Presidential Public Land Positions - take 2

[Big Fin]

Since the last Trump-public land thread went south, all the way fro sexual orientation to religion, I thought I would post this here in hopes we can keep it on topic.

This is Trump and his sons at the SHOT Show. Even if you don't like him and don't intend to vote for him, giving him some positive feedback for taking this position would probably give him more incentive to raise the volume on the topic and probably force his opponents to make their position clear.

To me, this is the opportunity hunters have been waiting for in this Presidential cycle. I have contacted my friends with platforms and asked them to make sure we use this opportunity to leverage the topic to a higher priority with all Presidential these candidates. No longer can they use it to froth the foam at fringe meetings, then act like they are our friends somewhere else.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/articles...-hunting-and-conservation?LOF1m5a4qBv6QrkZ.01

Some excerpts:

AL: I’d like to talk about public land. Seventy percent of hunters in the West hunt on public lands managed by the federal government. Right now, there’s a lot of discussion about the federal government transferring those lands to states and the divesting of that land. Is that something you would support as President?

DT: I don’t like the idea because I want to keep the lands great, and you don’t know what the state is going to do. I mean, are they going to sell if they get into a little bit of trouble? And I don’t think it’s something that should be sold. We have to be great stewards of this land. This is magnificent land. And we have to be great stewards of this land. And the hunters do such a great job—I mean, the hunters and the fishermen and all of the different people that use that land. So I’ve been hearing more and more about that. And it’s just like the erosion of the Second Amendment. I mean, every day you hear Hillary Clinton wants to essentially wipe out the Second Amendment. We have to protect the Second Amendment, and we have to protect our lands.


AL: Let me ask you this—back to conservation and access for hunters’ rights to get on public land. One of the things that we’ve found is so much of this campaign—not your campaign, but this election cycle—has talked about cutting budgets and reducing the federal government. And what the budget is for managing public lands right now is at one percent. In 1970, it was two percent. Would you continue to push that number down for wildlife conservation or would you look to invest more?

DT: I don’t think there’s any reason to. And I will say—and I’ve heard this from many of my friends who are really avid hunters and I’ve heard it from my sons who are avid hunters—that the lands are not maintained the way they were by any stretch of the imagination. And we’re going to get that changed; we’re going to reverse that. And the good thing is, I’m in a family where I have—I mean, I’m a member of the NRA, but I have two longtime members of the NRA. They’ve been hunting from the time they were five years old and probably maybe even less than that. And they really understand it. And I like the fact that, you know, I can sort of use them in terms of—they know so much about every single element about every question that you’re asking. And one of the things they’ve complained about for years is how badly the federal lands are maintained, so we’ll get that changed.

Donald Trump Jr.: It’s really all about access. I mean, I feel like the side that’s the anti-hunting crowd, they’re trying to eliminate that access—make it that much more difficult for people to get the next generation in. For me, hunting and fishing kept me out of so much other trouble I would’ve gotten into throughout my life. It’s just so important to be able to maintain that, so that next generation gets into it. And it’s the typical liberal death by a thousand cuts: “We’ll make it a little harder here. Make it a little harder here. We won’t spend the money there.” And it’s not just about hunting—it’s about fishing; it’s about hiking; it’s about access; it’s about being able to get in there and enjoy the outdoors and enjoy those great traditions that are so, you know, so much the foundation of America. And we’d be against anything like that. And frankly, it’d be about refunding those—making sure those lands are maintained properly; making sure they’re not going into private hands to be effectively walled off to the general public. And that’s something really important to us.

Keep it on track to the topic of public lands and Presidential candidates, or your account will just get toasted, rather than locking another post.

 

[mtmander]

I saw Trump jr on a bow site on a self guided hunt and it is good that Trump sr has a positive position on our land. Yes the more he talks about this the more others will have to comment.

 

[grizzly_]

What is the best way to raise awareness of the issue to Trump and others for those of us that don't have social media?

 

[Big Fin]

What is the best way to raise awareness of the issue to Trump and others for those of us that don't have social media?

Letters, phone calls, emails to his people that you support his public statements on such. If they get a bump of positives for doing so, they are more inclined to keep pushing it. If we are silent and the critics hammer him, expect the topic to go away.

And the same for those who have hidden their positions on such. If they see it as a stumbling block, then they have to re-examine the crazy stances they've been coached into taking.

Here are links to their campaign sites. Use the Contact Us links:

Trump - https://www.donaldjtrump.com/contact

Cruz - https://www.tedcruz.org/

Bush - https://jeb2016.com/?lang=en

Rubio - https://marcorubio.com/22-million/

Clinton - https://www.hillaryclinton.com/

Sanders - https://go.berniesanders.com/page/content/splash


Even more effective is if you know one of their state/local campaign staff or fund raisers. Be relentless with them and someone in the food chain will hear about it, especially if you tell them that you are impressed that Trump has favorable supported your position on public lands. Nothing can force a politician's hand like the threat of you supporting his opponent.

