Daines, Newhouse, and other R Senators with some bold words regarding public lands

[Irrelevant]

A blueprint for real conservation

If the administration is serious about restoring America the Beautiful, they must embrace Western Conservation Principles and promote these time-tested, science-based practices we know equate …

thehill.com

This [30 by 30] fails to reassure westerners this initiative isn’t a guise to lock up more land, and it fails to reassure us that the administration is taking seriously their responsibility to manage our public lands.

Looking at their actual plan (which is incredibly vague despite them making that same complaint toward the 30 by 30 plan, though rightfully so) I find blatant hypocrisy in their overarching idea that "Private does it better" yet we should spend a bunch of money to clean up Superfund sites and abandoned wells. But in the next breath suggest transferring Bureau of Reclamation infrastructure.

And of course, no partisan document would be complete without the call for "science-based" solutions, insinuating that the other sides solutions are not science based.

I will give them the nod on the need for litigation reform, there is a legitimate need for that as JR pointed out recently.

 

[ID_to_NV2012]

The multiple use doctrine is used by land management agencies, particularly the BLM, as a scapegoat to allow proponents the ability to do whatever they want on public lands. The hide behind it rather than sometimes telling them, "No."

The "streamlining" is detrimental to wildlife and their habitat because the NEPA documents are so poorly written that wildlife agencies have difficult times addressing the actually impacts to the landscape in the accelerated time lines.

Range conditions in the west have been terrible in 2021 and rather than land management agencies enforcing drought compliance, they allow ranchers to run livestock on the range.

What the hell is wrong with saying enough is enough? The landscape is not just for ranching or oil and gas extraction or "green energy." Everytime the land management agencies muff things up the habitat and wildlife end up paying.

I apologize for the rant. But this is getting old

 

[Irrelevant]

I'm not going to lie, "lock up more land..." triggered me. Why the F is acquiring more public land ever bad?

 

[elkduds]

See that R? The platform of the Republican party calls for transferring public lands to private ownership. As much as possible, ASAP. Never forget that in the voting booth. Sounds like these 2 want taxpayers to mitigate the fire danger before they sell it all to their donors. Read their editorial again with the goal to privatize public lands in mind, it will reveal their true intentions.

 

[Irrelevant]

See that R? The platform of the Republican party calls for transferring public lands to private ownership. As much as possible, ASAP. Never forget that in the voting booth. Sounds like these 2 want taxpayers to mitigate the fire danger before they sell it all to their donors. Read their editorial again with the goal to privatize public lands in mind, it will reveal their true intentions.

I am less surprised at their editorial and more surprised at their preferred "plan" and how many people signed it.

 

[Trial153]

See that R? The platform of the Republican party calls for transferring public lands to private ownership. As much as possible, ASAP. Never forget that in the voting booth. Sounds like these 2 want taxpayers to mitigate the fire danger before they sell it all to their donors. Read their editorial again with the goal to privatize public lands in mind, it will reveal their true intentions.

I guess it's a surprise when a politician does what they said they would do?

 

[Irishman]

By manage our public lands, Steve Daines means log more of the state and national forest. They keep talking about mismanaged forests (less logging) being the cause of forest fires, yet there is so little of the forest that hasn't already been logged here in Montana, and we are getting more forest fires than ever. Global warming, drier summers, weaken trees which in turn promotes beetle infestations. Drier summers result in more and bigger forest fires. If you want to manage the forests to make them healthier and less prone to huge fires, then thinning of the forests helps. However timber companies, sawmills, do not want to go in and thin out the forest like you or I would on our property, it's not economical for them. They want to cut every tree they can use, leaving little. Then when the forest returns, it's a thick overgrown fire hazard again. Steve Daines doesn't want the government spending money to actually keep the forest healthy.

 

[wa_archer]

They don't really give a shit about public lands, logging or the health of the forests. These politicians only care about the check being written and the favor they are paying back for that money. Its just a damn game for these politicians who are being marieneted by there donors or future prospects once they get out of office. Same reason they bend over for oil companies, chemical companies, big pharma, insert here.

