Time for Land Tawney to step down?

hossblur

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
411
Got into a FB debate with Land. Seems he was triggered when I stated BHA pushing renewable energy development wasn't part of BHA mission statement and that it was him carrying favor with the climate crowd and proving his "WOKENESS".

He called me "John Muir", I told him next time he talked to Mr. Posewitz perhaps he should ask him about that damn in Yellowstone that didn't get built in exchange for "some scratch" for wildlife.


So. I joined BHA because I thought it was a group that was FINALLY going to get past R vs D, young vs old, religious vs heathen, and focus on what we all shared, love of public land.

But I watched as more frequently Land thought it was his job to tweet lobs at a President. I watched his personal politics start to expose themselves more frequently.

I guess the membership was to look past politics and focus on the land, but Tawney was free to do otherwise.

In its membership are a lot of miners, oil guys, contractors, developers, all of whom joined and supported even though it meant it could hurt them personally.

Then. Suddenly BHA(TRCP, TU), decide to enter the climate change debate. The goal wasn't development might happen so the smallest footprint is the goal. It was BHA now publically supported wind and solar, while continually bashing other energy sources.

Why? I've read BHA mission statement a gazillion times. No where does it enter debates that dont involve PRESERVING AND PROTECTING PUBLIC LAND.

I left. In doing so I've been contacted by numerous others who have as well.

It sucks. I love the mission. The idea of "from the party of hunting, fishing, public land(Rinella quote) was supposed to have a voice, only now to be drug into the black hole of climate change and carbon sources.

So. Long write to get to this. I believe the leadership needs to go. If we are going to have cred with miners, oil guys, ranchers, hippies, kayakers, etc, BHA can't be getting away from their very specific mission, PRESERVING PUBLIC LAND.

Thoughts?
 

Ben Lamb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,936
Location
Helena
Those orgs have been working on Climate change for a long, long time. For the record. TRCP did a great series called Beyond Season's End in the mid 2000's, with TU, if I remember correctly.

Climate change will impact our public lands and wildlife. I think those groups need to be in the mix, personally.
 

wllm1313

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2015
Messages
7,800
Location
Aurora, CO ⇄ Boston, MA
Those orgs have been working on Climate change for a long, long time. For the record. TRCP did a great series called Beyond Season's End in the mid 2000's, with TU, if I remember correctly.

Climate change will impact our public lands and wildlife. I think those groups need to be in the mix, personally.
Yea I'm with @hossblur on BHA's energy stance, it sucks. I want all impacts on our public lands to be treated with the same level of scrutiny and more broadly that energy development be banned from public land entirely.

I read Cadillac Desert in highschool, years before I started working in Oil and Gas, about the time my dad and I started trying writing GOCO grants get wetlands in our community protected. It was then that I started viewing any energy development skeptically.

The Glen Canyon Dam would total be labelled as a "green" renewable power source, but I would fight it's creation today tooth and nail.

I like a lot of what BHA does, but saying... "Well if it's solar panels, then yeah f- those sheep/mule deer/sage grouse etc" drives me nuts.
 

Ben Lamb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,936
Location
Helena
Yea I'm with @hossblur on BHA's energy stance, it sucks. I want all impacts on our public lands to be treated with the same level of scrutiny and more broadly that energy development be banned from public land entirely.

I read Cadillac Desert in highschool, years before I started working in Oil and Gas, about the time my dad and I started trying writing GOCO grants get wetlands in our community protected. It was then that I started viewing any energy development skeptically.

The Glen Canyon Dam would total be labelled as a "green" renewable power source, but I would fight it's creation today tooth and nail.

I like a lot of what BHA does, but saying... "Well if it's solar panels, then yeah f- those sheep/mule deer/sage grouse etc" drives me nuts.
RMEF pisses me off with their anti-carnivore stance.

MDF pisses me off with their sucking up to the tag theft in UT

DU pisses me off with how they treated Don Thomas & by accepting tons of cash from anti-access people and then avoiding the issue.

etc.

