Space for storage isn't a big deal, but it doesn't bring big bucks
either. To develop land, you need water and sewer.

I have to give the Day family credit. Buying land and and chopping it
up is done all the time, but getting the BLM to surrender land to form
a town is something else.

Basecamp has been encroached by those hay farmers. I'm not sure how
they get the right to convert the BLM land.

If you have a claim that you can develop, you can build on the claim.
You don't really own it unless the claim is patentable. such as the
Lincoln Mine.

BTW, the BLM sells maps that indicate their land versus private land.
Fallini owns a bit of land that some people think is public. His no
trespassing signs are real.


Krackula wrote:

On 30 Jan 2006 21:10:24 -0800, miso@sushi.com wrote:

These facilities on the brac list eventually do go private. There are
quite a few in the SF bay area. You can look at
38.056986 -122.504465 on google earth as an example. This is a Toll
Brothers housing development on what used to be a SAC base.The Navy
doesn't land here any more:
37.788286 -122.315361
However, these places have value. Hawthorne, not to dis it, is pretty
much in the middle of nowhere, and thus is a fine place to do stuff,
and you can fill in the blank for "stuff."

I can tell you that  there is little private  land in Nevada and if
some or all of that place did go private there might  be a rush to get
it , I think.  ( I wouldn't mind a middling  chunk of some , myself
!!! hahah )
< 82 % of the land in NV is federally owned .......
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:dl2aEpsOuaoJ:www.unce.unr.edu/publications/FS01/FS0132.pdf+percent+of+public+land+in+Nevada&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

 sometimes it's hard to tell about the availability  and value of some
private lands in Nevada  like around Tonopah as the
nearby bases  artificially drive up the value of land around there.
A shabby little shack is shockingly pricey  there and way beyond what
I think a reasonable person might  pay for what is available.  if
Hawthorne  and the nearby base land became uninhabited  ,  I wouldn't
mind buying a nice little  seasonal cottage there in Hawthorne  for
my own " stuff "  ha ha hah ah a !!  hunters , outdoors men  and
others looking for affordable vacation property ( from California )
would also probably  swarm the place looking for  bargains as well.
there is water available around the Hawthorne area , making  it  a
rather desirable  location , in many ways.

I haven't looked at the official BRAC, but John Pike says Hawthorne is
going:
<http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/hawthorne.htm>

Now Tooele, where they are going to move the stuff, is also empty, but
that place is so nasty it can never be shut down. [Pronounced two el eh
if you are curious.]

I didn't know the above ground bunkers were not used. Am I to assume
the bunkers you see on google earth in Nellis Area 2 are not used
either, i.e. the real nukes are underground?

as far as nukes go .... by the early '70s , to my knowledge , ALL
nukes were  stored ( even short term storage , if possible ) deep
underground .  even   piddling little battle field nukes were stored
underground.  in the '70s , for example,  even  at Ft. Hood , Tx, they
kept the nukes in a tunnel system  ( I won't say exactly where , just
somewhere  near   a  HUGE  airfield landing strip ha hh aha ha ah )
parts of the Ft. Hood complex used to be the  Defense Atomic Support
Agency   before the  '70s and in '72 the last pitiful little nuke
artillery warhead was removed from there because of concerns about
public unrest of the era. ( didn't want those commie pinko hippies to
get their hands on it , did we ? ha ha hah h ah a  ) hard to say
what's  in  all those nuclear storage facilities these days !!!