We as the informed just need to keep making a big enough pitch that they know its not going to fair for there voting interests. unfortunately i only see it getting harder as both sides keep attempting to stretch what they can get away with.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Controlled burns, thinning, selective harvesting, proactive forest management can all work in the urban wildfire interface and in limited areas. But to consider thinning and harvesting the millions and millions of acres of National Forest ... and then to continue to practice that mode of "management" is absurdly impractical and fiscally impossible.

Senator Daines and his comrade, Gov GG have long advocated for "logging our way out of forest fires". They were highly successful businessmen and tech industry moguls. I only wish they would have stuck with what bolstered the economy and their pocketbooks, instead of diving into politics, now in murky waters way over their heads, IMO.

 

[Gerald Martin]

We have a plan that relies on a bunch of gobbledygook, buzz phrases and leveraged assets to ensure that our constituents vote for us instead of that other guy.

 

[Irrelevant]

We have a plan that relies on a bunch of gobbledygook, buzz phrases and leveraged assets to ensure that our constituents vote for us instead of that other guy.

That's a good description. There was almost zero substance to it.

 

[Gerald Martin]

We have a plan that relies on a bunch of gobbledygook, buzz phrases and leveraged assets to ensure that our constituents vote for us instead of that other guy.

And BTW, cut down the trees and they won’t burn.

 

[Cornbread]

Lots of big blowhards that don't accomplish a thing!

 

[Ben Lamb]

We have a plan that relies on a bunch of gobbledygook, buzz phrases and leveraged assets to ensure that our constituents vote for us instead of that other guy.

You can set your watch on this. It's the same playbook they've used for decades. Politics in America has reached a level of stupidity that dragging the rest of us down with it.

 

[Akcabin]

Yah know, I'm reading threw this n see folks bitching. About how bad almost everything proposed is just bad. So stop everything. There has to be a political reason where folks are getting paid off under the table.
Hey I'm smart enough to know that I don't know everything. I know this. There are the sides of mountains where 80% of the spruce trees are dead. Spruce beetles killed trees are everywhere. Standing there rotting and being huge fire dangers. Where the trees that fall create pixy stick landscapes void of vegetation and a mixed forest for wildlife. Including land that is designated park land. The state parks in AK were closed and couldn't open because of the danger of dead trees. You can't have a camp fire. I asked a private logger I know if he could select harvest n use them. Trade out the logs for reducing the dangers. He told me he tried but too much politics. Everyone looses again because it doesn't fit in a little box with a government stamp , kinda out of the box thinking to be able to solve a local problem. Where a local logger can go in n get the logs. Yes they will probably have to make a logging road that will be public access. But it doesn't fit in a government box so you will get sued by something. With groups on all sides just sitting on the sidelines waiting to find something to take a shot at n exaggerate everything they can.
. Trees that could have been turned into jobs. And leave a habitat that can regenerate. But too many folks bitching. So nothing happens.
Wildlife leave because there isn't a diversified habitat. Forest fires rage on. I might be a bit pinchy on this one because we lost our home and everything we owned to a forest fire.
Personally for me I believe that the passive management practices used by our federal land,fish n game are a failed policy. And the states should be able to have more say in how their lands are managed. Keeping decisions closer to home. Folks in other parts of the country that have no clue about our local heritages n economies.
What I do see is that what we have isn't working because folks won't try to understand that others also have ideas or concepts. And they know best. Absolutely will not compromise because there is a politician that is getting paid off by a big something. Someone who is elected to represent the people would never represent what the people want. Because I don't agree with the rest of their platform folks.
Hey I don't have all the answers but I know that if you don't start you can't get anywhere. And I'm pretty sold on thinking that less government is better. And local control is best.
Hey my thoughts. Probably started getting those thoughts the day I was born. Formed by the world as I see it just me