No group is going to be 100% where you want it. I'm not as well versed on the renewable issue that folks are upset with, so won't comment on that, but would say that under Land's leadership, BHA has grown into a national powerhouse, exponentially increased the number of public land advocates out there & he's built an army of people to continue this work. I won't throw the baby out wit the bathwater on the other groups, and I wouldn't do that to BHA either.
 

neffa3

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
3,849
Location
Wenatchee
Got into a FB debate with Land. Seems he was triggered when I stated BHA pushing renewable energy development wasn't part of BHA mission statement and that it was him carrying favor with the climate crowd and proving his "WOKENESS".

He called me "John Muir", I told him next time he talked to Mr. Posewitz perhaps he should ask him about that damn in Yellowstone that didn't get built in exchange for "some scratch" for wildlife.


So. I joined BHA because I thought it was a group that was FINALLY going to get past R vs D, young vs old, religious vs heathen, and focus on what we all shared, love of public land.

But I watched as more frequently Land thought it was his job to tweet lobs at a President. I watched his personal politics start to expose themselves more frequently.

I guess the membership was to look past politics and focus on the land, but Tawney was free to do otherwise.

In its membership are a lot of miners, oil guys, contractors, developers, all of whom joined and supported even though it meant it could hurt them personally.

Then. Suddenly BHA(TRCP, TU), decide to enter the climate change debate. The goal wasn't development might happen so the smallest footprint is the goal. It was BHA now publically supported wind and solar, while continually bashing other energy sources.

Why? I've read BHA mission statement a gazillion times. No where does it enter debates that dont involve PRESERVING AND PROTECTING PUBLIC LAND.

I left. In doing so I've been contacted by numerous others who have as well.

It sucks. I love the mission. The idea of "from the party of hunting, fishing, public land(Rinella quote) was supposed to have a voice, only now to be drug into the black hole of climate change and carbon sources.

So. Long write to get to this. I believe the leadership needs to go. If we are going to have cred with miners, oil guys, ranchers, hippies, kayakers, etc, BHA can't be getting away from their very specific mission, PRESERVING PUBLIC LAND.

Thoughts?
You talk about getting past the R and the D and yet you've been pissed that Tawney is a D since he started.
 

Werty

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
315
Location
Bzn, mt
My first question is, were talking to him through BHA, or were you talking to him on a personal level. I personally have 2 different opinions on some situations. Depending if something is work or personal.
 

Hem

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
1,460
Location
Three Forks, Mt
This just became a political thread and therefore a pissing match of opinions. It is the reason why our great nation is horribly stagnated. Most people refuse to peek outside their box.
Renewable energy development is long over due and as far as I am concerned should logically be a platform BHA supports. Imagine the benefit for future generations.
Nope, too many folks cant get beyond their current selfish and narrow minded point of view. We are a generation or two away from any broad impact renewable energy might have on livelihoods. Stop sweating it.
 

wllm1313

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2015
Messages
7,800
Location
Aurora, CO ⇄ Boston, MA
Yeah...
We are a generation or two away from any broad impact renewable energy might have on livelihoods. Stop sweating it.
exactly, but months away from companies doing irreparable harm to venerable species.

What's myopic is people thinking that any energy source doesn't come with huge costs and that those costs shouldn't be considered.
 

hossblur

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
411
You talk about getting past the R and the D and yet you've been pissed that Tawney is a D since he started.

No. In fact if you subscribe to other forums I'm apparently a flaming lib too.

Land Tawney can do whatever he wants UNLESS he's "LAND TAWNEY OF BHA", tgen he is speaking for BHA not Land Tawney.

I agree with Ben. Im not asking for BHA to go away. Far from it. I'm hoping they stick to their mission which is public land preservation.

You can't be for all things to all people, thus a mission statement, which as a leader it's your job to stick to it.

It's why you don't hire your mechanic to do your accounting.

We need miners and oil guys to be able to look past their livelihoods and support preserving public lands vs extraction. Seems like asking the climate debate to stay out of public land aint asking too much.

I don't give a chit if Land hates Trump any more than if he loves Obama. NEITHER have anything to do with keeping 50k people focused on looking past differences and uniting on public land.


I also found it odd that "John Muir" was an insult?
 

hossblur

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
411
See. Look how quick this thread jumps into a climate change argument. In doing so everyone retreated to their place.

It's EXACTLY why BHA shouldn't get sucked into that rabbit hole.

Somehow hundreds of other orgs didn't.
 
Top