Congress is moving forward with HR 862 to sell encroached upon lands to the owners who had relied upon an erroneous survey. The federal lands encroached upon are in the Coconino National Forest.
My question to those who may know more about this issue, is why wasn't the Small Tracts Act utilized, instead of going with the effort and expense of a separate act of congress to enact the sale? Seems like the Small Tracts Act process would have been applicable and a whole lot simpler.
http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th/house-bill/862/text
I don't recall the specifics of this one, but very often these fixes seem to go to special legislation (act of congress) because the STA requires fair market value be paid.
There are other requirements of the STA such as acreage limits. How the situation came to be that may also negate use of the STA for a particular situation.
I haven't checked but some AZ BLM plats are on line.
- jlw
This one seems to meet the criteria, i.e. within the minimum acreage and owners relied on what they thought was a sound survey. Must be something else that negated the S.T.A. useage, or I'm missing the obvious.
From faraway Ohio I only going to post a guess.
With the Forest Service, sometimes it's difficult to see the politics for the trees. 😀
It would seem that under the Organic Act of 1897 and subsequent acts that the Secretary would have the authority to resolve minor problems such as these. But that has not happened. Perhaps the Secretary needs the authority spelled out in this legislation:
(d) Revocation of Orders.--Any public orders withdrawing any of the
Federal land from appropriation or disposal under the public land laws
are revoked to the extent necessary to permit conveyance of the Federal
land under subsection (a).
(e) Withdrawal of Federal Land.--Subject to valid existing rights,
the Federal land authorized for conveyance under subsection (a) is
withdrawn from all forms of entry and appropriation under the public
land laws, location, entry, and patent under the mining laws, and
operation of the mineral leasing and geothermal leasing laws until the
date which the conveyance is completed.
Of course the claimants aren't being given Forest Service land which they have occupied under claim of ownership for 50+ years- they are going to pay $20,000 for these tiny tracts.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D) Arizona, has already passed the republican controlled house as a bipartisan issue. So it seems to be more of a congress vs. administration issue more than anything else. That's why congress is dealing with such small stuff.
That's just my 0.04'
I was the person who brought this to the attention of the F.S. in 1995, although they had knowledge of the basic problem in 1962. My recollection is that it did not meet all the criteria for an STA.