(NAFB.com) – In a stunning display of fiscal wizardry, the nation’s land managers were summoned before U.S. senators last week to defend what can only be described as an astonishing masterclass in budget cutting. The grand plan? Sell off a whopping 3.3 million acres—because who needs wilderness when we can have more, um, houses?
During a riveting session of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee (or as I like to call it, “The Low-Stakes Game Show”), it was revealed that the Forest Service will part with between 965,000 and 1.45 million acres of its glorious 193 million acres. Meanwhile, the Bureau of Land Management is also getting in on the action, offering up 1.23 million to 1.84 million acres of its 245 million acres. Just imagine the possibilities: endless suburbs sprawling across landscapes formerly rich in trees and wildlife.
But fear not, because this is allegedly not about sacrificing our national treasures. No, according to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, it’s simply about “barren land next to highways with existing billboards that have no recreational value.” I mean, who needs nature when you can have a lovely view of a billboard advertising the latest slice of pizza? Isn’t that the American dream?
And let’s not forget the House’s valiant effort last month, where they heroically stripped a plan to sell public lands in Nevada. Apparently, not all heroes wear capes; some just wield executive powers. Perhaps they realized that selling off Nevada’s glorious dustbowl wouldn’t be the best PR move.
As our land managers tirelessly work to reassure us that this sell-off is a tremendous idea, one can’t help but wonder: what’s next? Maybe they’ll start charging us for access to our beloved national parks? After all, what better way to promote the great outdoors than by labeling it a “premium experience”? For a reasonable fee, of course. Nature has to be monetized, people!
But let’s remember, folks, this brilliant strategy is to encourage housing development. Because when I think of affordable housing, I immediately think of selling off remote, nature-infused land in favor of more concrete jungles. Who needs parks when you have sprawling subdivisions populated with folks who just want to grill their burgers while staring at a neighbor’s fence?
So, as we say goodbye to our pristine public lands, let’s thank our land managers for their exceptional foresight. Here’s to a future where we can watch the sun set behind a row of cookie-cutter homes instead of ancient trees. After all, who wouldn’t prefer the dulcet sounds of construction over the serene rustling of leaves? Now, that sounds like a plan worth applauding!