 

[smarandr]

Gave Trump some positive feedback and even donated $10 to his campaign. Also said that every time I see or hear another instance of pro public lands talk there's another $10 in it for him. Works on my kid; don't know why it won't work on a billionaire businessman

 

[Jwill]

I'm with you, I hope he turns up the volume on this issue. I about fell out of my chair when I heard such good sense coming out. Also nice to see his family does more than show up for a yearly pheasant hunt/photo op.

 

[Sytes]

Staying specific to this instance of Trump's comments and that of his kids - Good stuff!

 

[Straight Arrow]

From the other Trump thread that was derailed, I feel compelled to repeat my comment.
Donald Trump's positive statements concerning hunting and public lands are encouraging and have definitely turned my head with respect to his legitimacy as a candidate. I may have missed something, but he appears to be the only one even speaking his mind about hunting at all. His influence could open an era of "hope and change" for sportsmen and public lands in the beltway, particularly partnered up with Congress, as represented by Paul Ryan, Speaker of the House and an avid hunter.

 

[grizzly_]

Here's some links to the comment pages that are a little trickier to find...

Cruz - https://www.tedcruz.org/contact/

Jeb - https://jeb2016.com/contact/?lang=en

Email Marco Rubio at [email protected]

 

[Magnum Sherpa]

Fin,
Thanks for the links to the candidates' contact pages. I sent a message to Trump's campaign thanking him for his current stance opposing privatization. Everyone on here should send at least one message, whether it is recognizing Trump's position or voicing disappointment for the others who are supporting privatization. If we create enough of a buzz, each candidate will have to take an official position on this issue.

 

[Big Fin]

Everyone on here should send at least one message, whether it is recognizing Trump's position or voicing disappointment for the others who are supporting privatization. If we create enough of a buzz, each candidate will have to take an official position on this issue.

^^^ That. And Thanks for doing so.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Dear Mr. Trump,

I wanted to write and thank you for comments you made at the 2016 SHOT SHOW during your interview with Outdoor Life's Anthony Licata, showing your support for keeping public lands public and not transferring them to the states or to private ownership. This message resonates with all of us who love to hunt and fish regardless of political affiliation and needs to be heard at the national level.

Unfortunately, your Republican opponents are on the wrong side of this issue especially Ted Cruz who had made public his desire to sell public lands if he gains the Presidency. He needs to be held accountable for this and if it costs him support from hunters and fishermen then so be it. I'd love for this to be made such an issue that all Republican candidates would feel the pressure to support keeping our public lands in the hands of federal management and not allow them to be transferred to the states where the inevitable outcome would see them being sold to private ownership.

In a nutshell.

1. Keep public lands public.
2. Transferring federal lands to the states will result in them being sold when states cannot pay for their maintenance.
3. Do NOT sell our national resources to pay for politicians irresponsible spending habits!
4. Public lands are our children and grandchildren's national inheritance. Once they are sold they are gone from public access for generations to come.

Thank-you for your stance on this issue!
Sincerely,
Gerald Martin



Wow! I should have gone back over that and edited that run-on sentence.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Dear Mr. Cruz,

I am writing to ask you to reconsider your position on selling public lands to pay down the national debt. Your opponent Donald Trump is on the right side of this issue and his comments during a recent interview with Outdoor Life magazine's Anthony Licata, at the 2016 SHOT Show are resonating with outdoor enthusiasts regardless of prior political affiliation.
We do not support selling or transferring public lands currently managed by the federal government either to individual states or to private ownership. These lands are our future generation's inheritance and birthright. Once these lands vanish from public ownership, public access to them is gone forever.

Do not sell off our public assets and resources to make up the deficit caused by politician's irresponsible spending habits!

You might think this is a good idea, but your position on this issue shows that you are tone deaf to the wishes and desires of the majority of the citizens of western states, regardless of Democrat or Republican party affiliation.

The only people who support this are those special interests who stand to benefit monetarily when they can exploit the resources currently held in trust for all of the citizens of the United States of America.

Sincerely,
Gerald Martin

 

[Sapper.dawg]

Done. They all got an email from me. Good thing I have an account I use for places that will spam me, as I expect to be receiving LOTS of emails from those campaigns wanting money from now until November.

 

[hank4elk]

I did this the other day and so far just requests for $, &no answers from any.......

 

[James Riley]

Done.

 

[KMWJR]

Sent a lengthy email to all.

 

[ashersdad]

Emails sent and will keep sending.

 

[jhudson1]

Watching that interview was a shot in the arm for sure. About time someone even appears to be willing to listen to us. Emails flying tonight.

 

[double tap]

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't many, if not most, western states have either constitutional or statutory requirements to use state-owned land for the highest financial gain?

To me, that almost exclusively means sell to the highest bidder, no? If so, this is another huge reason to keep public hands under federal stewardship, since the federal government has no such mandate for federal public lands.

Chris