Donald Trump: Don't hand federal lands to states

[ABX]

Real estate mogul Donald Trump would not let states take control of federal lands, the Republican presidential candidate said in a recent interview.

"I don't like the idea because I want to keep the lands great, and you don't know what the state is going to do," Trump said during a talk with Field & Stream magazine earlier this week.

The trade publication, sitting down with Trump at Las Vegas' Shooting, Hunting, and Outdoor Trade Show, had asked about the issue of turning over federally controlled lands to individual states -- an idea previously floated by rival 2016 contender and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and supported by staunch states-rights activists.

The proposal has also received more attention in light of recent actions by radical conservatives like Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his son Ammon Bundy, who led an armed group earlier this month in occupying a national wildlife refuge in Oregon to protest federal land use policies.

Trump cautioned, however, that states would be unpredictable in maintaining the designated lands.

"I mean, are they going to sell if they get into a little bit of trouble?" Trump asked. "I don't think it's something that should be sold."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-dont-hand-federal-lands-to-states/

[HAPPY2BME]

Who Really Owns Our National Parks?>

Americans may think we have complete sovereignty over National Parks, Monuments, and other places of historical or geographical value within our own borders.  The truth is shocking.  In 1972 the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) drew up a treaty called The Convention Concerning Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage.  UNESCO's official website says, "World Heritage sites belong to all the peoples of the world, irrespective of the territory on which they are located."  Under Carter, Reagan, the first Bush, and Clinton, the following U.S. National and State Parks were put on the World Heritage list:

Mesa Verde; Yellowstone; Everglades; Grand Canyon; Redwood;
Mammoth Cave; Olympic; Great Smoky Mountains; Yosemite; Hawaii Volcanoes;
Carlsbad Caverns; and Kluane/Wrangell-St.Elias/Glacier Bay/
Tatshenshini-Alsek.  Also listed were these historic sites: Independence
Hall; Statue of Liberty; Native American culture sites; Monticello and University of Virginia; Waterton Glacier International Peace Park.

[libertybele]

Trump is nothing more than a hollow drum anymore ... so obvious it's disgusting.

[ABX]

National Parks are only a small portion of federal land. People would be shocked the amount of land the federal government owns, especially as a percentage of Western states.



As a percentage of State lands.



What is more concerning to many people, especially in California, is they may not even own the land their house is built on. In a large portion of the Southwest, but especially in California including much of Los Angeles, the land is only 'loaned' via old land grants to the federal government from Spain. IE, the federal government actually owns the land your house is built on and buried deep in your deed history are statements to the fact the land was given to the US Government from Spain and said US government simply 'allows' development on those lands. That could be concerning for someone in charge without a proper respect for individual rights.

[HAPPY2BME]

National Parks are only a small portion of federal land. People would be shocked the amount of land the federal government owns, especially as a percentage of Western states.

==============================

All of that land, plus all of your land, plus your wife, kids, car, and bank accounts fall under Executive Order #11000.

Otherwise, in a world emergency, and at the order of the United Nations, a very large part of that land becomes resettlement camps for the entire world.

[truth_seeker]

What is more concerning to many people, especially in California, is they may not even own the land their house is built on. In a large portion of the Southwest, but especially in California including much of Los Angeles, the land is only 'loaned' via old land grants to the federal government from Spain. IE, the federal government actually owns the land your house is built on and buried deep in your deed history are statements to the fact the land was given to the US Government from Spain and said US government simply 'allows' development on those lands. That could be concerning for someone in charge without a proper respect for individual rights.

That is absolutely false. As a California Real Estate Broker for over 25 years in SoCal, I guarantee that to be false.

The percentages of federal land by state are fine, and I understand it.

I plan to go get my gun and squat on some beach owned by the FedGov and dare them to come move me off it. I hope I don't get hurt. BTW take care of my kids if I do. I wrote a book about a showdown with the gov. over squatting on public land.

