U.S. Forest Land For Sale

[L Roebuck]

Large Sale of Forest Planned
By Janet Wilson, Times Staff Writer

"The White House wants to help pay for rural roads and schools by auctioning 300,000 acres of what it considers non-vital parcels."

Los Angeles Times: tinyurl.com/ajofj

The list of National Forest Lands that could be sold: www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/spd.html

[Rock]

Forestland on Sale List Not All Bare
By Bettina Boxall and Janet Wilson, Times Staff Writers

" REDDING — Mountain property with dramatic views, the headwaters of salmon streams, tall timber and rugged backcountry, even a cave or two — all could be sold as part of a Bush administration proposal to auction roughly 300,000 acres of national forestland to fund rural schools and roads."

ktla.trb.com/news/la-me-forests28feb28,0,4567720.story?coll=ktla-news-1

[madratdan]

For some reason your link didn't take, so I copied and pasted it to my browser. I have doubts this land sale will ever materialize. At least I hope it never does. I've written my congressman about apposing it.

[L Roebuck]

This tiny link should work.

tinyurl.com/ksee4

[Sharon Faulkner]

Lynn, the tiny link works. I hope congress will not approve this. According to the article in the link, people are already calling regarding possible land sales, which includes a cave on one parcel of land.

<snip>
Peg Boland, supervisor of the Klamath National Forest near the Oregon border, said her office had already received calls from Southern Californians interested in buying some of the nearly 31,000 acres listed for possible sale in the Klamath.

That acreage includes timberland, ponderosa pine forest and grasslands that provide winter range for deer and elk, as well as 80-year-old conifer stands that give cover to the threatened northern spotted owl and rare goshawk, Klamath officials said. Pluto's Cave, popular with weekend spelunkers, is part of a sale tract with spectacular views of Mt. Shasta.
<snip>

[L Roebuck]

11 sales have already taken place. This link www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/disposal.html says

" In 2002, Congress provided the authority to sell a limited number of administrative sites. This authority was expanded in subsequent years (2003-2005) (P.L. 108-447, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, DIVISION E, Title III GENERAL PROVISIONS. Section. 322). To date, eleven sales have been completed. Additional properties will be offered for sale in 2005 and 2006 as public noticing and environmental analysis is completed by the local National Forest unit. "

Here's the link to Frequently Asked Questions: www.fs.fed.us/news/2006/releases/02/secure-rural-schools.shtml

Question: How Can I comment on this proposal?
Response: A Federal Register notice requesting comments on the lands identified as potentially eligible for sale will be published by the end of February. Once published, a 30-day comment period will provide an opportunity for anyone who wishes to provide input on the proposed authorization to sell certain land parcels or to comment on specific lands identified as eligible for conveyance. Comments will be accepted either by mail, fax, or e-mail. Detailed information about how to submit remarks will be included in the Federal Register notice (which will be available to be accessed through this website). www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/rural/Fed%20Reg%2006-1862.pdf All comments will be read and fully considered as the process goes forward.

Question: If this proposal were to be enacted how would the land sales occur?
Response: Since the Forest Service has very limited authority to sell parcels of National Forest System land (Small Tracts Act, Townsite Act, Forest Service Facility Realignment and Enhancement Act), Congress would have to pass, and the President would have to sign, legislation to enact an authority for general land conveyances of this nature. For general information on current land sales policies and procedures click here.

Question: Where can I find a map of the land parcels?
Answer: Maps showing the locations of the land parcels will be available on the website listing the potentially eligible land parcels during the 30 day comment period after the proposal is published in the Federal Register.

Question: What criteria were used to select lands that are potentially eligible for this proposal?
Answer: These parcels meet criteria identified in existing Forest Land Management plans as potentially suitable for conveyance. Many of these lands are isolated from other contiguous National Forest System lands, and because of their location, size or configuration are not efficient to manage as a component of the National Forest system. Isolated tracts can be expensive to manage because of boundary management and encroachment resolution costs.

I wonder if any TAG caves are included in this Forest Land For Sale?

Tennessee: www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/spd.html#TENNESSEE
Alabama: www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/spd.html#ALABAMA
Georgia: www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/spd.html#GEORGIA

[Azurerana]

Thanks Lynn.

Here is a copy of the letter I sent to the FS and my Senators. It might serve as a takeoff point from other people wanting to comment on the issue.

" Dear Forest Service official:
I write to say that the proposed list of parcels for sale in Missouri hits Missouri in a disproportionate fashion. I am AGAINST the proposed sale.

The 21,566 acres proposed for sale in Missouri is 1.4% of all Forest Service acres in the state. This compares to 0.3% of NF lands in California, and 0.1% of NF lands in Colorado, the only two states which exceed Missouri in total acreage. Why should Missouri and Missourians bear the brunt of this proposed action? All states should share the burden equitably, if indeed this action is at all necessary.

Missouri's forest lands have always been a piecemeal affair, largely since they are second growth forest acquired after land was abandoned as useless in the 1930s, and which the USFS and CCC put in much funds and efforts to restore. This was because much of the Ozarks had been massively ravaged by tie hackers, barrel manufacturers, and charcoal makers in the late 19th and early 20th century. The intent at the time was to 'fill in' the gaps as suitable inholdings became available. Now, the Forest Service intends to sell off outliers, instead of buy lands--a 180 degree reversal of the policy under which the Clark and Mark Twain Forests were first established.

