An interested reader offered some clarification on my multiple-use piece that I think is valuable, so I'm posting their comments verbatim (with permission)!
"FLPMA mainly governs the DOI/BLM – not USDA/Forest Service. The multiple use mandate on National Forest System lands comes mainly from the Organic Act of 1897 and the Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Act of 1960.
Also: “Ms. Sgamma would oversee federal leasing programs for oil and gas, mining, grazing, and renewable energy.”
In the western states – including Alaska, metallic minerals (and a few others) are governed by the U.S. Mining Law which establishes a self-initiated claim system – not a leasing program. This is an important distinction because leasing is a discretionary decision (and can be revoked like at Twin Metals). A mining claim gives the owner a property right to the minerals. The Feds cannot categorically deny a Plan of Operations on mining claims. They can only regulate mining activities to ensure environmental protection."
Fortuntely multiple use is back, but it would be even better if we devolved authority to the states. Why does the federal government need to manage forests in Utah? At least we got rid of 'preserving' land into Natural Asset Companies, which would simultaneously have ruined the real economy and enriched the ultra-wealthy who would have been paid 'carbon credits' for delivering absolutely nothing in return: https://www.wildhorsewisdom.xyz/p/carbon-delicacies?r=31a4ti&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
NACs would have been devastating. I think there's a lot of room for states to gain back control of a lot of the land now controlled by the federal government.
An interested reader offered some clarification on my multiple-use piece that I think is valuable, so I'm posting their comments verbatim (with permission)!
"FLPMA mainly governs the DOI/BLM – not USDA/Forest Service. The multiple use mandate on National Forest System lands comes mainly from the Organic Act of 1897 and the Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Act of 1960.
Also: “Ms. Sgamma would oversee federal leasing programs for oil and gas, mining, grazing, and renewable energy.”
In the western states – including Alaska, metallic minerals (and a few others) are governed by the U.S. Mining Law which establishes a self-initiated claim system – not a leasing program. This is an important distinction because leasing is a discretionary decision (and can be revoked like at Twin Metals). A mining claim gives the owner a property right to the minerals. The Feds cannot categorically deny a Plan of Operations on mining claims. They can only regulate mining activities to ensure environmental protection."
Sarah, Will you be returning as Sarah O'Montalbano on St. Patrick's Day? ;-)
O'dear! My Italian ancestors are rolling in their graves at such a suggestion. St. Patty's Day is a great day to have red hair, though.
Fortuntely multiple use is back, but it would be even better if we devolved authority to the states. Why does the federal government need to manage forests in Utah? At least we got rid of 'preserving' land into Natural Asset Companies, which would simultaneously have ruined the real economy and enriched the ultra-wealthy who would have been paid 'carbon credits' for delivering absolutely nothing in return: https://www.wildhorsewisdom.xyz/p/carbon-delicacies?r=31a4ti&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
NACs would have been devastating. I think there's a lot of room for states to gain back control of a lot of the land now controlled by the federal government.