Here’s Otter’s response. He doesn’t say anything about the impact of his public land-sale bill on hunting, fishing, or other public access.
“I find it interesting that, at a time when many local governments are struggling to make ends meet, some would oppose an effort to restore to local property tax rolls and Idaho-based stewardship some carefully selected parcels of the nearly two-thirds of Idaho that is controlled – and too often locked up from multiple use – by the federal government. Even as an absentee landlord, the federal government has a responsibility to pay its fair share. This proposal is a responsible option to consider when counties in Idaho routinely are shortchanged by millions of dollars on PILT payments and the government is failing to maintain such facilities as the backcountry airstrips needed for emergency response. It also might be worth asking where the criticism was when the federal government sold large portions of the Boise Foothills to the city of Boise. Are such transfers only valid when they are proposed by self-appointed conservationists, and not by those who espouse the broader concept of multiple-use stewardship?”