting Section Research Manager Updated October 11, 2018 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R45340 SUMMARY R45340 Federal Land Designations: A Brief Guide October 11, 2018 This report provides a brief guide to selected titles—such as national park, national wildlife refuge, national monument, national conservation area, national recreation area, Laura B. Comay, and others—that Congress and the executive branch have used to designate certain U.S. Coordinator lands. These designations primarily apply to federal lands administered by land Specialist in Natural management agencies, including the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and Resources Policy [email protected] Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Forest Service (FS) in the Department of Agriculture. The report R. Eliot Crafton also discusses certain designations that Congress and executive branch entities have Analyst in Natural bestowed on nonfederally managed lands to recognize their national significance. It Resources Policy [email protected] addresses questions about what the different land titles signify, which entity confers each designation, who manages the land under each designation, which statutes govern Carol Hardy Vincent management decisions, and what types of uses may be allowed or prohibited on the Specialist in Natural land. Depending on the authorities governing each land designation, congressional and Resources Policy [email protected] executive designations may bring few management changes to a site or may involve significant management changes.
    [Show full text]
  • THE DEPARTMENT of EVERYTHING ELSE Highlights Of
    THE DEPARTMENT OF EVERYTHING ELSE Highlights of Interior History 1989 THE DEPARTMENT OF EVERYTHING ELSE Highlights of Interior History by Robert M. Utley and Barry Mackintosh 1989 COVER PHOTO: Lewis and Clark Expedition: Bas-relief by Heinz Warneke in the Interior Auditorium, 1939. Contents FOREWORD v ORIGINS 1 GETTING ORGANIZED 3 WESTERN EMPHASIS 7 NATIONWIDE CONCERNS 11 EARLY PROBLEMS AND PERSONALITIES 14 THE CONSERVATION MOVEMENT 18 PARKS AND THE PARK SERVICE 22 INTERIOR'S LAND LABORATORY: THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 25 MINING, GRAZING, AND MANAGING THE PUBLIC DOMAIN 27 FISH AND WILDLIFE 30 INDIANS AND THE BIA 32 TERRITORIAL AFFAIRS 34 TWENTIETH CENTURY HEADLINERS AND HIGHLIGHTS 36 AN IMPERFECT ANTHOLOGY 48 NOTES 50 APPENDIX 53 Hi Foreword ven though I arrived at the Department of the Interior with a back­ E ground of 20 years on the Interior Committee in the House of Repres­ entatives, I quickly discovered that this Department has more nooks and crannies than any Victorian mansion or colonial maze. Fortunately, my predecessor, Secretary Don Hodel, had come to realize that many new employees-I'm not sure he had Secretaries in mind-could profit from a good orientation to the Department and its many responsibilities. Secretary Hodel had commissioned the completion of a Department history, begun some 15 years earlier, so that newcomers and others interested in the Department could better understand what it is and how it got that way. This slim volume is the result. In it you will find the keys to understanding a most complex subject--an old line Federal Department. v This concise explanation of Interior's growth was begun by then Na­ tional Park Service historian Robert M.
    [Show full text]
  • The Antiquities Act: History, Current Litigation, and Considerations for the 116Th Congress
    The Antiquities Act: History, Current Litigation, and Considerations for the 116th Congress May 15, 2019 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45718 SUMMARY R45718 The Antiquities Act: History, Current Litigation, May 15, 2019 and Considerations for the 116th Congress Benjamin Hayes Legislative Attorney Summary The Antiquities Act authorizes the President to declare, by public proclamation, historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest situated on federal lands as national monuments. The act also authorizes the President to reserve parcels of land surrounding the objects of historic or scientific interest, but requires that the amount of land reserved be confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected. Since its enactment in 1906, Presidents have used the Antiquities Act to establish 158 monuments, reserving millions of acres of land in the process. Presidents have also modified existing monuments, whether by increasing or decreasing their size (or both), on more than 90 occasions. Though most monument proclamations have been uncontroversial, some have spurred corrective legislative action and litigation. Congress has twice imposed geographic limitations on the President’s authority under the Antiquities Act in response to proclamations reserving millions of acres of land in Wyoming and Alaska. Litigants have also challenged the President’s authority to establish certain monuments, disputing whether the historic or scientific objects selected for preservation were encompassed by the act, as well as whether the amount of land reserved exceeded the smallest area necessary for the objects’ preservation. Courts, however, have uniformly rejected these challenges and adopted a broad interpretation of the President’s authority under the Antiquities Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Has Sold 4.1 Million Acres of State Land for Development Download
    FOR SALE: Utah lands on the chopping block © Mason Cummings Former public access point to a parcel within Bears Ears National Monument that has been sold off to private interests. New research shows Utah has sold 4.1 million acres of state land for development 54% More than 54% of the original 7.5 million It’s no secret that Utah’s elected officials Since becoming a state in acres of trust lands granted to Utah at have led a sustained attack against 1896, Utah has sold more statehood have been sold, a telling sign national public lands, passing the Transfer than 54% (4.1 million acres) of what the state would do if it took over of Public Lands Act in 2012 that demands of the original 7.5 million public land. Now the state is demanding the takeover of 31.2 million acres of acres granted. 31 million more acres of Our Wild —public federally managed public lands within forests, refuges and national treasures. the state. Governor Gary Herbert signed the act into law and state representatives Utah is the essence of iconic Western led by U.S. House Natural Resources SOLD beauty. From the glory of Zion National Committee Chairman Rob Bishop have Selling land is a part of Park and the sweeping Canyonlands championed legislation intended to Utah’s management strategy carved over eons by the mighty Green and further the public land takeover effort for state lands, and in 2015 Colorado rivers, to incomprehensible stone in Utah and beyond—land that rightly accounted for 1/3 of state arches, verdant valleys and soaring peaks belongs to all Americans.
    [Show full text]