Discussion on public lands

[mister_coffee]

What would 500 or 1000 acres carved off the Bridger-Teton Nat’l Forest right on the doorstep of Jackson Hole be worth? Or, for a similar sized parcel of BLM or National Forest right outside of Vail, Aspen, Park City, Moab, etc etc.? Or even on the outskirts of Issaquah, North Bend or Monroe here in WA?

We kind of went through that same thing in the 1980s and 1990s with public land swaps. I think the law was called the Federal Land Exchange Facilitation Act. There were problems with that too.

I'd say that if the land was sold at fair market value, the land sale process was 100 percent transparent, and there was a thorough and diligent environmental and public interest review it might be appropriate in some of those cases to sell public lands on a very modest scale. By "very modest" I'd have caps on parcel size and how many acres can be sold in a given area over a ten-year period. And any authorization to sell such lands should have a hard expiration date. None of that is likely to happen though so my viewpoint is irrelevant.

[just-jim]

.
Good points, David….I think you are mostly right.

But, I think the angle of ‘Public land Sales’ is not so much about selling say, Grand Teton NP as whole. Rather, I think it is about being able to offer up small parcels to your greedy real estate developer buddies/funders in very valuable areas.

What would 500 or 1000 acres carved off the Bridger-Teton Nat’l Forest right on the doorstep of Jackson Hole be worth? Or, for a similar sized parcel of BLM or National Forest right outside of Vail, Aspen, Park City, Moab, etc etc.? Or even on the outskirts of Issaquah, North Bend or Monroe here in WA?

Last year I read about a ‘pilot’ program between the FS and Breckenridge city/county/ski area in Colo. Not sure which agency was the lead - I think it was the County? It was for long term establishment of low and middle income housing on a parcel of the National Forest close to town and ski area. I dont recall exactly how it’s was being ‘authorized’….by a Special Use permit, Partnership/Co-operative agreement or ? May have even been authorized by a specific Congressional Act. I’ll see if I can dig more information.

Update: Found this; https://www.summitdaily.com/news/summit ... e-housing/
.

[PAL]

Another distraction in the playbook. Keep the citizenery guessing.

[mister_coffee]

I have to question whether there is any economic or business logic at all to selling federal lands.

The first thought I have is that we know what the rate of return on undeveloped resource-bearing land is. Usually on the order of two or three percent. Which is a horrible rate of return compared to shares.

The second issue is that any investment of this type involves what is called a negative carry. You will pay taxes and other costs on this land, probably for many years, before you can get any return from it.

Another issue is that if the legality of the land sale is questionable, you might not be able to keep the land and would have no guarantee of being made whole if it was determined at some later date that the land sale was against the law.

Still another issue is related to supply and demand. Most real estate markets in areas dominated by lots of federal land holdings are very thinly traded. What would the sale of huge blocks of public land do to local real estate valuations? Which drive both property taxes and are a major asset (if not the major asset) for most landholders. Also if you sell lots of federal land all at once you are unlikely to get great prices for it. And because of the reasons listed above I doubt there is going to be huge demand for all of that land.

What would the real estate play be? You can't just subdivide it into half-acre lots of sell it to people who want to build a home. You'll need to put in roads, power, water, and other utilities. That will cost money. Somehow I doubt there is the demand for an additional million homes in Wyoming.

What would the real estate play be, (part two)? With Grand Teton, I can't see how you'd make the money back or make any imaginable return on what it likely would cost to purchase. You'd be talking that you'd need revenue in the billions of dollars per year range assuming you didn't need to do any additional development.

The only way this makes any sense is if it ends up being a scammy crony capitalism deal where the land is sold for fractions of a penny on the dollar to buddies of the powerful with carve outs exempting them from local taxes or possibly even local land use regulations. Which makes the risk that they'd actually get to keep the land that much higher.

[just-jim]

.
Wes Siler mentioned PILT, very briefly, in the interview when he was talking about Utah, but he didn’t really explain how it worked.
.

[mister_coffee]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the PILT program where the Federal Government pays local governments to offset the tax revenue lost from untaxable lands in their area.

Okanogan County received $3.3 million from this program in 2024, which was something over ten percent of the county budget.

PILT seems like a program DOGE will eventually go after.

https://washingtonstatestandard.com/bri ... eral-land/

[just-jim]

.
Excellent interview! I watched it, yesterday, when HCR posted it on her daily column. The first 6 or 7 minutes is a GOOD recap of the history of Federal land management.

Besides working for 4 decades in land management, I did a History degree….focusing on the periods that included the western US conservation movement.

The history of public lands - and their management - is a fascinating narrative. The attempts of oligarchs, greed-head developers, railroads, energy interests, grazing interests….along with State efforts trying to mount some phony ‘State’s rights’ campaign, etc….is pretty foreseeable and - unfortunately - repeats every generation or so.

Politicians always seem to under-estimate the profound interest Americans have in their public lands.

In the post civil-war era, it was a concern for what railroads wanted, in particular, that lead to the establishment of Yellowstone and Yosemite Parks.

A generation later it was the activities of the ‘robber-barons’ and oil and timber interests that lead to creation of the Forest Service and the passage of the 1906 Antiquities Act that led to Presidential creation of many Forests and Monuments.

In the 1930’s it was the actions of grazing interests who were trying to get - what are now BLM lands - transferred to the States that led to the 1934 Taylor Grazing Act which created an agency to manage those lands.

And in the 70’s we saw further strengthening of BLM authority with the Federal Land Policy and Management Policy. Along with - of course - all the other Environmental laws and regulation from that era; NEPA, Wilderness Act, Clean Air/Water, Endangered species act, etc.

When politicians abuse and threaten our commonly held public resources - the American public will sit up and take notice…and ACT.
.

[Rideback]

https://wessiler.substack.com/p/watch-h ... ardson-and