Proposal to Sell/Lease State land
Contributors to this thread:South Dakota
From: Griz34
16-Jan-19
Do any of you know any more about this bill? I'm not on Facebook, but my brother sent me this screenshot today.
From: Griz34
16-Jan-19
Double Post
From: grizzly
16-Jan-19
I thought the idea was to have recurring income for the school funds, not a one and done fund. I'm not in favor of selling. I'm pretty sure we already lease them. Could very well be aspects of it don't understand or know just yet.
From: Brotsky
17-Jan-19
I believe this was related to selling mineral rights on those lands. Selling the land would not be in line with state statute for what those lands were designated for. The state would retain ownership however they would sell the mineral rights. Either way it's a bad deal for outdoorsmen as once the mineral rights are sold you can bet they will be developed for exploitation.
From: Griz34
17-Jan-19
I'll be sending some emails.
From: DR
17-Jan-19
I'll get more confirmation soon but my discussions have lead me to believe that HB 1023 is to enable land swaps and transfers. GFP has been working on trading land locked parcels for private parcels with better access, thus increasing sportsmens ability to recreate on that property. No net loss is the key IMO.
From: SteveG
18-Jan-19
That would be nice, DR. We have plenty of landlocked state land. Look forward to what you find out.
From: sdkhunter
29-Jan-19
I'd be all for land swaps and things of that nature to move the non-accessible public parcels into locations that can be accessed... Just want to make sure it's not a one and done full out sale of the ground as mentioned above...
From: DR
30-Jan-19
That's how it's been explained to me guys, to legalize trades/swaps (sales). Key is to keep tabs and watch for NO net loss. Also, I'd hope they'd look at similar 'quality' habitat types.
From: grizzly
30-Jan-19
Now if we could get the NF to provide access to some of their landowner locked sections, that would be nice.
