[Levin]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Fundamentally I disagree that persons who do not have a direct interest in land management should have a say in it. Why should somebody in NYC be able to dictate what happens to ranchers in central Nevada, all the while being a big recipient of the benefits of federal tax dollars through contributions to the municipalities via the tax shifts.

I don't want to dictate to Idaho what should happen in Idaho.

I do have a direct interest; I'm from the West; I visit public lands where cattle graze multiple times each year; I vote for my politicians based on their views on issues affecting the West . . .

But I think you miss a major point about public lands -- they are not Idaho's or Utah's or Nevada's. They belong to the American people. It is not about dictating what you can do on your land, but what you can do on our land. You're being provincial. Just because you have the happy circumstance of living nearer to public lands doesn't mean all others should shut up.