The U.S. Federal government owns 84.9% of the lands of Nevada. The most government ownership of any of the 50 states. The Federal government owns more of Nevada than Utah - 64.9%, Idaho - 61.6% or Alaska - 61.2%, the next 3 largest land ownership percentages .
The question is does the government, in the form of BLM (Bureau of Land Management), Forest Service or the Fish and Wildlife Service really need millions of acres under its control when the property is located within a state's border? Or should the state reserve control of the public lands?
The Federal government argues that the state is unable to adequately service and control such a large area. The state cannot protect the lands from environmental abuses, or unlawful use because most states do not have the financial resources for the personnel or system requirements.
The States argue that the lands are within the states borders and are under the control of the state. The state would like to use the lands for public and private uses to stimulate industry, business and create a state income stream or source of taxation. In the case of Nevada most of the desert is used by military, ranching or mining concerns.
When the federal government withdraws the huge tracts of land from public use as in wildlife preserves, national monuments, BLM tracts, etc. the state's residents have no access the land within their own state.
The point is that the U.S. government should never own 84.9% of a state's lands. What is the point of being a state? Where are the state's rights?
Read more here: