Hunting Washington Forum
Community => Advocacy, Agencies, Access => Topic started by: MADMAX on August 25, 2023, 10:05:28 AM
-
Lets go Brandon
https://www.foxnews.com/media/hunting-fishing-hiking-risk-due-biden-administration-regulations-politics-at-its-worst
-
:bash: :bash:
-
I read the article twice and couldnt find the proposed rule change, the hyperlinks lead to another opinion article. Am I blind?
-
I read the article twice and couldnt find the proposed rule change, the hyperlinks lead to another opinion article. Am I blind?
I believe it is referring to the proposed "BLM Public Lands Rule"
https://www.vaildaily.com/news/overwhelming-response-to-proposed-public-lands-rule-presents-a-difficult-task-for-blm/
-
Looks like lots of info available
Just wasn’t aware until I saw the link I originally posted
Heres more
https://naturalresources.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=413536
https://www.blm.gov/public-lands-rule
https://www.themeateater.com/conservation/public-lands-and-waters/new-blm-rule-could-fundamentally-change-public-land-management
-
Looks like lots of info available
Just wasn’t aware until I saw the link I originally posted
Heres more
https://naturalresources.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=413536
https://www.blm.gov/public-lands-rule
https://www.themeateater.com/conservation/public-lands-and-waters/new-blm-rule-could-fundamentally-change-public-land-management
Thanks for the links!
This seems to have the most info while still being readable
https://www.blm.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2023-05/Public%20Lands%20Rule%20-%20reviewer%20guide.pdf
It looks like the rule change does 2 things
- Establishes a new type of lease, specifically a conservation lease, where the leasing party can pay to lease a BLM plot for the purpose of conservation or restoration
- In cases where another lease will result in unavoidable ecological impacts, a conservation lease will be required to offset the impacts
I can see this being a big hurdle for energy development and ranchers trying to open new leases on BLM land. These groups are the #1 and #2 economic drivers for the BLM to hold onto the land in the first place, and it seems like they might be shooting themselves in the foot if they push them too hard.
-
I couldn’t find anything about limiting hunting fishing or hiking? Maybe I’m missing something?
-
“Recreation” is all encompassing
:twocents:
-
It’s politics with little substance.
-
It’s politics with little substance.
This regime Excels at that
-
“Recreation” is all encompassing
:twocents:
Ok but where does it say that they will be restricting recreation? I admittedly skimmed over it but I saw nothing saying they will be keeping people from recreating on blm lands?
-
“Recreation” is all encompassing
:twocents:
Ok but where does it say that they will be restricting recreation? I admittedly skimmed over it but I saw nothing saying they will be keeping people from recreating on blm lands?
It does not state that specifically
Its a risk per the original posting experts
Remember this old saying
Were from the government and were here to help
-
“Recreation” is all encompassing
:twocents:
Ok but where does it say that they will be restricting recreation? I admittedly skimmed over it but I saw nothing saying they will be keeping people from recreating on blm lands?
If you look at the credentials of the two ladies quoted (one with a degree in political science and the other with a degree in computer programing)I'd not really consider them experts
We'd all like to know what comes from this program, but don't need highly charged unsubstantiated and premature.ramblings from either side of the issue
-
“Recreation” is all encompassing
:twocents:
Ok but where does it say that they will be restricting recreation? I admittedly skimmed over it but I saw nothing saying they will be keeping people from recreating on blm lands?
You arent supposed to ask questions, your just supposed to agree.