To the point of your question, "Will the Presidents Actions lead to hard lines being drawn by hunters?" I think the answer is yes. Hunters are not inclined to stand quiet while anyone rolls back the hands of time on public lands, clean air, clean water, etc. I know I'm not. I see no exceptions for clean air, clean water, public access. If there is a plausible exception, I've yet to hear it.
That said, engagement by a small group such as the hunting community requires strategy. When you are not the majority, when you are an outsider to the power circle, it does no good to scream and yell on Facebook. It requires smart action and utilization of your limited assets.
If people knew the difference hunting groups have made since the election, they would smile. I think some day it would make a cool story. Yet, to protect the trust earned/placed, these efforts don't end up being discussed in public.
I can assure you that if not for some hunting groups we are all members of, the choice for Interior Secretary would have been between three avid anti-public land zealots who were licking their chops to get the land liquidation started. Hunting groups you are all members of had a big influence on changing that direction. That does not solve everything, but it is a big help.
The USFWS Direction position was highly desired by the western state delegation. Their choice was never given much consideration due to resistance from hunting groups.
The new Secretary of Ag is an avid quail hunter. His nomination leaped ahead of many others, thanks to some strong support from hunting groups.
And none of this happens in the public forum. It happens by working to build relationships, having credible arguments as to why the person is more qualified, and a bit of luck. Yet, even at that, hunters only have so much political capital. There will be appointments where hunters will be thanked for their input, but other choices will be made. Such is the reality of being a small segment of society.
Every day there are hunting groups working on this stuff. It is not done on Facebook, Twitter, or elsewhere. Right now, that is the biggest impact hunter groups can have on issues we have as priority. There will be other issues where our groups are just too small to be a player. We will provide comments and input, but it would be bad strategy to invest your scarce resources and influence on those topics that will be ruled by others, no matter how hard you try.
Even with the influence of hunters, no appointee is perfect. These appointees are not King of the Public Lands. They will work for an Executive, at the policy and budgetary discretion of Congress. Anyone expecting miracles will be disappointed. Political mathematicians will do the calculus to put these folks in "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situations.
In my 25 years of engagement in these issues, the last two months has been some of the most critical work hunting groups have done. Those groups will get no thanks for it, given it has happened without great fanfare. When an appointee is forced into a tough spot, criticism will be focused toward groups who pushed that nominee forward, warts and all, as being better than some very bad alternatives. Criticism comes with the territory when trying to lead.
When the appointee process ends and we migrate to legislation, I expect more of the same strategy by hunting groups and hunters. Hunting groups have built relationships with people who might be the last line of defense on public lands, clean air, clean water. Those will be invaluable when the attacks come on clean air and clean water. And they will come, as certain as the sun sets this afternoon.
In an election when all institutions have moved further right, the groups most able to provide effective guidance are those whose membership bell curve peaks right-of-center; as would be the case with hunters when measured as an entire community. We have an important role to play, even though we are a small percent of the population. Our hunter community dislikes political process, almost to the point of apathy, making our potential influence even harder to exercise.
It will surely be interesting. It will not be easy. And it will not be comfortable. But, it never has been comfortable, and it never should be.