.jpg)
A plan for a one-time payment for state lands inside the BWCA is shortsighted and likely politically motivated.
Rep. Roger Skraba (R-Ely) has taken on the opposition to plan from the DNR and the Forest Service that would go against the letter of the law and severely limit the amount of monies that go into the state’s School Trust Fund.
The 1964 Wilderness Act requires these lands to be exchanged, not sold. Period. So why did a plan for a land swap get changed to a purchase? Likely politics. After a steady downhill slide of Joe Biden’s re-election chances, Democrats can see the writing on the wall. An ill-fated assassination attempt on Donald Trump last weekend may have sealed the deal.
Just as what we saw in 2016 and 2020, shenanigans involved mining in Minnesota were unleashed in Washington D.C. This one-time sale follows the same path and should be discarded if not for no other reason than shorting the future revenues the state would receive under a land exchange.
Skraba is building opposition and he stands on the high ground. A one-time payment pales in comparison to an eternity of revenues, especially if newly acquired lands can be logged over time. But there is a certain group that likes to oppose logging as well as mining and they are in full favor of the land sale plan. In this case, follow the lack of money and you can see what is really happening.
We appreciate where Skraba has brought the discussion, including to the Morse and Fall Lake township boards last week. He will need to get other local government bodies on board as well as county boards.
His argument is sound and based in legal principles. This past week he questioned how a DNR or Forest Service attorney could overrule federal law.
“I would love to see this brought to the Supreme Court,” said Skraba. “There is no doubt a land sale is not allowed under Public Law 88577.”
