I know there's currently a lawsuit pending with western states trying to gain control of public land. Is there still a drive among the Republicans to privatize public lands? With control of Washington is there a chance we see something dramatic happen with public lands?

II say no. Public lands are a huge thing for all Americans red or blue states. I can see drilling, timber cutting and more natural resources taken from these lands but to put them up for action would be a terrible thing regardless of party you favor.

Yup

I agree it will all come under the oil drill timber harvest metal mining and god knows what else look for that mine operation to be a go again and the BWCA here to become threatened again witll open up the Federal to it also ANWR too will be on that list too.

The movement has started in Utah and unfortunately in Wyoming the Freedom Caucus took it up but hunters frankly said no to that and I think they have backed off some in Wyoming.
States would sell them off, except the ones that have laws saying no you can't.

a lot more people that vote conservative hunt these public lands

in WI you have a really good chance of most public land flooding every few years or sitting next to flooded every few years land.

keep harvesting timber from them they are a great natural resource

There are a multitude of activities that can take place on public land as many have stated. Multiple use was a major push for Aldo Leopold. Leopold was not an environmentalist, he was a conservationist and the difference is huge. The public both federal and local could benefit from the leasing rights that get sold and the companies can save major investments in having to purchase such land and the vast majority of acres would remain unchanged.

Bryce

Right on! There is a massive push by many to “sell all public lands and get em on the tax roll!” Look at Nevada who has already sold virtually all of their school trust lands. It’s a loaded topic. One “side”
Is great for not wanting to get rid of these lands but potentially limit uses, the other “side” would sell most off in a heartbeat given the chance

Randy Newberg has some great information over on his Hunt Talk forum along with podcasts regarding just this topic.

What would Savell do without his Gubment Woods!!

Happy trapping! ScottW

I would much rather pay a dollar a day fee or an annual 30 dollar parks type access pass to use the land if it is about money on tax roles

GCP some folks are of the thinking that that gov't shouldn't own any land and it all should be private or sold/given to the states to do whatever with.
I know quite a few ranchers and farmers that think that way. Hunters, not so many.

State and federal governments and even county governments have payments in lieu of taxes to help support the local municipalities. In 2024 the federal government paid out 621 million in PILT payments to 1,900 local municipalities. If a lot of forest land was sold to private owners and they opted for forest management tax breaks they would take in fewer funds. Where would the funds from public lands go or be used for. With a 1.8 trillion dollar deficit most of it would be gone in a year or two if we wanted to lower our deficit and lower the increase in our national debt.

Bryce

… what’s around me is called Type II … a man has to pay $48 a year to hunt and trap it .. it’s 160,000 acres walk in or horseback only

I hate myself for buying public land and putting it into meaningful production. I'm sure all our ancestors feel the same way.

The public lands all ready bring tax revenue to the states that contain those lands. All federal lands that produce revenue for the federal governments (PILT) Payment in Lieu of Taxes are distributed to the states. I graze public lands and pay fees, however be it coal mining, oil produced, minerals, timber all produce these fees and billions have been payed to the states. Public law 94-565 was passed during the Carter administration and just this year 623 million has been payed to the states. There is all ready legislation waiting, in the halls to privatize these lands and is supported by the GOP, and by large industry. They will be privatized in my opinion for a fast buck and the general public will lose out as far as access. I have all ready received word from the BLM that this could happen and to plan accordingly and that there may be a potential option to by the land, but my guess it will go to the highest bidder and it wont be me or most of the public it will be the large corporations and a one time fix for putting money in the govt. purse and I hope it is spent done wisely. This movement has gone on for years and a first called the sage brush rebellion's. I think the new administration coming into office will be able to facilitate in part the plan.

Danvee, how did you end up with your public land?

Well its not mine its public, I just lease the grazing privilege's, The first piece was obtained by my grandfather, then father then I bought out the ranch after my folks passed. The second ranch I bought, and when the base property is purchased, which is the deeded titled land the leases are usually passed on to the new owner. It is basically leased land through the Taylor grazing act.

Half of Alaska is owned by the feds, personally I would like to see a good chunk of that returned to the state of Alaska to manage.

, Victor 0,Its not owned by the feds but managed and the reason you dont pay state income tax in Alaska is because of the PILT monies the state gets from managed federal lands you also get what a $1300 per person subsidy check from the state which come from PILT funds. Public lands is a cash cow for the states and the resource industry and labor forces that work extracting timber, minerals, coal, oil and grazing and can still be used as a playground for the public, yeah there are restrictions but no knocking on doors begging for permission to hunt, fish, trap and camp, its worth saving.

Keep it government
No taxes
Free hunting and trapping

Having just come from a deer hunt on public land I have hunted for 46 years and used to trap for a living on I have to chime in. I'm a retired federal wildlife biologist with time spent with both the BLM and US Forest Service here in New Mexico. I was hired away from the Federal Wildlife Services program (Animal Damage Control then) by the BLM because as they put it, they needed a biologist who could work with the rural community to put habitat improvement projects on the ground. Before that I trapped for a living after having served in the military. I also helped my parents with farming in the Rio Grande valley. Point being, I am not anti-multiple use and I have a fair amount of agricultural background. My college degree was in wildlife with a minor in range science. Federal multiuse public lands are a rip-off for the American taxpayer. Mining law dates to 1872 with essentially no changes. Livestock producers pay $16.20 a YEAR for a cow and a calf up to 6 months to graze public lands managed by both the BLM and US Forest Service. Try feeding a cow on private land for that amount. I can show you ranch after ranch on public lands here in New Mexico where not only the pasture fences but the allotment boundary fences are non-functional. I just observed illegal bulk feeding activities on public lands that have seen less than 3" of rain all this year with no reduction in stocking. I watched cattle from observation points traveling over 3 miles in one direction trespassing into adjoining allotments to try to find feed. Most federal grazing permits and leases (there is a difference) are not held by family ranches. Many are used simply to shelter other income from taxes. Oil and gas are vital industries but you couldn't pay me to live in the Permian basin and the industry is devastating to huge swaths of land. The hunting community through organized conservation groups spends millions of dollars annually to mitigate damage caused by these industries on public lands. Public lands need to be inventoried for the highest value to the public areas and the rest traded or sold to consolidate ownership in those high public value areas. A priority should be given to consolidating public holdings in the East and Mid-West where public lands are scarce and the majority of the US population lives. The fact is that government land agencies both state and federal don't do their jobs under existing laws. I could go on but I won't. These are facts based on actual experience and observation of public lands. Both major political parties are jokes when it comes to public land issues. There are good people in all these industries but just like trappers they tolerate too many bad apples in the barrel.