Every few years Wyoming and the other western states get the idea that the Federal government ought to hand over the Federal domain to the states. The states don't propose to buy, please note, but just get it.
For those who aren't aware, starting really in the 1860s with the Homestead Act the Federal government started taking a different approach to vast tracks of land it acquired by the surrender, acquisition or simply the theft, of lands held by aboriginal title. Aboriginal title was that title held by the native inhabitants, i.e., the Indians. The Federal government recognized that title, as the Crown had also, but regarded it as a subservient, less perfect, form of title. Basically, it was inferior as people who lived a wild, aboriginal life, weren't regarded as civilized, and therefore they couldn't have a civilized title. The concept sort of was that they didn't really know what they had or how they had it, but they did have something.
From very early in the country's history it was the law that only the Federal government, heir to the rights of the Crown, could dispose of aboriginal title. States and territories couldn't do it. Up until the Homestead Act, the Federal government generally handed over most of the land it had to the new state upon statehood, but not all of it. The land it kept were "reservations", and not just of the "Indian Reservation" type. Washington D. C., which it acquired by donation, is one such Federal Reservation, or was, in spite of its ceaseless nonsensical whining about wanting to become the only city state in the country, thereby elevating a bad idea to statehood level.
Starting with the Homestead Act, however, the Federal government decided that it would keep much of the Federal domain and allow farmers to acquire it directly from the Federal government. This was done in order to encourage the settlement of lands otherwise regarded by most people as wastelands. The thesis was that by making the land free, or darned near free, people would be encouraged to give farming or livestock raising on it a go. The Homestead Act was followed by the Mining Law of 1872, which did the same for mining, with mining given a preferential place over everything else.
This was the system for most of the West until the Taylor Grazing Act when Congress recognized that the Dust Bowl conditions in the West then in play, combined with darned near full homesteading, was wrecking everything. So, it operated to prevent further homesteading entries and to lease the land to agricultural interests. A law that provided for leasing of oil and gas rights was already in existence. Finally, in the 1980s (I believe) the Mining Law of 1872 was altered to prevent further land patenting.
This system has worked really well. The Federal government has been a really good steward of the land and the fact that it belongs to all of us has meant that its been open to agriculture, hunting, fishing, and recreation.
So why would the state's have a problem with that?
Well, they do. Partly that's because the state's see the Federal domain as a source of income, and partially its because local interests always naively imagine the land ending up in their hands. People who depend on the Federal domain often have a problem sharing it, and they somehow imagine that if it went to the state, it'd go to them, and they'd own it.
And that's why this is a hideously bad idea.
In reality, allowing Wyoming to own the Federal domain would mean, sooner or later, that it would sell it into private hands. Those backing the bill in the legislature to support this concept deny that, but that is what would happen. Local pressure from local interest would scream and cry for this until hit happened. And then they'd be stunned when the land all went to big monied interest elsewhere.
For those who support agriculture, mineral extraction and recreation in this state, which is darned near everyone who lives here, there's no better way to mess that up than to support transferring the Federal domain to Wyoming. Wyoming is always selling little bits and pieces of what it does own, and sooner or later, it'd do that with all the land it owns. And at that point, locals would basically own nothing, and be able to go nowhere.
This idea is terrible. The legislature will almost surely pass it. Let's hope that Congress doesn't support it. If it were ever to get through, however, this would be the time. If that's the case, when the day comes when you can't go anywhere on what the Federal government once owned, remember the names of those who proposed this idea and ask them what they were thinking, unless of course you support the concept, and then you can ask yourself.
Postscript
This bill has now been amended such that the proposal is no longer to study the transfer of the lands, but rather transfer the management of them.
That's certainly a much more reasonable, sort of, prospective, but this too is a poor idea. After all, if the Federal government is paying for the management of the lands, why opt to take on the expense and burden of that task? The answer would no doubt be that there would be more local control, which is true, and which is why the state has chosen to administer such things that it can, such as the Occupational Health and Safety regulations. Nonetheless, taking on this burden here, which is well done by the Federal government, seem to be a rather poor idea.
_(cropped).png)
