We have national forest in our area. Used by all camping fishing etc. only fees are at improved sites
About 30 years ago he Feds purchased several farms. If for sale they paid the price. Made agreements with others to buy at time of death of owners
For fair market value. The area is now a wildlife refuge We have increased migrating birds and small mammels in the entire area. Entrance is free and most are happy that it was not turned into subdivisions, factories and warehouses Its become an asset to our community Even the families involved were not upset as the land some chose to move to was better farm land without drainage issues
So the land is being “used” for the good of the people which seems to be consistent with the intent
Opinion?
Only that once the intent has been established, that it reverts to the states. I’d say pretty much the same about all parks and national forests. Nothing says the state can’t retain it as a park.
the ends justify the means? Could not the state or county make the same accommodation?