Thanks for your polite and cogent response.
You apparently are too stupid to recognize that I specifically excluded land with valuable mineral rights, which is a small minority of the total.
I was also referring, in general, to BLM land, rather than Forest Service land. The history of Forest land being quite different.
BLM land was formed mainly out of the public domain land nobody wanted to buy by the 60s or whoever.
Why you think I’m personally responsible for mismanagement of timber lands is beyond me.
I am not personally a fan of most federal land management. But I’ve never seen one tiny bit of evidence that states would do any better.
I also am very familiar with large stretches of BLM land. Some of it is incredibly beautiful, but much of it resembles nothing so much as a really large construction site. Piles of dirt.
It’s interesting that you never mentioned the US constitution. It’s also interesting that despite the fact that I mentioned lands so-called “managed” by the US Forest service that I can personally vouch that the forests “managed” by the US Government are in bad shape. The two Japanese bark beetles that I had to brush off my pants might be a clue. Well, other than someone like you they would be a clue. You would rather attack the messenger than deal with the problem.