BW, We're talking ten percent over nearly a century. A lot has happened in the past century and you can't tell me that selling a section of state land (1 or 36) near town where it's needed is necessarily a terrible thing, especially if the funds go to buy some "better" land further out, which does happen. Or, the money is invested in some other, higher rate of return that better funds education and lowers the tax burden for citizens. It is rational to buy, sell and consolidate in order to "optimize" holdings. You know, like BLM likes to do, and USFS likes. Why shouldn't states do the same?
Up hills slow, Down hills fast Tonnage first and Safety last.
