The Senate Panel wants all the federal lands in Wyoming, with the exception of Yellowstone – Cap City News

From Angus M. Thuermer Jr.

Wyoming’s Senate Company wants the Congress to give the state all federal lands and mineral rights in the country for equality, with the exception of the Yellowstone National Park.

The Committee on Agriculture, State and Public Lands and Water Resources votes 4-1 for a resolution, which requires the Congress to confirm by October 1, his intention to transfer the property. The Senate Joint Resolution 2, a “resolution requiring the same basis”, covers about 30 million acres, “which derive from the former federal territory.”

This is about 47% of the state’s state area, sponsor Bob’s leading sponsor sponsor, R-Casper, told the committee. The property in question includes the Grand Teton National Park, the National Monument of Devils Tower, The Bridger-Teton, Shoshone, Targhee, Black Hills, Bighorn and Medicine Bow-Rout National Forests, plus the national grassland and the bureau of the land.

In addition to the demand for property belonging to all Americans, the resolution requires federal mineral rights in Wyoming, which amount to 69% of the rights in the country.

Referring to the Constitution, it came to say that “Congress has the power to dispose of” on earth. He interprets what that means.

“It’s a mandate to dispose of it,” he said. “They have no authority not to dispose of.

“You can’t do the opposite of something that is specifically aimed at the US Constitution,” he said.

He agreed with Scott Brown, who told the committee during public testimony that “by virtue of your oath [to uphold the Constitution] You are required to vote in favor of this resolution. ”

Sens. Tim French, R-Powell; Troy McKeown, R-Gillette and Laura Pearson, R-Kemmerer, supported the resolution. Senator Barry Crago, R-Buffalo, voted against it.

Mis -reading

The resolution claims two violations of the US Constitution, including this federal property, puts Wyoming on an uneven basis compared to other countries and that federal control over land in Wyoming violates the Law on Rights.

These arguments are part of the Sagebrush revival rebellion, which recently ended with the rejection of the US Supreme Court of the Utah Petition. Beehive was looking for 18.5 million acres of property at the land management bureau.

But Utah’s arguments are based on “unlawful assumptions” made by a lawyer who incorrectly reads and mistakenly interprets the Constitution, and Cherry chooses definitions, according to a widely quoted article by John D. Leshi, a professor in the UC law in San Francisco.

Alec Underwood, program director of Outdoor Council in Wyoming, agreed. The rejection of the Supreme Court “is based on over 100 years of lawsuits showing that this is impossible legal,” he said.

Comes saw the rejection of the Supreme Court differently. “They sent him back to the district court and told them to make their way up the ladder,” he told the court order in 12 words, which only reads: “The proposal for leave for filing a complaint was refused.”

If the Congress agreed to the demands of the resolution, Wyoming would be ready to negotiate a return of some property to the federal government, said. The resolution states that Wyoming would create a new designation – state public lands – this is different from the lands of the school Trust, where camping, fires and other activities are limited.

In addition to the constitutional issues, the Senate Committee hears concerns about the fate of mineral rights, the cost of land management, the prospect of selling the area of ​​Wyoming, the price of grazing, the potential loss of access, the response of wild fires, the loss of $ 30 from $ 30 dollars millions of annual federal payments instead of taxes and more.

100 years of lawsuits

IDE could not say whether mineral rights would belong to Wyoming or exceeding land owners if the panel receives its wishes. “How to find out where it goes without creating a 100 -year -old litigation,” Crago asked.

IDE, who said it was previously Mineral Title Land Man, agreed that the proposal “could become very messy in the mineral estate.

“I had a plot of 40 acres,” he said, “who had 200 different mineral owners on him and you are trying to track them all and you can spend a month of work … and you still don’t find half of the mineral owners. ”

Crago also warned that grazing costs could increase if the state comes to possessing federal lands. The representative of the Open Urwood Council said Pasha leasing on state land costs $ 5.52 per month for animals for $ 1.35 for federal property.

Crago said Wyoming is limited by his own constitution about how little he can charge for grazing and “we are probably at the bottom of that number right now.”

Noting that outdoor recreation represents $ 2.2 billion and 15,000 jobs a year in Wyoming, Underwood raised a comprehensive question.

“How Wyoming’s condition will take over the management of millions of additional decares,” he asked and “have a strong enough budget to do so, to take the main financial disadvantages of the loss [of] Federal funding flows and guarantee that permits Passion are somehow continuity … while guaranteeing that the public has access to public lands and wildlife habitat maintains? ”

Other conservation representatives said the resolution was essentially half -baked.

“I feel that you probably need to do a little more research on this before you vote to support it,” says Josh Metten of the partnership of the protection of Theodore Roosevelt. The representative of the Big Yellowstone Coalition, Richard Gareth, agreed and said the resolution fulfilled would lead to “the state’s impulse to sell these lands”.

Carp of the day

The meeting provided participants with participants the opportunity to carp for federal actions, to dispose of their proposal and to offer their prospects.

Senator France said Wyoming was to win “billions of billions of dollars … if these lands return to the country.” Wyoming has never owned the property in question.

He repeated Wyoming’s ordinary grip on federal managers who close two track roads to protect resources. “It’s happening everywhere,” he said.

Senator Pearson came with him. “Thinking that [on] Federal lands you have access really you don’t, “she said.

McKeown is aimed at the Federal Fire Department. “Do you have comments why BLM leaves a lot [land] Just burn? “He asked a conservationist.” There are many cases where the state was ready to quell fires and not only… The Federal Government came late for help, they would not allow [Wyoming firefighters] there to do it. ”

The French also gave way to acquire the land of Wyoming, which he could acquire. “I do not believe that the people in this country, the legislature, any, will sell the Shoshone National Forest at the highest auction participant,” he said.

This article was originally published by Wyofile and was reprinted here with permission. Wyofile is an independent non -profit organization focused on people, places and policy of Wyoming.