Carnage2011
Well-known member
He also dug up a thread that is almost two years old to do it. lol
BHA can now celebrate. Hypocrites
- Thread starter hossblur
- Start date
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 2,701
Fair. Still A execution in lieu of A+
Or, you could view the two release dates you shared - then return to the opening post date...
No worries, you're in good company if that's your method of misguided, "precision".
brocksw
Well-known member
I just re-read this whole thread. I see my opinions on the subject have not changed at all. I still hold a pragmatic view towards the multiple use nature of public lands, and remain clear eyed about conservation groups (BHA and/others) having a near zero chance at stopping an entire sector of the energy industry, one with private and federal backing, from making good on those aforementioned multiple-use mandates on public lands.
Hey @Devin O'Dea. I got your email, was the new account trying to accomplish something? If so, generally direct communication works much better.
Bigjay73
Well-known member
Imma wait and see if the one member on this board who knows a thing or two about the energy industry has changed his opinion from two years ago.
brocksw
Well-known member
I’m still waiting for anyone to show a link where BHA supported a solar project on public lands…. I haven’t seen one.
I’m also waiting for anyone to show me where BHA encouraged solar development on public lands…. It also, has yet to be shown.
I’m also waiting for anyone to show me a link specifically showing where BHA objected to an oil/gas/mining project, but then did a complete 180 and supported a solar project in that same location (ya know….hypocrisy)…..Again, yet to be shown.
I grow tired of the HT that can’t see through Hoss’s inflammatory and hyperbolic, detached from reality, the world is ending, posts on BHA.
I expect better from HT. Perhaps I’m just naive.
Public Lands Renewable Energy Development Act Benefits Wildlife, Hunters
Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.
www.backcountryhunters.org
Last edited:
Bigjay73
Well-known member
I guess we all are biased in one direction or another
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Fair point.I’m still waiting for anyone to show a link where BHA supported a solar project on public lands…. I haven’t seen one.
I’m also waiting for anyone to show me where BHA encouraged solar development on public lands…. It also, has yet to be shown.
I’m also waiting for anyone to show me a link specifically showing where BHA objected to an oil/gas/mining project, but then did a complete 180 and supported a solar project in that same location (ya know….hypocrisy)…..Again, yet to be shown.
I grow tired of the HT that can’t see through Hoss’s inflammatory and hyperbolic, detached from reality, the world is ending, posts on BHA.
I expect better from HT. Perhaps I’m just naive.
Public Lands Renewable Energy Development Act Benefits Wildlife, Hunters
Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.
How many solar related actions items have you been emailed about? Because I've had half a dozen or more for proposed mines
What's funny, is I called my shot 2 years ago.I’m still waiting for anyone to show a link where BHA supported a solar project on public lands…. I haven’t seen one.
I’m also waiting for anyone to show me where BHA encouraged solar development on public lands…. It also, has yet to be shown.
I’m also waiting for anyone to show me a link specifically showing where BHA objected to an oil/gas/mining project, but then did a complete 180 and supported a solar project in that same location (ya know….hypocrisy)…..Again, yet to be shown.
I grow tired of the HT that can’t see through Hoss’s inflammatory and hyperbolic, detached from reality, the world is ending, posts on BHA.
I expect better from HT. Perhaps I’m just naive.
Public Lands Renewable Energy Development Act Benefits Wildlife, Hunters
Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.
A year later, BHA is on board in 700,000 acres of development.
The Boundary waters is roughly 1 million acres. Can you show me where BHA was open to negotiation on a mine there?
Were they open to negotiation on drilling in the Attic National Wildlife Preserve? Was there negotiation on the Pebble Mine?
Did they wait for the EIS to come out on any of those?
How about https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2023...ng-under-ohio-state-parks-and-wildlife-areas/
Is there negotiation? Waiting for an EIS?
That's just one page on Google.
But we all know the answer. BHA will support whatever team blue proposes, because, it's team blue.
