Executive Order To Try To Open Up Land Locked Public Land

[Forkyfinder]

Folks who think this is a great executive order - id ask - why wasnt this a thing prior to now? Do you really think Iron Bar and the corner crossing now bubbling up across the west played no role?

If i had "checkerboard" land id be running to find a "solution" now before what's been unfairly exclusively mine becomes public owned.

 

[Pucky Freak]

“We prefer Mike Lee, but we’ve noticed your pitchforks”

 

[Nunjagottam]

Idk, land swaps are demonized because they tend to favor the well connected over the local grass roots. At least this provides a framework to bring parties to the negotiating table. Hopefully some of the big players from the public side (BHA, The Meat Beaters, Fish Kissers, RMEF etc) have sharpened their coalition building and fundraising skillsets enough to levearge this EO and the hightened public interest, into some quality land exchanges.

 

[elkduds]

 

[schmalts]

All things aside, you wouldn’t post anything negative about this even if there was one, now would you?

Edited to add: I couldn’t care less about anyone’s bias on this issue. However, it’s ironic to point out someone else’s when you clearly have the same.

Wrong

 

[jimh406]

Wrong

Can you be more specific?

 

[SAJ-99]

Mostly this seems like a nothing burger. It says a lot of things but you have to parse each item and see where there are laws that make the EO directive just typical Trump blather.
Like this item, (vi) permit the use of traditional lead ammunition and tackle. There is a law on the books for this. This EO doesn't make it so you can go shoot lead shot at waterfowl this year. If the White House thinks it does, a Judge will set them straight.

Or this "(a) voluntary removal or reduction of barriers to wildlife movement and habitat connectivity; Which is almost comical given they are "building the wall" along the border and creating a barrier to wildlife movement and being sued for it.

More, the Sunday hunting thing are all state laws. No EO can tell states how to set hunting laws.

This list is endless. As I said before, there are already programs in place for the Federal government to sell land and do easements and such. They don't need an EO for those. Those are the things where the general public has the highest chance of getting screwed. Basically, this isn't about corner crossing at all good or bad. So don't hold your breath on Eshelman creating public access to Elk Mountain so you can drive to the hunting spot. If it doesn't benefit him by A LOT, we will need to keep going over the corner.

There will be lawsuits and stays of the order on this EO, and on and on, which is really the point. Flooding the legal zone with nonsense and make the judicial system figure it out is how it all works. Some people may think "this sounds good, let's see what happens" as they try to get a few votes, but they weren't changing their vote anyway.

 

[Nick87]

Mostly this seems like a nothing burger.

Be my guess as well. Per usual. Sure gets both sides riled up though, also per usual.

 

[SAJ-99]

Be my guess as well. Per usual. Sure gets both sides riled up though, also per usual.

I should add that it is a nothing burger as long as there are people with lawyers filing for the injunctions. The Admin hasn't figured out exactly when it can and when it can't ignore the judicial branch. My guess is that will be tested in the second half of the term.

 

[ZBB]

Edited to add: I couldn’t care less about anyone’s bias on this issue. However, it’s ironic to point out someone else’s when you clearly have the same.

All things considered, if this were true, you would call out significantly more people on hunttalk, but you don’t.

 

[El Jason]

All things considered, if this were true, you would call out significantly more people on hunttalk, but you don’t.

Should we move this to the manufactured outrage thread?

It’s darkly humorous he would call out someone who is deeply entrenched in natural resource management for not striking an optimistic tone with this administration.

 

[SAJ-99]

All things considered, if this were true, you would call out significantly more people on hunttalk, but you don’t.

We all have biases. I’m pretty clear about my views. I don’t need anyone “calling me out”. I would very much like to see corner crossing declared legal everywhere. Unfortunately, we as a nation decided we didn’t like the arbitrary and capricious nature of kings so we designed a process to make laws that decides these things. That process is imperfect, but it is a good balance that has worked for 250 years. It is constantly evolving but when these things come up I get a little worried that the system hangs by a thread when a good number of people support the result even if it skips the process. I would rather Congress do its job and be the voice of the people.

And yes, I said the same thing when Obama signed many EOs. It was a dangerous precedent (and Congress wasn’t doing its job then either, which seems to be the trend). What we see today is what happens when bad actors take the wheel.

 

[jryoung]

And yes, I said the same thing when Obama signed many EOs. It was a dangerous precedent (and Congress wasn’t doing its job then either, which seems to be the trend). What we see today is what happens when bad actors take the wheel.

As I was making deer sausage yesterday the thoughts of the "sausage making process" and how it relates to policy kept floating though my head.

You can have the best ingredients, in all the right ratios, but any number of issues from there can still screw up your sausage....or some luck or unrelated circumstances can save it. Policy is similar. Specifically in this EO opening Castle Mountain NM in California is a good thing, it should have never been closed to hunting. The irony here is that a single local individual made the decision to close hunting, when the intent of the original EO from the Obama Administration was to include the same management plan as the Mojave National Preserve as it was surrounded by it. Superintendent Seuss thought differently, and he nearly unilaterally closed it off to hunting. Sometimes local office decision making isn't in our best interest.

After sitting on this EO for a few days and seeing the flood of attention on it....some of it cringy from influencers (not hunting) and the like that clearly don't know shit about hunting or hunting/land policy I just can't shake the thought this is a marketing move with lots of paid content in social channels. That's politics though, incentive is needed for good things to happen......other than just moving foward on the merits.