 

[Irrelevant]

Yah know, I'm reading threw this n see folks bitching. About how bad almost everything proposed is just bad. So stop everything. There has to be a political reason where folks are getting paid off under the table.
Hey I'm smart enough to know that I don't know everything. I know this. There are the sides of mountains where 80% of the spruce trees are dead. Spruce beetles killed trees are everywhere. Standing there rotting and being huge fire dangers. Where the trees that fall create pixy stick landscapes void of vegetation and a mixed forest for wildlife. Including land that is designated park land. The state parks in AK were closed and couldn't open because of the danger of dead trees. You can't have a camp fire. I asked a private logger I know if he could select harvest n use them. Trade out the logs for reducing the dangers. He told me he tried but too much politics. Everyone looses again because it doesn't fit in a little box with a government stamp , kinda out of the box thinking to be able to solve a local problem. Where a local logger can go in n get the logs. Yes they will probably have to make a logging road that will be public access. But it doesn't fit in a government box so you will get sued by something. With groups on all sides just sitting on the sidelines waiting to find something to take a shot at n exaggerate everything they can.
. Trees that could have been turned into jobs. And leave a habitat that can regenerate. But too many folks bitching. So nothing happens.
Wildlife leave because there isn't a diversified habitat. Forest fires rage on. I might be a bit pinchy on this one because we lost our home and everything we owned to a forest fire.
Personally for me I believe that the passive management practices used by our federal land,fish n game are a failed policy. And the states should be able to have more say in how their lands are managed. Keeping decisions closer to home. Folks in other parts of the country that have no clue about our local heritages n economies.
What I do see is that what we have isn't working because folks won't try to understand that others also have ideas or concepts. And they know best. Absolutely will not compromise because there is a politician that is getting paid off by a big something. Someone who is elected to represent the people would never represent what the people want. Because I don't agree with the rest of their platform folks.
Hey I don't have all the answers but I know that if you don't start you can't get anywhere. And I'm pretty sold on thinking that less government is better. And local control is best.
Hey my thoughts. Probably started getting those thoughts the day I was born. Formed by the world as I see it just me

And how would you feel if instead of losing your house to a wildfire you lost your house and family to poorly permitted logging operation?

2014 Oso landslide - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Ben Lamb]

Yah know, I'm reading threw this n see folks bitching. About how bad almost everything proposed is just bad. So stop everything. There has to be a political reason where folks are getting paid off under the table.
Hey I'm smart enough to know that I don't know everything. I know this. There are the sides of mountains where 80% of the spruce trees are dead. Spruce beetles killed trees are everywhere. Standing there rotting and being huge fire dangers. Where the trees that fall create pixy stick landscapes void of vegetation and a mixed forest for wildlife. Including land that is designated park land. The state parks in AK were closed and couldn't open because of the danger of dead trees. You can't have a camp fire. I asked a private logger I know if he could select harvest n use them. Trade out the logs for reducing the dangers. He told me he tried but too much politics. Everyone looses again because it doesn't fit in a little box with a government stamp , kinda out of the box thinking to be able to solve a local problem. Where a local logger can go in n get the logs. Yes they will probably have to make a logging road that will be public access. But it doesn't fit in a government box so you will get sued by something. With groups on all sides just sitting on the sidelines waiting to find something to take a shot at n exaggerate everything they can.
. Trees that could have been turned into jobs. And leave a habitat that can regenerate. But too many folks bitching. So nothing happens.
Wildlife leave because there isn't a diversified habitat. Forest fires rage on. I might be a bit pinchy on this one because we lost our home and everything we owned to a forest fire.
Personally for me I believe that the passive management practices used by our federal land,fish n game are a failed policy. And the states should be able to have more say in how their lands are managed. Keeping decisions closer to home. Folks in other parts of the country that have no clue about our local heritages n economies.
What I do see is that what we have isn't working because folks won't try to understand that others also have ideas or concepts. And they know best. Absolutely will not compromise because there is a politician that is getting paid off by a big something. Someone who is elected to represent the people would never represent what the people want. Because I don't agree with the rest of their platform folks.
Hey I don't have all the answers but I know that if you don't start you can't get anywhere. And I'm pretty sold on thinking that less government is better. And local control is best.
Hey my thoughts. Probably started getting those thoughts the day I was born. Formed by the world as I see it just me

