Unfortunately many sportsmen who rely on public lands will be so blinded by identity politics that they'll support the politicians they support regardless of whether their decisions negatively impact their interests. Such is life I guess.
New Appointment to head BLM?
- Thread starter shoots-straight
- Start date
The Utah delegation has power because of who backs them. The NRA, oil companies, mining companies.
But, and maybe I'm a little cranky this morning, about 50k outdoorsmen showed up in Febuary to support them as well. Spent about $7million. Don Peay spent the weekend hand holding elected officials, Jason Chaffetz was the keynote. There you have a collection of top companies buying space, top industry names, and conservation orgs, lined up supporting a group that does not support public land, and whose founder, Peay, isn't supportive of the North American model.
There isn't anything to combat the mentality with. When our Gov, Romney, little Trump see the size and scope of that expo, with Peay in their ear, the optics are that Sportsmen support the Utah Mentality.
I tried bribing Fin with Dairy Queen to talk BHA into having its rendezvous here as a counter. Apparently Boise means more to Land than defeating or pushing back the Utahns.
The Outdoor Retailers ran away.
You want to beat back the Utah group, SHOW UP when it counts. Rob Bishop just got reelected. His challengers had no money, no help.
Mike Lee was prior.
If guys, orgs, companies, actually believe in public land, they are going to have to stop playing both sides. The petro companies don't. The mining companies don't.
Utah has a warchest with millions in it. An AG wanting to do it, and a law firm in Louisiana on retainer that have been preparing to sue for transfer. They just got a dream BLM director.
200 tags seems like a cheap price to gain 640 million acres.
But, and maybe I'm a little cranky this morning, about 50k outdoorsmen showed up in Febuary to support them as well. Spent about $7million. Don Peay spent the weekend hand holding elected officials, Jason Chaffetz was the keynote. There you have a collection of top companies buying space, top industry names, and conservation orgs, lined up supporting a group that does not support public land, and whose founder, Peay, isn't supportive of the North American model.
There isn't anything to combat the mentality with. When our Gov, Romney, little Trump see the size and scope of that expo, with Peay in their ear, the optics are that Sportsmen support the Utah Mentality.
I tried bribing Fin with Dairy Queen to talk BHA into having its rendezvous here as a counter. Apparently Boise means more to Land than defeating or pushing back the Utahns.
The Outdoor Retailers ran away.
You want to beat back the Utah group, SHOW UP when it counts. Rob Bishop just got reelected. His challengers had no money, no help.
Mike Lee was prior.
If guys, orgs, companies, actually believe in public land, they are going to have to stop playing both sides. The petro companies don't. The mining companies don't.
Utah has a warchest with millions in it. An AG wanting to do it, and a law firm in Louisiana on retainer that have been preparing to sue for transfer. They just got a dream BLM director.
200 tags seems like a cheap price to gain 640 million acres.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Sadly so, as evidenced by the firm stance of even those staunch public land supporters and avid hunters on this forum who doggedly stick mostly to one political party ticket ... unwittingly believing that party (and all candidates) still holds true to worthy conservative principles.
The reality IMO is that the leadership and full power of that party, in the form of one man, does not seem to hold to any traditional principle unless it is simply $elf-$erving.
It seems inconsistent with the history of political compromise on behalf of the nation to be forced to take a single issue stance in order to perpetuate the legacy and value of public lands and public wildlife, with commensurate public access, public hunting, and North American Wildlife Conservation traditions at jeopardy.
Apologies for what seems overly political on this forum ... however this thread is unfortunately based on discussion of an appointment with political lightning rods related to public land and public wildlife conservation.
Had some coffee. Still cranky, but I reread my post.
It's not the companies job to lead the fight. They are in business to make a profit, those that support us are terrific.
I'm speaking to the 50k members of their customer base. It's long past time YOU quit talking about land transfer, and public land, and the Utah attitude, then showing up, spending money, and supporting the Utah attitude. You can't have it both ways.
Our side needs a scalp. Right now, we get bought cheap.
It's not the companies job to lead the fight. They are in business to make a profit, those that support us are terrific.
I'm speaking to the 50k members of their customer base. It's long past time YOU quit talking about land transfer, and public land, and the Utah attitude, then showing up, spending money, and supporting the Utah attitude. You can't have it both ways.
Our side needs a scalp. Right now, we get bought cheap.
