You really seem to be uniformed about this issue. No one is talking about turning National Parks over to the states.
This is an interview about hunting. There is no hunting allowed in National Parks.
The issue is over the many many times larger amount of federal lands that are not in National Parks but are still controlled by federal bureaucracies. Trump thinks federal control in distant Washington DC is a great thing because you never know what people will do when the feds don't control it. Your know, that icky thing called freedom where the central government doesn't control everything.
Is that your position? If not, you may want to rethink your support of Trump.
And, IMO, just another in the list of why the term ‘conservative’ means diddly.
Ol’ Teddy R., starting the Socialist race into the 20th century. Here, Trump is exactly correct. The Constitution being PRETTY clear. Except for a FEW instances (postal roads and the like) the FEDERAL govt ‘owns’ sh!t.
Either you believe/follow or you (legally) change; there’s no ‘Oh, because XYZ like it’ or ‘51% believe in...’.
Has it NOT been shown over and over the Fed is NOT a steward in good standing? Closing off once public because of some Sierra-planted spotted-lynx hair or fruit-fly or...Even CREATING massive blazes because they don’t ‘allow’ logging/clearing?
How the term ‘federal lands’ can even be debated, on this board alone, is disturbing.
Here, Trump is wrong. Yet, I haven’t read/heard the position of others in the race (ala they all deserve a severe tongue lashing, or just a few).
Course, not so curiously, there’s nary a question such as, “The Constitution states XYZ. You’ve said/your position is...”. The document has LONG been abused and neglected.