Trump on Public Lands-Maybe Not the Ally You Thought Edition
- Thread starter airlocksniffer
- Start date
shootbrownelk
Well-known member
Senators Enzi and Barrasso and Congresswoman Lummis are tired of hearing from me. Those 3 and the incoming Congresswoman Liz Cheney are our biggest enemies in Wyoming. They all are 100% for the Land Transfer scheme...marching in lockstep with the Wyoming StockGrowers and the Energy industry. My $0.02.
dcopas78
Well-known member
I agree, Buzz. Unfortunately, a large portion of hunters aren't fighting it because they don't realize there is a fight. Here in the eastern states, federal public lands are an afterthought (for the most part) when it comes to hunting and fishing lands. Public lands aren't valued here like they are out west. Most are over-hunted, barren of game, hard to access, etc. The local hunters all have their private leases or property sewed up, and pay little mind to what happens to public land. I try to bring up the subject every time I get around a group of hunters that talk about taking the plunge and going "out west" to chase elk someday. My dad runs a taxidermy business and I've talked to many people that come through his doors about hunting public land. Most have never visited, let alone hunted out west.
They are all dedicated hunters, but they are so stuck in the "whitetail" rut (pardon the pun), that they fail to see that this country has to offer on the vast western public lands. They watch "realtree" or other programs and think that elk/mule deer/antelope hunting is out of their reach because they aren't a rich TV hunter. They don't understand the license draws and tag allotments. They don't understand public lands and how you can access them. They don't realize the scale of the lands we are talking about protecting. It is hard to visualize millions of acres when you grew up hunting a few hundred acres. Every time I hunt a new area out there, I'm awestruck by the experience and the sheer magnitude of the lands that belong to me and every other American. I'll do what I can as far as advocacy and writing my reps. I've encouraged my friends and people I've met to do the same, but I don't know that they follow through.
They are all dedicated hunters, but they are so stuck in the "whitetail" rut (pardon the pun), that they fail to see that this country has to offer on the vast western public lands. They watch "realtree" or other programs and think that elk/mule deer/antelope hunting is out of their reach because they aren't a rich TV hunter. They don't understand the license draws and tag allotments. They don't understand public lands and how you can access them. They don't realize the scale of the lands we are talking about protecting. It is hard to visualize millions of acres when you grew up hunting a few hundred acres. Every time I hunt a new area out there, I'm awestruck by the experience and the sheer magnitude of the lands that belong to me and every other American. I'll do what I can as far as advocacy and writing my reps. I've encouraged my friends and people I've met to do the same, but I don't know that they follow through.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
As Buzz pointed out, even out west the number of vocal advocates who are actively advocating for public lands is relatively small and likely was not even a blip of a factor as far as voter influence during this recent election. As has been expressed previously, the outdoor recreation industry and such organizations as TU, RMEF, DU, and others nationally prominent will be the influence of any consideration by Congress and the White House.
Even in Montana, my perception is that the congressional delegation is much more concerned about maintaining party affiliation and big dollar industry support than listening to Montanans concerned about public lands, wildlife and the special qualities of this region. Token gestures and public expressions by the politicians ... yes, somewhat, but sincere passionate protection of public land and wildlife values ... not so much.
Even in Montana, my perception is that the congressional delegation is much more concerned about maintaining party affiliation and big dollar industry support than listening to Montanans concerned about public lands, wildlife and the special qualities of this region. Token gestures and public expressions by the politicians ... yes, somewhat, but sincere passionate protection of public land and wildlife values ... not so much.
It feels like I am beating my head against a wall when I mention anything about public land transfer to anyone here in Indiana. Most hunters aren't even aware that it is an issue.
Southern Elk
Well-known member
That is so true. Here in MS most everyone hunts private land. They are so out of touch with public land that they couldn't care less what happens. Add on top of that the republican rhetoric that the federal govt is bad, and I'm fighting a loosing battle trying to explain my position to anyone.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I don't know if you actually looked at the numbers or if that was just a statement made because it "feels correct" but in terms of % of the country considered environmentally protected, the World Bank appears to have actual data to dispute you. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ER.LND.PTLD.ZS?end=2014&start=2014&view=map&year_high_desc=true
Venezuela has more protected land than we have as a percent of there total land mass. Same with Nicaragua, Guatemala, Slovenia, Morroco... the list goes on and on and on.
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
The average hunter in my neck of the woods is very anti public land in everything they do and say they just haven't figured it out yet. It's going to take a lot to convince a closed mind.
We had better start doing what it takes because the thought of saying "I told you so" makes me nauseous.
I don't dispute one thing you said, too many uninformed ignorant citizens who are addicted to sound bites depicting this country as if 90% of the population was unemployed, underpaid, over taxed, and over regulated. I personally don't see it because most of that talk is pure BS. Ask the majority of those people for some specifics of what regulations are burdensome and unnecessary and they wouldn't have a damn clue, ask them how much they pay in taxes and what tax rate they would be ok with and again I bet most wouldn't have a clue, ask them who's to blame for the fact they might be unemployed or underpaid and the majority will say those damn environmentalist wackos and the EPA are the culprits, again they couldn't give you any specifics to back up that claim. It doesn't matter how good the economy is there will never be a time when everyone is going to be happy or share in the prosperity of a good economy, some people are going to get the shaft even in the best of times that's just the way it is and the way it will always be. You can always bitch about something and most people do but as I look around at the cheap price of gas, the stock market, unemployment rate, job growth figures, status of the auto industry etc. we are a hell of a lot better off than we were 8 years ago. We're not in the Great Depression but you'd never know it by the avalanche of misinformation being spread and gobbled up by the some in the public who just can't stand to hear a little good news or refuse to acknowledge it when it's there. I'll readily acknowledge as a lifelong hunter and angler, the more and more the Right moves to what used to be referred to as the Fringe Right, the more I drift to the Left, a place quite honestly I wouldn't have ever imagined I'd feel comfortable, but now I do. Something about that Tea Party States Rights crowd and their radical right wing agenda tells this hunter we have nothing in common.
LuketheDog
Well-known member
Percent of total land mass means nothing, the US has a pile of states that are bigger than most countries above us on that list! Count the number of protected acres per country and get back to us...
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
I disagree Luke. That would be the same as comparing economic growth of different countries by dollar instead of by a %.
The ratio of protected land to total land is the only comparison that would make sense giving you a direct circulation to economic data.
Just looking at the link and not really digging into it, I did not see a definition of "protected".
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Then you make it a contest of who is the biggest, which wasn't the point. You clearly don't need to be a wealthy country to have environmental protections, which means we don't have to constantly strive for the singular goal of economic enrichment in order to justify environmental protections.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I concur. But there's not exactly a lot of great, easy to find on a coffee break data our there to provide. I just know I've been to several very poor central American countries with great tracts of protected land. It's not about being the richest.
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
A definition might be helpful. But then I wouldn't be able to make assumptions based on my perspective and personal agenda
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
So it looks like Trump has selected a Bundy supporter for Secretary of Interior. Do folks still care to argue that he is good on public lands?
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/309628-trump-to-pick-rep-mcmorris-rodgers-for-interior-secretary-report
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/309628-trump-to-pick-rep-mcmorris-rodgers-for-interior-secretary-report
Apart from wanting to sell off public lands, McMorris Rodgers has also:
Tried to stop the BLM plans for sage-brush habitats
Allow road building in Wilderness Areas
Gut the Antiquities Act so that TR's legacy was left useless.
But hey, I can get a 30 round mag for an ar for under $20.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
It's hard to ruin a Friday when it's snowing and the birds are flying, but that did it.
Similar threads