I know the other leaders told us to leave, but I'm staying. Probably up at Big Sur, where I plan to earn me some living, somehow. Never mind I ain't never owned a bit of it, because I think I am entitled to use it period.

[ABX]

That is absolutely false. As a California Real Estate Broker for over 25 years in SoCal, I guarantee that to be false.

The percentages of federal land by state are fine, and I understand it.

I plan to go get my gun and squat on some beach owned by the FedGov and dare them to come move me off it. I hope I don't get hurt. BTW take care of my kids if I do. I wrote a book about a showdown with the gov. over squatting on public land.

I know the other leaders told us to leave, but I'm staying. Probably up at Big Sur, where I plan to earn me some living, somehow. Never mind I ain't never owned a bit of it, because I think I am entitled to use it period.

Interesting. There is a lot of bad info out there then. I know this is one of the arguments the Bundys and their supporters made in the Nevada fiasco.

[truth_seeker]

Bundy's in Nevada quit paying fees for grazing on federal land. Lost in court then almost got people hurt back then.

This Arizona fellow wrote a book about taking such a stand, and went to Oregon to get involved.

It will be interesting to follow.

[Scottftlc]

National Parks are only a small portion of federal land. People would be shocked the amount of land the federal government owns, especially as a percentage of Western states.

What is more concerning to many people, especially in California, is they may not even own the land their house is built on. In a large portion of the Southwest, but especially in California including much of Los Angeles, the land is only 'loaned' via old land grants to the federal government from Spain. IE, the federal government actually owns the land your house is built on and buried deep in your deed history are statements to the fact the land was given to the US Government from Spain and said US government simply 'allows' development on those lands. That could be concerning for someone in charge without a proper respect for individual rights.

I don't know about other states, but that's not true in Nevada. As you can see, there is a tremendous amount of the state in federal hands. Most of that is wilderness and grazing lands.  During periods of growth, the Feds auction off land around cities to developers - mostly here in Vegas where pretty much all the growth occurred.  The developers buy the land outright based on approved plans, build large developments and then sell them off. This hasn't happened much since 2008 due to the market collapse. Many unfinished developments were bulldozed back to desert to wait a more opportune market.  I live on a piece of land bordering a restricted federal archaeological site, and I own mine outright as do all my neighbors, though 15 years ago it was federal land.  Also in those maps and percentages, Tribal land is counted as federally owned.  There is a lot of tribal land in the west, not 1/2 mile from me as the crow flies are three Pete Dye golf courses on Paiute land.

[Scottftlc]

Bundy's in Nevada quit paying fees for grazing on federal land. Lost in court then almost got people hurt back then.

This Arizona fellow wrote a book about taking such a stand, and went to Oregon to get involved.

It will be interesting to follow.

Yes, that was over federally leased grazing land - there's a tremendous amount of that in Nevada. The Bundy's essentially tried to squat on it by using the land for their cattle and not paying the grazing fees for years.  Then they claimed it was theirs because they'd been grazing on it for generations.

[truth_seeker]

What is more concerning to many people, especially in California, is they may not even own the land their house is built on. In a large portion of the Southwest, but especially in California including much of Los Angeles, the land is only 'loaned' via old land grants to the federal government from Spain. IE, the federal government actually owns the land your house is built on and buried deep in your deed history are statements to the fact the land was given to the US Government from Spain and said US government simply 'allows' development on those lands. That could be concerning for someone in charge without a proper respect for individual rights.

I need to debunk this more completely. Passing along total BS is very misleading.

The land in Spanish Land Grant Ranchos were given to individual families, first by Spain and later by Mexico.  At that point it became privately owned, and has been continuously.

It has never been federal or state owned property.

Here is an extensive list of land granted properties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranchos_of_California

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranchos_of_California#American_era

One of the largest and oldest in Los Nietos, which was later subdivided into six separate ranchos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancho_Los_Nietos