Executive Order To Try To Open Up Land Locked Public Land

[beaglegun]

https://www.alexjoneslive.com/2026/...ccess-to-americas-public-lands-and-waterways/

 

[schmalts]

Anyone have a list of the details? The link was a pretty vague description.

 

[Beignet]

There’s a copy of the EO itself linked right there in the article.

 

[Brad]

Who in their right mind gets news from Alex Jones? I won't click on anything to monetize that lying, criminal asshole...

 

[Big Sky Guy]

Reinvigorating America's Hunting Heritage

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: Section 1. Purpose and Every child deserves a safe and nurturing home where they can learn, grow, and reach their full potential. Adoption makes that possible by...

www.whitehouse.gov

The optimist in me sees this helping corner crossing. The realist sees a bunch of land swaps happening in 6 months.

 

[TOGIE]

yeah i'm not ecstatic about any prioritization of land swaps. but overall this does not seem like a bad thing.

also, they are desperate to appease, any and every way they can - trump and the congressional repubs are quite underwater.

 

[jimh406]

What the land-use order does​

The order sets a presumption of accessibility on federally managed lands (outside national parks). Hunting is to be generally allowed unless a specific closure is justified by local resource conditions. National parks stay closed to hunting; two national monuments are an exception.

Direct land-access changes

• Within 90 days, Interior must allow hunting of non-ESA-listed species in Castle Mountains National Monument(California) and Craters of the Moon National Monument and Preserve (Idaho). The order states that managed hunting would not put the monuments’ historic/scientific objects at risk.
• Within 180 days, Interior, Agriculture, War (Defense), and Commerce must propose policy/regulation changes to:
  • Expand hunting, fishing, shooting, and other recreation
  • Allow construction/repair of access infrastructure for recreation and wildlife management
  • Open landlocked or checkerboarded parcels via voluntary easements, land exchanges, and cooperative agreements that respect private property
  • Use qualified volunteers for wildlife and invasive-species work
  • Allow assistive technology on trails and hunt sites
  • Permit traditional lead ammo and tackle
• Within 60 days, Agriculture must reform high-demand Forest Service river-access lotteries to prioritize U.S. citizens and prior unsuccessful applicants and ban automatic computer entries.
• Interior must streamline seasonal migratory bird hunting authorizations and, within a year, encourage states to expand Sunday hunting on state and federal land.

Related (not just access)

• Youth and veteran hunter recruitment using existing education, labor, Interior, and VA programs.
• Coordination with states on habitat connectivity, invasive species, disease, predator management, prescribed fire, grazing, and voluntary private-land agreements to grow game populations.
• Support for state wild-game donation programs (food banks, schools, TEFAP) and use of Pittman-Robertson funds for hyperabundant species such as whitetail deer.

Implementation must follow existing law (including an earlier hunting-access EO, EO 13443) and available appropriations. It does not create a private right to sue.

Context​

This sits on top of earlier 2026 actions that also changed public-land use:

• May 29, 2026 — EO 14408 rescinded 1970s off-road vehicle orders (EO 11644 and 11989) and directed agencies to revise the implementing regulations.
• USDA rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule (August 2026) and earlier moves on grazing, timber, and the BLM Public Lands Rule.

The September 17 hunting order is the latest one that specifically resets how federal land is opened or closed for recreation and wildlife use. Agencies still have to write and publish the follow-on rules; those have not taken effect yet.

 

[schmalts]

This sounds like a big win for hunters as long as some land swaps are made to expand or gain more access.

 

[Hunting Wife]

On the surface some of this sounds good, and I’m sure there are a few things, like maintenance and infrastructure, that could greatly benefit from more attention/funding. However, I’m a little concerned about the recent EOs and proposals like relying on volunteers for wildlife and invasives work for example, while proposing a budget that cuts operational funding for wildlife and habitat management in certain agencies by close to 30%, with further reductions in staffing. I feel like these orders are an effort to hide the actual damage being done to the operational abilities of the agencies responsible for management. Or use them to set a precedent for agencies ceding their Congressionally mandated purposes and missions to private enterprise.

 

[SAJ-99]

On the surface some of this sounds good, and I’m sure there are a few things, like maintenance and infrastructure, that could greatly benefit from more attention/funding. However, I’m a little concerned about the recent EOs and proposals like relying on volunteers for wildlife and invasives work for example, while proposing a budget that cuts operational funding for wildlife and habitat management in certain agencies by close to 30%, with further reductions in staffing. I feel like these orders are an effort to hide the actual damage being done to the operational abilities of the agencies responsible for management. Or use them to set a precedent for agencies ceding their Congressionally mandated purposes and missions to private enterprise.

That’s the hard part. You have to have to separate what it says it will do from what it is intended to do. I would bet the people in DC that came up with this don’t give a squat about hunters. On the other hand, Landowners with blocks large enough to land lock public…hmmm.

 

[elkduds]

 

[Sytes]

However, I’m a little concerned about the recent EOs and proposals like relying on volunteers for wildlife and invasives work for example, while proposing a budget that cuts operational funding for wildlife and habitat management in certain agencies by close to 30%, with further reductions in staffing

ALWAYS appreciate your input in content that may or may not conceal or manipulate the integrity of executive, congressional, or states legislative / commissioner positioning.

Thanks for bringing a non bias position to a crowd typically entrenched within one side or the other.

****

My thoughts on this, is it better to have this EO or better that it never surfaced, regardless whether it was "suspected" to cover for another or not?

Regardless red or blue, I am Bull Moose. I would rather have this EO than not.