Because at the end of the day neither Democrats or Republicans really give a shit about you or I. Unless were big-money donors, we are just a cog in the machine that keeps sending them free money that they can piss away on their pet projects or use for kickbacks for corporations.
antelopedundee
Well-known member
Republicans in general are horseshit stewards of our public lands. Always have been and always will be. Rape em for the almighty dollar. That's why I hate voting for the tards. I forget which gun writer who said years ago that they protect your gun rights, but don't protect your places to use them.
antelopedundee
Well-known member
The green new deal was overly aggressive and unrealistic but at least it was thinking in the right direction.
I don't much care for either political party, I'm an independent for a reason. Thankfully, all Republicans haven't always been bad stewards of the land. Roosevelt immediately comes to mind.
Also Dick Cheney sponsored the Wyoming Wilderness Act. I was in the Platte River Wilderness last week, and I wondered if he would still do such a thing if he were a representative under this political climate.
Last edited:
elkduds
Well-known member
The day before this posted I was considering putting up another "Don't Get Complacent RE PLT" reminder, just because politicians are too busy w impeachment, reelection, immigration, racism...
It is imperative to remind each other and legislators that we don't blink, and we never sleep when it comes to valuing and defending our national legacy of public lands. Every day the people who see public lands as the place their fortunes lie buried are lobbying, bribing, locking gates, lying to voters, advertising, convincing decisionmakers to neglect defending public lands. This unreviewed appointment adds to the subterranean flood: industry leaders decomposing the agencies and departments of federal government: EPA, Parks/national monuments, NEPA, LWCF.
The buzzards of antifederalism and extractive industry flock to feast on the remains of our federal body of lands: BLM, USFS, Parks/Momuments, military preserves, wildlife areas. That is the legacy of this administration's most successful domestic policy, period.
Tell your legislators to stop this assault on public lands. Tell them every week in person, via advocacy groups, on the phone, in writing, in the media, in the voting booth: Keep their hands off our public lands.
It is imperative to remind each other and legislators that we don't blink, and we never sleep when it comes to valuing and defending our national legacy of public lands. Every day the people who see public lands as the place their fortunes lie buried are lobbying, bribing, locking gates, lying to voters, advertising, convincing decisionmakers to neglect defending public lands. This unreviewed appointment adds to the subterranean flood: industry leaders decomposing the agencies and departments of federal government: EPA, Parks/national monuments, NEPA, LWCF.
The buzzards of antifederalism and extractive industry flock to feast on the remains of our federal body of lands: BLM, USFS, Parks/Momuments, military preserves, wildlife areas. That is the legacy of this administration's most successful domestic policy, period.
Tell your legislators to stop this assault on public lands. Tell them every week in person, via advocacy groups, on the phone, in writing, in the media, in the voting booth: Keep their hands off our public lands.
Last edited:
MO Betta
Well-known member
This is very disconcerting. I tend to lean more towards the conservative side in general but on issues such as these we owe it to ourselves and those who come after us to keep these public lands in the hands and hearts of the public and to let it be known that regardless of party affiliation we need our representatives to have our interests at heart. I took the opportunity to contact all of my representatives in the Senate and House. I've attached one of the inquiries I penned if someone would like to use it, or someone much more eloquent than myself wishes to modify for those who would like to use it as a template for contacting your representatives. It's just a flat text file so most everyone should be able to open it.
antelopedundee
Well-known member
I'm a GDI as well, but over the years most [but not all] of the Pubs I've known of were pro-business at the expense of the environment. OK to lose a few critters as long as it's not all of them.
He wasn't on public land when he shot his hunting partner.
MO Betta
Well-known member
There's garbage on both sides. Bull Moose 2020.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
This is a Republican party like none before.
if you made post on several other boards, Bowsite comings to mind youd be lambasted left wing socialist or a best greeted with indifference or denial. The reliance of party identity in the decision making of hunters is particularly frighting.
Mirror adjusted appropriately...
I'm not happy one bit about the selection of this nutter to lead the BLM charge. As an Independent that leans Republican and one who did not vote for Trump (nor Hillary) and has voted Schweitzer (D), Buillock (D), and Tester (D), I am far from a fan of their, "left wing socialist" agenda and that is the true crux of this issue. Partisan politics has reached a point where the evil on both sides is a pill that is too hard to swallow to follow along with Independent priority interests. It's an ugly scene all around.
Welcome to extremes that run the middle. This is the true frightening thought...
Frightening indeed.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Ironically, like many here, I have voted and identified Republican most of my adult life. This recent BLM political appointment reflects the consistent position of the party regarding public lands and wildlife. I adamantly assert the position is contrary to the best interests of hunters on this forum.
