Smart ass answers is what the Huffington post deserves.
Ok. I agree, HuffPost is about selling advertising delivered on left-of-center media.
Not just to you, but a question to anyone who thinks that facts are irrelevant because of who presents the facts, "What kind of answers/discussion does the topic and facts deserve, regardless of how HuffPost presents them to pander to their readership?"
I am lucky that on these public land political topics, I don't have to rely on opinions disguised as fact as happens with HuffPost and the equivalent counterparts on the other side of the media bias bell curve. My years of doing this allow me to pick up the phone or email those who are in this stuff as their daily work.
A few facts, not spun with any desired "journalistic outcomes."
FACT - We are getting our asses handed to us on public land conservation issues. We have been getting it handed to us since I started being involved in these topics thirty years ago.
FACT - Much as Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, used backdoor methods to accomplish objectives important to those paying their political freight, the current administration is doing the same thing. Just different channels, different agendas, different payment methods, different beneficiaries.
FACT - The BLM does not have a Director. It is being run by a self-proclaimed anti-public lander, known as William Pendley. The Administration is purposely not filling a position that requires Congressional approval (BLM Director), as the person they keep reappointing as a spoil of victory to their friends, Deputy Director Pendley, could never pass a confirmation vote. Ask anyone, on either side, who is tuned in on this issue and they will tell you the same answer. Just a way to work the current system. Other Administrations have done similar things in different agencies.
FACT - The current budget proposed by the Administration reflects that anti-public land message by reducing the LWCF funds, earmarked for conservation and land acquisition via prior legislation. It cuts the $900 million earmarked for that fund down to less than $50 million. It is the most important fund for solving access issues on large public landscapes.
FACT - What I have presented above is a minute fraction of the issues we are currently facing related to public lands and conservation of those lands.
OPINION (based on decades of engaging on these topics) - Point is, every Administration uses some assets as bargaining chips for repayment of political liabilities. In the current case, the current Administration views public lands, clean air, clean water, conservation, as bargaining chips to repay a lot of debts. Again, no different than past Administrations using some government policies, assets, or programs to repay what is owed to those who supported them. Just a different currency being used for the repayments and being paid to different beneficiaries.
MORE OPINION - Regardless of the Administration or who one voted for, ignoring what is happening or being an apologist as the hunting community sometimes behaves, does nothing for the benefit of public lands, clean air, clean water, and conservation. The groups who want less public land, dirtier water, dirtier air, and care little for conservation show up with their attorneys, checkbooks, and lobbyists. They are hoping we become apologists on these topics because we voted for (insert name) or we identify as (insert party). They count on us not being engaged or split based on political affiliations. I see so much within the hunting world that plays right into the hand of this strategy. The other side is well-funded and well-connected. They and their causes don't need our support. Wild things and wild places need our support.
www.nature.org
m.huffpostbrasil.com
www.nature.org