I believe I read there are 100or so proposed projects waiting for this approval process. How many are BHA opposing?
Randy has a real good video on Jim Posewitz fighting a damn.
All those good paying jobs and clean electricity shot down by a guy who didn't feel like trading off public land for energy profits. I guess he should have been more of a realist and "clear eyed", we need power, right? You should check it out
I’m still waiting for anyone to show a link where BHA supported a solar project on public lands…. I haven’t seen one.
I’m also waiting for anyone to show me where BHA encouraged solar development on public lands…. It also, has yet to be shown.
I’m also waiting for anyone to show me a link specifically showing where BHA objected to an oil/gas/mining project, but then did a complete 180 and supported a solar project in that same location (ya know….hypocrisy)…..Again, yet to be shown.
I grow tired of the HT that can’t see through Hoss’s inflammatory and hyperbolic, detached from reality, the world is ending, posts on BHA.
I expect better from HT. Perhaps I’m just naive.
Public Lands Renewable Energy Development Act Benefits Wildlife, Hunters
Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.
I don't "grow tired". I may shake my head. Regardless how frequent I shake my head, people like their rationalized flavored Kool aid.
Wait no longer...
"In that meeting, Land Tawney of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers (BHA) had a chance to get to know her and see what it might be like working with her in the future. ‘She offers a strong and knowledgeable vision for the Interior Department, a vision that is informed by her earliest experiences with her family on public lands and waters and on successful hunts in the West,’ Tawney said in a BHA press release. ‘She is approachable, capable, and a bridge-builder.’”
-“Haaland will also have to implement a policy transition from energy dominance to one of energy innovation. President Biden’s agenda calls for a step away from relying on fossil fuels and a move towards alternative energy sources like wind and solar. Haaland will have to implement these changes without taking jobs away from oil and gas workers and produce clean energy without affecting the environment. If done right, this could mean a workforce of skilled former oil and gas employees transitioning to jobs that improve wildlife habitat on public lands and waters.”"
This was my first link reviewed. How much time to waste when a single Google search prompts a BHA, Land Tawney, post that addresses your wait.
Changed your mind? Highly doubtful. Rationalize away.
brocksw
Well-known member
Do you live in a state with a proposed solar project? If not, perhaps that’s why?
Did you get an email from us on any North Dakota issues? Did anyone from BHA notify you or ask you to comment on the oil and gas plan revision here in ND? How about the ND BLM RMP? Is that because we’re hypocrites in bed with industry or because not every action alert/issue gets nationwide attention and is handled the same way?
We submitted comment to both. Why didn’t you?
Your argument completely ignores nearly every point I’ve made. Engaging with you is pointless.
I think that’s a weak example, and if that’s your smoking gun, it further makes my point. But keep throwing peanuts, I’ll keep going to work.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Yes. Several
Man, no one is attacking you. So easy off. But are you blind to the hypocrisy? It's there. BHA has fallen victim to partisan politics as much as anyone in the rod and gun conservation space. Most of us aren't going to stop supporting them, but I'm also going to call them out on it.
brocksw
Well-known member
I don’t see Washington anywhere on the BLMs solar project list. Not on applications or permits. Would you mind sharing?
Who said anyone is attacking anyone? Just because I disagree with you on a lot of what you’re saying does not mean I hate you, or that I’m even angry.
But I’ll explain this again.
There have probably been hundreds if not over a thousand wells drilled across the country on public lands just since this thread was last a hot topic. A tiny fraction of those areas has BHA given any opposition. I know of a specific management plan revision where BHA opposed development in Non-motorized areas. That’s not the same as opposing all oil and gas development on all public land. Does that mean we’re in bed with the oil lobby?
No, the focus of opposition, for the most part, has remained on high value, sensitive areas. Opposing one mine in or next to one of the Nations most popular wilderness areas, is not the same as opposing all mines in all locations across the country.