While I don't agree with 100% of this, I think there's a metric chit-ton of wisdom here. Complaining alone is just feeding the beast. Offer up solutions instead of just retreating back to talking points or vague policy prescriptions.

A huge reality that we don't want to talk about is how budgets for our land management agencies are gobbled up by ridiculous policies set by congress relative to fire-fighting, litigation, planning ,etc while refusing to invest in those agencies in order to get the work done in a timely fashion, take a scalpel instead of a maul to reforming NEPA, and figuring out how to eliminate bad decisions like Cottonwood in order to expedite truly needed projects and improving habitat health on public lands.

The Good Neighbor Authority program is one such solution that has been utlized well for both forest health and wildlife, with a great emphasis on protecting structures. That was done under the Farm Bill during 44's tenure. Another good program (that needs a few small tweaks) is from 45's Department of the Interior that allows for confier removal, especially Pinyon Juniper, under a cat-ex to improve BLM lands for sage grouse and other species of wildlife.

There's tons of good solutions that have bipartisan support out there, but the extremists on both sides of the aisle would rather have us fighting each other for scraps than working together.

I am truly sorry you guys lost your house to a fire.

 

[Akcabin]

And how would you feel if instead of losing your house to a wildfire you lost your house and family to poorly permitted logging operation?

2014 Oso landslide - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yeah folks can cherry pick everything. Nit pick. Can't do anything because there was a mudslide somewhere. I suspect there was a lot of rain involved also. But you know know maybe you're right n we should not log. Might cause a mudslide or just fill in the tragedy. Well you know it could happen.
Maybe you can waist your time trying to figure out some other statistic or event. How about how many acres of land that have been logged and there was no landslide fact. And grew back with new growth that attracted a variety of wildlife.
Hey probably should not have wrote that like I did but it is what I felt.
But hey I can respect your thoughts.
And still feel that we need less government. Rules and administrative orders that are blanket policies.
Many ares where over 75% of the trees are dead. Many around large communities. Folks in western states only have to look out there window or short drive down the road. If they caught on fire it could also be pretty dangerous. Thousands of folks trying to get out of town while the roads are plugged. Watching a fire come at them.
I believe that that is a could happen sinario. Hey just my thoughts folks

 

[Irrelevant]

Yeah folks can cherry pick everything. Nit pick. Can't do anything because there was a mudslide somewhere. I suspect there was a lot of rain involved also. But you know know maybe you're right n we should not log. Might cause a mudslide or just fill in the tragedy. Well you know it could happen.

I think you missed my point. It was that simply reducing or eliminating permitting has it's own flaws, some of them quite major. Permitting is generally in place for reason, just like construction specifications are in place for reasons. Everything is fine with good intentions until something bad happens then you wish you had the permitting.

 

[CoffeeGoat]

I think you missed my point. It was that simply reducing or eliminating permitting has it's own flaws, some of them quite major. Permitting is generally in place for reason, just like construction specifications are in place for reasons. Everything is fine with good intentions until something bad happens then you wish you had the permitting.

According to the article you cited, logging was not the cause of this mud slide because permitting did not allow it to go ahead - and yet the hillside came down anyways.

Of course the right answer is not "no permits" but don't mislead yourself that more "system" or "oversight" will solve everything either. Somewhere like California might need a fair bit more logging, somewhere like Montana might need less. We might need to address international trade to make sure those mills can make a profit on sustainable harvested lumber.

It's a challenging problem, I think a good start is figuring out how to hold the people in charge responsible and reducing the impact of legal obstruction.