Balancing BLM multiple use mandate

[NVDesertHunter]

New polling showing that most westerns want a balanced approach to managing public lands:

https://www.nwf.org/-/media/Documents/PDFs/Press-Releases/2025/NWF-Poll-Western-Voters-Oil-and-Gas-Proposals.pdf

MSN

 

[elkduds]

Sample size (N) of 400/state, weak. 5% margin of error, high due to small sample size. Source of survey: National Wildlife Foundation. Likelihood of GOP in DC giving one slice of a f#ck, 3.3%. Even within the statistical limits, this is strong evidence of public opinion against reduced regulations and increased drilling on BLM.

 

[Treeshark]

Even within the statistical limits, this is strong evidence of public opinion against reduced regulations and increased drilling on BLM.

Only 8 states were surveyed- I’m not sure how useful this information is due to selection bias.

A data set of all 50 states would be much more compelling.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Only 8 stayes were surveyed- I’m not sure how useful this data is.

8 states

Which state legislators do you suppose have politically the largest risk?

How the predominately republican represented populace of Montana, Dakotas, Utah, and Wyoming feel about federal land is pretty relevant unless your lost on the most important things in politics. Getting re-elected and keeping legislative power.

 

[Treeshark]

Thanks for catching my typo, *you’re a good man

 

[Laszlo Cravensworth]

Sample size (N) of 400/state, weak. 5% margin of error, high due to small sample size. Source of survey: National Wildlife Foundation. Likelihood of GOP in DC giving one slice of a f#ck, 3.3%. Even within the statistical limits, this is strong evidence of public opinion against reduced regulations and increased drilling on BLM.

400 is a sufficient sample size for all of those state, and a 5% margin of error is not high for a survey.