But that’s what you’re saying. Because BHA and BHA alone, didn’t stop an entire sector of industry, that they’re in total, unwavering support of it. Like stopping it was even an option to begin with. To me, that’s a severe disconnect from reality. This notion that BHA held the key to the gate for solar development on public lands is, quite frankly, delusional. Yet you keep making it sound like that’s exactly the case, and that it has something to do with blue or red.
The federal government, not BHA, has made a decision to utilize/honor the multiple use mandate for the federally managed public lands for the purpose of energy development. Like they have done with every other industry. Oil, gas, timber, mining, and grazing.
BHA didn’t unilaterally make that decision. The feds didn’t call BHA and ask if it was ok. Land Tawney’s signature wasn’t required for any single part of that decision at any point in the process. Not one person in the entire BLM department asked, “should we call BHA and ask them if it’s okay if we allow solar?”
Sorry folks, that’s not how it works.
And that’s where the PLREDA came into the play.
“it’s important to understand that this legislation doesn’t drive new development or endorse one energy source over another, but sets more protective standards for renewable energy projects than exist currently while ensuring that we prioritize conservation.”
“Our support of this legislation is not an endorsement of energy development itself but a set of important guidelines that must be followed when development does occur. PLREDA incentivizes responsible development, creates more rigorous conservation standards that consider fish and wildlife — something that doesn’t currently exist for any energy development sector”
*gasps in disbelief!
Clutch your pearls!
You mean to tell me no other energy sector had an equivalent piece of legislation that would prioritize conservation, fish and wildlife, and BHA was going to make the dearest renewable energy sector do it?
Oh my laaaawdd. How ever could the big bad BHA be so mean and so unfair to the solar industry?!
But wait…that’s right! BHA is in bed with the solar industry! This must all just be a liberal front! It’s actually just an effort to allow unfettered access to solar companies so they can put solar fields in Americas most sensitive and important wildlife areas! What deception! What trickery! Thank you HT for uncovering this conspiracy! This liberal agenda!
That’s what you all sound like to me…
But seriously, if some solar project was applied for in the boundary waters, or where it would disrupt a primary migration corridor in WY, or in the largest salmon fishery in the world, or in the largest old growth forest in the world, and BHA opposed it just like they did with other industry projects in those exact same locations, how would it be any different?
The answer is it wouldn’t.
Yet, you’re sitting here telling me that because they supported legislation that put additional guardrails on future development, guardrails meant to focus on conservation, guardrails other industries never even had, that now all the sudden this is where their partisanship is showing? How can that logically be the case? That is completely out of touch with the reality of the situation.
Now, if BHA supports a utility scale solar project in one of those same areas that they opposed in another industry, and the statement is, “well, this is a renewable project, so it’s okay.” I would totally agree with you. 100%
But from my discussions with HQ policy staff, both in the past and in the present, that is just not the case, nor is it the plan.
If the fact that the intent of PLREDA and BHAs support of it, was completely opposite of what you’re saying, to put more guardrails up, not less, and you still refuse to accept that, then I have no hope to ever change your mind about anything. Because it would seem blatantly obvious to me that you aren’t interested in facts or truth.
In terms of partisanship, I’ve been an independent my entire adult life. I see partisanship everywhere and in all orgs. But I sure as hell won’t discuss it on a public forum. The fact that a thread like this even exists should be reason enough as to why.
Last edited:
It's like any organization... Many aspects I appreciate about RMEF, TRCP, etc... yet there are a few aspects that I call b.s..
*RMEF weak sauce stance out the gate when shoulder season entered the FWP scene.
*TRCP looking the other way when their own caught up in public/private land access dispute.
Your peanut worthy response is, as expected...
My single Google search was not shared for you. It's shared as a clear example of your blind loyalty.
Carry on.
As an aside:
Post in thread 'Time for Land Tawney to step down?' https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/time-for-land-tawney-to-step-down.293540/post-2899780
Sums up my thoughts, from an earlier thread, 2019.
