Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

<<There has always been "land deals" by the FS.  However, the objective in the past has been to use the small isolated parcels as "trade bait" to increase the size/contiguity of the National Forests, usually resulting in a net increase in overall protected acreage.  For example, trading a small valuable piece of prime isolated "flat" land suitable for building/development/farming for a larger tract of mountainous, less desirable land contiguous to NF lands.  Sometimes the land acquired is in a flood plain or riparian area, where acquisition protects the watershed.  This is reasonable, prudent and good management. 

 

However, this is NOT the current case.  Notice that this is an outright sale to provide funds to replace an expiring bill that provides money for schools.

 

"The parcels are part of a nationwide sales package intended to raise about $800 million, according to government officials looking to replace an expiring 2000 law that provided milllions to rural school programs in areas where declining timber harvests had lowered school tax bases. The law, the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act, expires Sept. 30."

 

Selling the land outright results in the FS having less land parcels for negotiating with landowners to acquire larger contiguous areas and increase green spaces. >>

 

 

Jim has hit the nail square on the head...this is the biggest problem with this proposal.  The FS has always had certain tracts of land identified that were potentially "available."  Not for selling, but for negotiating trades with willing landowners who may own a piece of land the FS wants.  For example, small isolated tracts, small fingers of Nat Forest land that extend out from the main body of land, etc. are difficult to manage.  At the same time, there are privately owned tracts, many of them as yet undeveloped, embedded within most Nat. Forests.  These trades focus on trading the "available" FS tracts for some of these "inholdings," as they are called.  Or, if a person wanted one of these "available" tracts but had nothing of interest to the FS to trade for it, he/she could purchase a tract that the FS wanted, and then trade it for a tract that the FS wanted to get rid of.  So, even though tracts were given up by the FS, something was received in return, and helped to consolidate Nat. Forest holdings into more contiguous blocks, acquire important riparian areas or endangered species habitat, etc.

 

By outright selling these tracts, the FS is giving away its bargaining chips, and greatly reducing its ability to acquire inholdings in the future.  In addition, I feel that this sets a *very* dangerous precedent for the government taking the easy way out of budget crises by dipping into our national heritage...this time they say they're doing it for schools.  What will the next excuse be?  Not trying to start a political argument here by *any* means...but had Bush not spent billions on invading two other countries, would the administration be in such dire financial straits??  It's all about choices...and IMO, this is a very POOR choice.

 

Dawn in East Texas

 

 

  
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Holland <lanconn@xxxxxxx>
To: 'Sky Ranch' <skyranch@xxxxxxxx>; 'Bob Morris' <bobmorris@xxxxxxxx>; 'Ridecamp' <ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 14:53:06 -0500
Subject: RE: [RC] selling off national forest lands

There has always been "land deals" by the FS.  However, the objective in the past has been to use the small isolated parcels as "trade bait" to increase the size/contiguity of the National Forests, usually resulting in a net increase in overall protected acreage.  For example, trading a small valuable piece of prime isolated "flat" land suitable for building/development/farming for a larger tract of mountainous, less desirable land contiguous to NF lands.  Sometimes the land acquired is in a flood plain or riparian area, where acquisition protects the watershed.  This is reasonable, prudent and good management. 

 

However, this is NOT the current case.  Notice that this is an outright sale to provide funds to replace an expiring bill that provides money for schools.

 

"The parcels are part of a nationwide sales package intended to raise about $800 million, according to government officials looking to replace an expiring 2000 law that provided milllions to rural school programs in areas where declining timber harvests had lowered school tax bases. The law, the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act, expires Sept. 30."

 

This action sells off PUBLIC assets to provide funds for this project, and IMHO, will be wasted somewhere else.  This is a one-time "fix" but I guess the Bush administration, instead of dealing with it up front, prefers the typical short-sighted solution of simply "passing the buck" to the next administration when all the funds from the land sale are gone, avoiding more "heat" right now on the failure of their school programs.

 

Selling the land outright results in the FS having less land parcels for negotiating with landowners to acquire larger contiguous areas and increase green spaces.  Wonder how that affects global warming? It's a "lose-lose" situation, and another poor decision. We're "spending the principle instead of the interest", and eventually there will be no more principle...or "principals" either if the abuse of the American people's rights and heritage continues in it's current direction.

 

JMHO.

 

Jim, Sun of Dimanche+, and Mahada Magic

 

Richard T. "Jim" Holland

Three Creeks Farm

175 Hells Hollow Drive

Blue Ridge, Ga 30513

(706) 258-2830

www.threecreeksarabians.com

Callsign KI4BEN

Rather than looking at the aggregate amount of acreage to be sold, look at the size of the parcels. Many of them are small isolated pieces of land that are very difficult and expensive to manage. Also look at the blocks of land the USFS is anticipating acquiring in addition to the sales. More to be acquired than to be eliminated.  Find all the facts not just one side of the equation. 

Bob Morris
Morris Endurance Enterprises
Boise, ID

This is on the front page of the Chattanooga, TN paper

South hard hit by White House proposal to sell off publicly owned national forest land
In a move that sets a dangerous precedent and reverses decades of policy, the Bush Administration has announced plans to sell off some 300,000 acres of national forest lands around the country - including 31,000 in our region.
>>COMPLETE STORY

http://www.southernenvironment.org/cases/usfs_lands/casepage.htm    so folks, it is getting closer to home all the time.  Some of these areas are places we ride. 

 

Linda Norton