______ SA 140. Mr. PAUL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 47, to provide for the management of the natural resources of the United States, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle B of title I, add the following: SEC. 11___. ACCESS TO WATERWAYS IN THE DANIEL BOONE NATIONAL FOREST, KENTUCKY. The Secretary of Agriculture shall allow access to the waterways feeding into Lake Cumberland through the Daniel Boone National Forest in Rockcastle County, Pulaski County, Laurel County, Wayne County, McCreary County, and Whitley County, Kentucky, for the purpose of installing docks, boat slips, and marinas. ______ SA 141. Mr. PAUL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 47, to provide for the management of the natural resources of the United States, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle A of title I, add the following SEC. 10____. SALE OF CERTAIN NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LAND IN THE DANIEL BOONE NATIONAL FOREST. (a) In General.--The Secretary of Agriculture (referred to in this section as the ``Secretary'') shall, in accordance with any other applicable law and subject to valid existing rights, conduct 1 or more sales of the National Forest System land described in subsection (b) to qualified bidders. (b) Description of Land.--The National Forest System land referred to in subsection (a) consists of National Forest System land that-- (1) is located along U.S. Highway No. 27 from Burnside, Kentucky, through the Daniel Boone National Forest to the point at which U.S. Highway No. 27 crosses into the State of Tennessee, as depicted on the map prepared under subsection (c); and (2) is identified for disposal by the Secretary. (c) Map.--As soon as practicable after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prepare a map of the National Forest System land referred to in subsection (b)(1). (d) Consideration.--The sale of National Forest System land under subsection (a) shall be for not less than fair market value.
Believe DBNF is Federal Property... like LBL. Guess selling off National Park land is one way to build the wall.. lol.
I honestly don’t know a lot about DBNF... but I suspect it may have had similarities with LBL when it was formed. Which at LBL ... TVA forced all the landowners out... many didn’t even get close to a fair market values for their homes or farms. Eminent domain was even used against a few holdouts that held the feds off at gunpoint. Which most of my family lived there and forced out. The promise made then to landowners is LBL would never be sold or commercialized. It would be used for recreation .. former residents could come back to hunt & fish. Which even after many years have passed.... most families are still bitter about it and evolved through generations. I’d even go as far to say... that if they announced they were selling off a portion of LBL ... the guns would break out again. Again I don’t know about how DBNF was created... but if our federal government was involved... a bunch of people got screwed.
Sounds like the sportsmen of Ky will get raped and lose hunting ground. I'm not sure how this is a good thing for anyone other than the state government that will piss it away or outfitters that will gobble it up and price out most hunters. Maybe I'm missing something here but I don't like the sound of it.
I’m just tired of hearing about the woe is me! public hunting grounds. People act like hunting licenses and citation fines wholey fund these properties. I find that impossible. There are countless public hunting opportunities for everyone and I don’t see an issue with the federal or state government trying to make money off of some of its real estate. The right to a free hunting spot does not exist in the National or state constitution that I’m aware of.
Neither does ownership of Land, exept for some acres in the District of Columbia. There is Federally administrated land, and State administered land, but it belongs to “The People”. What weight that carries anymore is anyones guess, but you do have a right to put in your two cents about whether it gets sold off.
Apparently you don’t hunt public land much. It’s over crowded as it is. Sell more off isn’t ever a good thing. Especially if it’s just to give the government a few bucks that will be gone in the blink of an eye. Sportsmen do fund most of the public land. Why not just sell it all off? Sell LBL and Kentucky lake. Outdoor recreation brings in a lot of revenue as well. I just think it’s short sighted to sell off something like that.
The public lands for which he speaks are a birthright of every American. A birthright that is uniquely American. Public lands access is a part of the fabric of this country. We have somewhere around 640 million acres of public land in America and I don’t want to lose any of it. I prefer to remain a public land owner. So, no thanks to selling off a birthright, Senator Paul. Speaking of, there’s a Kentucky Backcountry Hunters and Anglers Chapter in the works. And we welcome fellow sportsmen and women to join us. Keep It Public. https://www.backcountryhunters.org/
If you think that the sale of state or federal land is good for any American that spends any amount of time outdoors please do some research on the historic sale of state and federal lands across the nation. My opinion is it is a bandaid to find money that will be squandered and then the outdoorsman or women will be out of more acreage to recreate. https://www.backcountryhunters.org/
There are several areas in the Constitution about how and why the federal government should own land and for what specific purpose, letting it sit idle is not one of the. The father of the national parks system Teddy Roosevelt ( a progressive btw) put this national parks system forth as protecting the land , it was nothing more then a gov land grab. The same goes for all the BLM land out west..