This policy is shortsighted. Once the land is gone, it is gone, and other funding sources will be needed for the rural school/road funds. What do you sell then? Even by your own document 06-1862, you admit the lands proposed for sale have not been properly inventoried--just designated as surplus based on geographic location and assessment as 'inconvenient' to manage. That is not good stewardship. Even if the parcels are sold, if you don't know what they contain, how can one set a proper valuation? That makes no economic sense.

Copies of this letter are being sent to my Missouri Senators. They are shrewd enough to see a bad deal when it is shown to them. I am petitioning them to restore funds to the USFS budget in order to cover the shortfall which would necessitate the sales. "

[L Roebuck]

azurerana said:

Thanks Lynn.
Here is a copy of the letter I sent to the FS and my Senators. It might serve as a takeoff point from other people wanting to comment on the issue.

Thanks Azurerana!

Also for cavers with a slower connection speed who want to make comments or contact, here's the information.

Electronic submission is preferred. If you submit your comments by email or fax, you do not need to send a paper copy by mail.

Email: [e-mail]
Fax: [phone]
Mail:
USDA Forest Service, SRS Comments, Lands 4S
1400 Indepemdence Ave., SW
Mailstop 1124
Washington D.C. 20250-0003

For further Information contact:
Cynthia R. Swanson
Assistant Director of Lands
Washington Office
202.205.0099

[Sharon Faulkner]

Eleven sales, apparently I am way behind on this issue.

After reading the link to the Alabama lands that are listed, I sent an email to Scott Shaw, who is very knowledgeable regarding the Bankhead area, asking if he knew if any of the lands listed contained caves. Here is an excerpt from his reply:

Yeah I hopped on this the moment I saw it a few weeks ago. The only track of land in the Bankhead that's in "cave country" is track B-85. It's on the Newburg quad and consist of three ~40 acre squares cut-off from the rest of the forest. There are no caves recorded in those areas.

So currently, the Bankhead area caves are not in jeopardy of being sold.

[L Roebuck]

Here another url concerning the sale of Forest Land.

US Forest Service Land Sales – Moving in the Wrong Direction
www.safc.org/campaigns/USFS_Land_Sales.php

[Azurerana]

www.geocommunicator.gov/NILS-PARCEL2/map.jsp?Map=USFS
Online GIS-IMS interactive map of parcels (best with broadband access)

seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420AP_WST_Bush_Land_Sale.html
article on the disproportionate distribution of funds vs sales.

[madratdan]

Thanks for the map links, Azurerana. I've been looking for one with Colorado info.

[Taylor]

Seems as if Missouri officials are preparing to dig their heels in and say no to the sell of some of their forest land.


GOP leaders in state blast plan to sell forest tracts
By Ken Leiser
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
03/18/2006

Top Missouri Republicans took aim Friday at a Bush administration proposal to sell tracts of the Mark Twain National Forest to help fund struggling rural school districts

Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt wrote a letter to a U.S. Department of Agriculture official complaining that the U.S. Forest Service is suggesting the sale of land that appears to be "accessible, utilized and valuable." The federal government said it chose tracts in the Mark Twain forest that were isolated or hard to maintain.

"Another concern is that the financial proceeds from the proposed sale would primarily benefit school districts in other states while Missouri schools would receive a much smaller amount of the potential revenue," Blunt wrote to Mark Rey, undersecretary for natural resources and environment at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The Bush administration proposal seeks to raise about $800 million nationally for rural county schools that are struggling as the result of sagging timber receipts on federal lands. Three Republican members of Missouri's congressional delegation said Friday that the Forest Service has failed to show how it will benefit the state.

Missouri would sell up to 21,566 acres of the Mark Twain Forest and collect $2.64 million for its rural schools, according to a letter signed by Republican Sens. Christopher "Kit" Bond and Jim Talent, and U.S. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, R-Cape Girardeau.

Oregon, by contrast, would receive more than $260 million in proceeds with half the forest acreage slated for possible sale, the letter states. "This formula is grossly inequitable ...," the lawmakers wrote.

The proposal requires congressional approval, and the Forest Service is accepting comments until March 30. Missouri Auditor Claire McCaskill, a Democrat seeking to unseat Talent, opposes the land sale.

www.stltoday.com/

[Azurerana]

These people are opposing it purely on the inequability of the economics. None of them are exactly what one would call eco-friendly. However, under the circumstances, we'll take any allies for whatever reason we can find.

[L Roebuck]

Lawmakers dump land sale measures
By NOELLE STRAUB
Star-Tribune Washington bureau Friday, June 30, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Lawmakers declared two Bush administration proposals to sell off hundreds of thousands of acres of federal land all but dead Thursday after a Senate committee passed a key spending bill that excluded the provisions, as the U.S. House had done earlier.

President Bush's proposed 2007 budget would have sold Forest Service lands to fund a rural schools and counties program and Bureau of Land Management acres to fund government operations and reduce the debt.

But the Senate Appropriations Committee approved a bill funding the Interior Department and the Forest Service for next year that does not contain the land sale measures.

A spokesman for Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., who chairs the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, said he did not expect any attempts to revive the measures.

"Chairman Burns has said the land sale proposal is dead in the water and it is not in the Interior appropriations bill which was reported out of committee today," said spokesman Matt Mackowiak. "We have no indication these two proposals will show up down the road."

In May, the House passed its version of the spending bill, also without the land sale proposals.


Full Article: Star Tribune.net

[madratdan]

Wow............This is great news. If that bastard son wants to decrease our national dept, then why doesn't he bring our troups home where they belong.