Replies

Typically the feds voluntarily sold off their lands directly or passed homestead acts. Both of which resulted in a ‘transfer’ to the state.

No, they did not. They resulted in transfer of title to private individuals.

If you think of private ownership as belonging to the state, possibly that's why we disagree.

The state is a governmental entity just like the federal government. Most states own at least some land: office buildings, parks, state forests, etc. For example, 10% of Utah land is owned by the state.

Much like the federal government except on a smaller scale.

If federal land in western states was transferred to the states they would simply expand their land bureaucracies to run them. Or possibly sell some of it.

But with exception of land with minerals, do you really think anybody wants to homestead on or buy public land in Nevada?

OK, I agree some land will have value by location. Along major highways, for instance.

But the West is a really big place. Most of this land is far from anything, and has no water. What do you think people are going to do with it?

What do you see this land selling for? $100/acre? $1000? $10,000?

Let's assume $500 per acre. To buy one square mile would take $320,000. On which you might be able to run as few as 32 cow-calf units. Which might bring in a gross income of maybe $40,000/year.

I don't know if that's a viable business proposition, but I kind of doubt it. Especially if you consider that maintaining, fencing, etc. a square mile has considerable expense to it. Not to mention labor and other expenses.