Mallardsx2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2015
- Messages
- 2,772
The US is 34.14 trillion dollars in debt and people on here are aware of that fact and still just pretend like it doesn't exist. This solar NONSENSE is taking us further into un-recoverable debt (that most importantly is taking up massive amounts of ABOVE surface space public and private) and we can't even agree to even pump the brakes on it.
Solar is NOT the future people. It's just not. It might supplement the "feel-gooders" minds in the world, but your just robbing Peter to pay Paul chasing solar and most renewable projects. I wish they were viable and sustainable, but they just aren't without govt subsidies and incentives.
Blind Loyalty has consequences people. Don't be a lemming.
Solar is NOT the future people. It's just not. It might supplement the "feel-gooders" minds in the world, but your just robbing Peter to pay Paul chasing solar and most renewable projects. I wish they were viable and sustainable, but they just aren't without govt subsidies and incentives.
Blind Loyalty has consequences people. Don't be a lemming.
Is the opposite true? When the federal government is looking to permit a mine, do they call Land Tawney? Is BHA consulted? Somehow they get real active.
When you step back and look, and see personal politics in their leadership that expands far past who they vote for, or what yard sign they have, but very public partisanship, then compare that to their mission statement, its not conspiracy theory.
It's asking a lot of folks to see Land Tawney, very publicly advocating for democrats, then seeing them sign on to development of public land in cases that are dem supported(that swallow up as much or more acreage as rep supported uses).
Can you show me any solar farm on public BHA has opposed? Windfarm? Not in theory. In practice.
Hunt for Wild Lands
A land facing ceaseless development. A people overly reliant upon technology and motorized equipment. A quality of life – particularly the sporting life – that seems increasingly in jeopardy.These are some of the basic tenets of our call to arms – for North American sportsmen and -women to stand up for the wild country and fish and wildlife that depend on it. Now, more than ever before, we need wild lands: places to rekindle the fire at the heart of the human soul. Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is a nonpartisan group of sportsmen and -women who are standing up for these places and for the outdoor opportunities they represent. BHA MISSION STATEMENT
Hard to be non partisan with partisans in leadership. Hard to fight development if your for development. Development isn't a Grey area. There's either dirt, or there isn't. Tge displaced animals don't care why.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Whatnot, you do realize Tawney is no longer the CEO?
But carry on with the partisan BS, it's all you "know".
But carry on with the partisan BS, it's all you "know".
44hunter45
Well-known member
I think it is amusing that some charge the BHA with waving the blue flag when the red team still has a plank in their platform calling for the divestiture of federally owned lands.
As a republican and BHA Lifer, I have reached out to the RNC many times about this. Try it for yourself, you will get a "Thank you for your opinion, Green Decoy" letter back every time.
So long as the RNC espouses divestiture and regulation free extraction, do any of you thing BHA is going to turn to the right?
As a republican and BHA Lifer, I have reached out to the RNC many times about this. Try it for yourself, you will get a "Thank you for your opinion, Green Decoy" letter back every time.
So long as the RNC espouses divestiture and regulation free extraction, do any of you thing BHA is going to turn to the right?
Maybe living in UT makes me more sensitive to this issue, as we are constantly bombarded with schemes to dissolve public land.
How do I go to the Uintah Basin, and look at an oil driller who is a hunter/fisherman and tell him that leasing him more blm land needs to stop, then explain to him we need to accelerate solar farm creation on blm land?
Maybe that plays well at University of Utah,but on the landscape, no one sees a solar farm and is thankful we are ending drilling rigs.
How do I go to the Uintah Basin, and look at an oil driller who is a hunter/fisherman and tell him that leasing him more blm land needs to stop, then explain to him we need to accelerate solar farm creation on blm land?
Maybe that plays well at University of Utah,but on the landscape, no one sees a solar farm and is thankful we are ending drilling rigs.
Similar threads
