The Bureau of Land Management, an executive agency, that operates out of Washington, DC, owns and manages nearly 250 million acres of public land.
A substantial or remarkable percentage here in Nevada and western states. What the Founders and framers of the US Constitution originally intended and say in Article I Section 8 is Federal owned and controlled land should be very limited. It is bad enough now in the present moment the weaponization of Federal executive agencies where one can make a legitimate claim to get rid of and place their responsibilities and duties on the local or state level and the private sector get involved too. It is evident when it comes to owning and managing land, also the Federal Government has overreached and has gone so beyond its constitutional jurisdiction.
No doubt local, state government along with its citizens and legal residents to each respective state will know what is best to utilize the land and serve their local-state interests than the Federal government. Proven track record when Federal government bureaucrats thousands of miles away make one size fits all decisions who have no stake in those decisions. On the contrary, those affected by these top-down decisions, for the most part, do not serve well or can be counterproductive for each respective state and their local community's needs.
We see examples of this in states like New Mexico and Wyoming which depend heavily on revenue from oil and gas production yet the Federal government in recent past and present have been a major roadblock to their progression. The number of permits to gain access and do what is necessary to create and expand oil and gas production is being denied in substantial numbers. Before, it get approved, very much slow walked by the Bureau of Land Management to use Federal land for energy production. In Nevada, there was a long stretch of time in the twentieth century Nevada was exploring and creating multiple millions of barrels of oil and gas, proven beneficial, to where now just hundreds of thousands of barrels a deeply significant drop in exploration and production. Of course, the Federal government, from policymakers to bureaucrats in the Bureau of Land Management, decided it was a threat to the environment and wildlife and an unwise investment to produce at least once and of course, develop, and expand oil and gas production.
In addition, in Oregon acres upon acres of Federal land remains dormant, and not used, Federal government owns much land in Oregon and local communities in southern Oregon are suffering feeling the economic pain because of it. The opportunities for economic entrepreneurship or commerce are cut off because the Federal government deems that as a threat antithesis to their current agenda of environmental radicalism.
Surely, conservation and wildlife are something to be preserved and thrive but for the Federal government to deem US energy production as a threat and unwise to invest in is truly bogus. On the contrary, US energy production of oil and gas is developed and produced cleanly. The technologies to develop and produce, it is evident, are no threat to wildlife and conservation. Alaska is a great example of striking a balance. Nevertheless, the federal government deems it unworthy which shows they have no business making these decisions. Given US energy production-fossil fuels will always be vital to the nation’s growth and vibrancy these decisions should be left to respective state and local communities.
Hopefully, when a convention of states becomes a reality. Citizens and legal residents can propose to the delegates or the delegates themselves propose an amendment. In its orderly and structural process at the convention an amendment under the realm of constitutional jurisdiction for the Federal government to sell the land and place it into the sole jurisdiction of states to handle.