Even California is 42% public land and that doesn't include private land set aside in land trusts.
Personally, I think that nearly all the beautiful and important biological land was public land a long time ago. Adding more public land is the prerogative of rich self-serving people who are the prime users of public land, especially inaccessible public land.
I see no justification for more public land. I see plenty of justification for reducing the amount of public land, and increasing the usage of public land for commercial purposes.
If hunters, hikers and the rest of the outdoors loving population (myself included) can't find enough places to go in the giant sprawling system we have already...they are too lazy.
Do we need more land for the lazy among us?
Comments