[who_would_fardels_bear]

Agreed. This came out during the Bundy Ranch incident when people found out that the feds didn't really take most of Nevada's territory, but instead most of Nevada's territory was federal land from the very beginning.

At no point did Nevada try and assert any rights over that land, probably because for most of its history the land was considered of little or no value. If now some value is found in that land for cattle grazing, mining, housing, etc. then any attempt by Nevada to gain control can be seen as just a greedy land grab.

[i_robot73]

>
At no point did Nevada try and assert any rights over that land, probably because for most of its history the land was considered of little or no value. If now some value is found in that land for cattle grazing, mining, housing, etc. then any attempt by Nevada to gain control can be seen as just a greedy land grab.
>

I must disagree w/ the last point. The Const. makes it quite clear on Federal ‘holdings’; just because the State has not pressed its rightful authority doesn’t make it moot.

IMO, in the creation of the State, borders were setup/agreed-upon, the land instantly reverted to the State where it lies.