Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 5513

Should San Bernardino County & the Forest Service Swap 73 Acres of Land Near the Pacific Crest Trail?

Argument in favor

San Bernardino County has grown quickly in recent years, and the county needs more space for a new timber recycling processing facility. This land exchange would allow the county to build that facility in a place that’s removed enough from the city while also eliminating the need to transfer trees down a dangerous mountain road for processing.

Brian's Opinion
···
12/10/2018
San Bernardino County has grown quickly in recent years, and the county needs more space for a new timber recycling processing facility. This land exchange would allow the county to build that facility in a place that’s removed enough from the city while also eliminating the need to transfer trees down a dangerous mountain road for processing.
Like (3)
Follow
Share
Scott's Opinion
···
12/10/2018
This is positive action for both parties. The PCT is a national treasure and should be maintained federally when possible.
Like (2)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

This land exchange would reduce the amount of public land available for public use. It’d also force a portion of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail to be rerouted, which shouldn’t be altered because it’s currently one of the Earth’s best trail experiences.

burrkitty's Opinion
···
12/11/2018
Don’t ruin the Pacific Crest trail! Rerouting it is not going to be easy and there is no way it will be as beautiful. Don’t damage it for such a shortsighted reason!
Like (16)
Follow
Share
Doug's Opinion
···
12/10/2018
Poor planning on the part of the county shouldn’t dictate the use of public lands.
Like (2)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands
      Committee on Natural Resources
    IntroducedApril 13th, 2018

What is House Bill H.R. 5513?

This bill — the Big Bear Land Exchange Act — would direct the Forest Service, at the request of San Bernardino County, California, to exchange 73 acres of federal lands in the San Bernardino National Forest for 71 acres of lands owned by the county. It would also direct the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to relocate a portion of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail that is currently located on the federal lands to be exchanged. The bill would require the county to pay for any administrative costs, surveys, appraisals, and other costs associated with the land exchange.

Impact

San Bernardino County; San Bernardino National Forest; USFS; and Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 5513

$500.00 Thousand
The CBO estimates that relocating a portion of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail that’s currently located on the federal lands to be exchanged would cost less than $500,000.

More Information

In-DepthRep. Paul Cook (R-CA) introduced this bill to transfer 73 acres of federal land to San Bernardino County in exchange of 71 acres of land owned by the county, enabling the county to build a new industrial recycling and storage park to handle timber processing and recycling.

Indivisible Morongo Basin, a resource to help individuals and groups in the Morongo Basin “respond to the Trump agenda and radical Republican legislation,” opposes the land exchange proposed in this bill. It argues that the exchange of lands will force the rerouting of the Pacific Crest Trail and decrease public lands’ availability “for other purposes.”

This bill passed the House Committee on Natural Resources with an amendment on a unanimous vote. There are no cosponsors of this bill, but the land exchange proposal has strong local support in San Bernardino County from The City of Big Bear Lake, Friends of Big Bear Valley, the Big Bear Fire Department, and others.


Of NoteSan Bernardino County, in southeast California, currently has ownership of approximately 71 acres of inheld land within the San Bernardino Forest northeast of Big Bear City. It has proposed to convey this land to the USFS in exchange for 73 acres of USFS land further north, where it’d work with a contracting company to build an industrial recycling and storage park in a safe and remote site further away from the city and closer to the trees being processed.

Currently, trees and other materials from the San Bernardino Forest are driven down the mountain through a narrow and winding pass to a processing facility in the valley, resulting in multiple traffic accidents yearly. The new processing facility would also allow San Bernardino County to locally process materials, ranging from concrete to dead trees, that currently have to be hauled down the mountain. This would significantly reduce traffic on the roads up and down the mountains, making the mountain roads safer for those who live in and visit the San Bernardino Forest and reducing wear and tear on the roads.


Media:

Summary by Lorelei Yang

(Photo Credit: iStockphoto.com / Angel La Canfora)

AKA

Big Bear Land Exchange Act

Official Title

To provide for an exchange of lands with San Bernardino County, California, to enhance management of lands within the San Bernardino National Forest, and for other purposes.

    Don’t ruin the Pacific Crest trail! Rerouting it is not going to be easy and there is no way it will be as beautiful. Don’t damage it for such a shortsighted reason!
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF PUBLIC LANDS!!!
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    San Bernardino County has grown quickly in recent years, and the county needs more space for a new timber recycling processing facility. This land exchange would allow the county to build that facility in a place that’s removed enough from the city while also eliminating the need to transfer trees down a dangerous mountain road for processing.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    This land exchange would reduce the amount of public land available for public use. It’d also force a portion of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail to be rerouted, which shouldn’t be altered because it’s currently one of the Earth’s best trail experiences.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Why isn’t there an “who gives a shit” button? It’s California. Why should I care about their trees and trails? Let the land of fruits and nuts do their own thing and we grown ups can worry about real issues.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    This is positive action for both parties. The PCT is a national treasure and should be maintained federally when possible.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Stop destroying all the public lands we have. It’s sickening to watch this ‘administration’ ransack our natural resources in the name of antiquated technology and capitalism.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    This land exchange would reduce the amount of public land available for public use. It’d also force a portion of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail to be rerouted, which shouldn’t be altered because it’s currently one of the Earth’s best trail experiences.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Poor planning on the part of the county shouldn’t dictate the use of public lands.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Federal land are lands designated by previous presidents and/or local government to be kept untouched by development and as such should remain that way regardless of what this administration sees fit to do. To dismantle a trail as historic as the one mentioned is akin to erasing history and history is what got us to where we are now and to do away with it erodes the very core and foundations that we live for!!! Leave lands alone!!!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Where’s the line? 🌲🐻🌎 How many men will it take before we call it rape?
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to preserve as much public land as possible for recreation and use. The further we go down this path, the more land we will lose over time. It sounds like it would cost a lot less to re-work the current roads used for safer transportation than to re-route an existing piece of trail that is widely used.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    1) How much money is Paul Cook personally going to make on this swap? 2) Why destroy the environment for private profits? 3) All of the Representative’s personal profits from this should go to pay for all costs up to the $500,000 or more, plus costs for moving, installing, and maintaining the section of the Pacific Crest Trail being forced to move.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Real Estate magnate and Trump University Chancellor (aka Captain Bone Spurs) will want to sell The Statue Of Liberty and Mt. Rushmore next. Someone fire this madman. LOCK HIM UP......
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Are public lands are not for sale or trade. The PCT is an icon and its importane as a trail system stretching from san Diego to the Olypmic Peninsula is a national treasure to be preserved not alteted at the whim of any county or state! We the people for the people!
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    The Trump / Pruitt / Wheeler Administration cannot be trusted in any decision concerning the environment.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    There is no need to move or swap land for the process of lumber. There are better ways to transport logs than a narrow road down to be processed. The land that is for the public needs to remain in place and for our county's to stop putting area of use for public to be changed for the loss of the peoples access to estanblished camping and recreation use. The use of helicopers is long been used for this and it does not involve buiting new roads or indanger the employees vs. travelers to avoid lumber trucks.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    This land exchange would reduce the amount of public land available for public use. It’d also force a portion of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail to be rerouted, which shouldn’t be altered because it’s currently one of the Earth’s best trail experiences.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    Just another example under trump administration that business (and making money for them) is THE only requirement for his/his appointees decisions. This must stop.
    Like
    Follow
    Share