American Prairie loses grazing rights

[Gila]

Low behavior is calling people nut jobs for not agreeing…

Anyone who tells me I should be sued for slander because I disagree with them are nut jobs OK?

 

[Gila]

There’s a pile of mistruths

 

[Gila]

The Rokslide mods have a high tolerance for bullshit, but how you haven’t been banned for this level of trolling, I don’t know.

Really doesn’t matter anymore how many cattle AP had intended to displace because they no longer have the ability to control public lands unless they graze cattle. The USDA and DOI are now handing over more public lands to cattle ranchers. Basically, the only cattle displaced will be what is on their own deeded lands. They still have leases out there for Wild Sky Beef.

 

[Greenstig]

Wowzers.

Since this thread is bound to be locked at some point, I’d like to get back on topic and make a final appeal to any future readers:

AP is a private organization operating with private funding. You, me or anyone else on this forum will likely never have any control over what happens within the organization.

However, what we do have control over is how we, as hunters, are perceived.

If someone is allowing you eat at their table, showing up with pitchforks and torches probably isn’t the best way to keep your seat.

Being a friendly and appreciative guest is how we will continue to get fed.

 

[Gila]

AP is a private organization operating with private funding. You, me or anyone else on this forum will likely never have any control over what happens within the organization.

The tax payers have a say over the public lands that AP wants to control for their re-wilding, preservationist pipe dream.

However, what we do have control over is how we, as hunters, are perceived.

Hunters should be perceived as appreciating the real stewards of wildlife which are the multi-generation ranchers. The cattle ranchers who have practiced the Clarence Mortensen Principles or the like to regenerate the prairie. Hunters should also advocate for habitat improvements by pushing for more logging, more cattle grazing and more prescribed burns on public lands. Hunters should also advocate for taking wolves and grizzlies off the Endangered Species Act for better predator management. Hunters should also be perceived as advocating for Wildlife Management by science, not a re-wilding emotion.

Being a friendly and appreciative guest is how we will continue to get fed.

The arrogance of American Prairie, Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Biological Diversity to show up in the community and demand millions of acres of public and private lands for re-wilding is a difficult pill to swallow. Yet, I have applauded AP for getting public access in the refuge…for putting a good chunk of land into BM and for giving access to adjacent public lands. But no matter what I post, I am continually insulted, lied about. The real truth is some of you don’t want the facts because you can’t live with the facts. But it seems only some are actually reading my posts, yet they believe the lies that others tell about those posts.

Go out and watch some podcasts. Suggest doing a search for Tom Opre: “The Real Yellowstone”

Digital Cinema Event Page

no_description

shepherdsofwildlife.org

 

[CJ19]

Wowzers.

Since this thread is bound to be locked at some point, I’d like to get back on topic and make a final appeal to any future readers:

AP is a private organization operating with private funding. You, me or anyone else on this forum will likely never have any control over what happens within the organization.

However, what we do have control over is how we, as hunters, are perceived.

If someone is allowing you eat at their table, showing up with pitchforks and torches probably isn’t the best way to keep your seat.

Being a friendly and appreciative guest is how we will continue to get fed.

this is sort of what a lot of people worry about with this project. The "conservation" crowd telling me how great APR is and that they need tax subsidies to build out. But at the same time we better be nice because APR is corporate venture financed by the largest corporations and richest people on earth and they wont let us hunt there unless we are nice to them and conform to their world view. You hit the nail on the head.

 

[WRO]

this is sort of what a lot of people worry about with this project. The "conservation" crowd telling me how great APR is and that they need tax subsidies to build out. But at the same time we better be nice because APR is corporate venture financed by the largest corporations and richest people on earth and they wont let us hunt there unless we are nice to them and conform to their world view. You hit the nail on the head.

Pretty much every ranch and farm receives tax subsidies of some kind, whether it be very low tax rates, subsidized grazing costs, nrcs fencing and habitat improvements etc.

APR has 20 years of public access history, most big ranches allow zero access and are owned by billionaires and millionaires.

I’m failing to understand your logic here, can you please explain?

 

[Greenstig]

The tax payers have a say over the public lands that AP wants to control for their re-wilding, preservationist pipe dream.

Hunters should be perceived as appreciating the real stewards of wildlife which are the multi-generation ranchers. The cattle ranchers who have practiced the Clarence Mortensen Principles or the like to regenerate the prairie. Hunters should also advocate for habitat improvements by pushing for more logging, more cattle grazing and more prescribed burns on public lands. Hunters should also advocate for taking wolves and grizzlies off the Endangered Species Act for better predator management. Hunters should also be perceived as advocating for Wildlife Management by science, not a re-wilding emotion.

The arrogance of American Prairie, Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Biological Diversity to show up in the community and demand millions of acres of public and private lands for re-wilding is a difficult pill to swallow. Yet, I have applauded AP for getting public access in the refuge…for putting a good chunk of land into BM and for giving access to adjacent public lands. But no matter what I post, I am continually insulted, lied about. The real truth is some of you don’t want the facts because you can’t live with the facts. But it seems only some are actually reading my posts, yet they believe the lies that others tell about those posts.

Go out and watch some podcasts. Suggest doing a search for Tom Opre: “The Real Yellowstone”

Digital Cinema Event Page

no_description

shepherdsofwildlife.org

this is sort of what a lot of people worry about with this project. The "conservation" crowd telling me how great APR is and that they need tax subsidies to build out. But at the same time we better be nice because APR is corporate venture financed by the largest corporations and richest people on earth and they wont let us hunt there unless we are nice to them and conform to their world view. You hit the nail on the head.

Thank you gentlemen for your fresh insight and thoughtful contributions. Many of us have never considered such rational arguments backed by verifiable information and unbiased sources.

However, my post was not intended for either of you. I can see that both of you have made up your minds long before I got here. There is nothing that I, or anyone else, can say will sway you from your stance on AP and the current situation involving public land grazing leases. You are passionate about your opinions and I have no desire to change your minds.

———

My hope is that anyone not familiar with the situation finds enough credible information to independently reach their own conclusions. I hope they can identify and disregard the conjecture, political pandering, and outright falsehoods that have muddied the waters.

I am not affiliated with AP and I’ve never contributed to them financially. I’m just a hunter from Montana. My cautious optimism is based on ground-level interactions and the real, verifiable data that’s available.

As of today, the BLM hasn’t released a final decision regarding the grazing leases. I guess we’ll all just have to wait and see how it plays out. Either way, I’m sure it will be headed to the courts next.

 

[CJ19]

Pretty much every ranch and farm receives tax subsidies of some kind, whether it be very low tax rates, subsidized grazing costs, nrcs fencing and habitat improvements etc.

APR has 20 years of public access history, most big ranches allow zero access and are owned by billionaires and millionaires.

I’m failing to understand your logic here, can you please explain?

In ~20 years in a resource management related field I have dealt with some the organization(s) APR has decided to ally with. I want nothing to do with them. Hopefully APR can keep them at arms length. Will be my last post. Good luck. I hope APR end up more TNC than EJ.

 

[Gila]

As of today, the BLM hasn’t released a final decision regarding the grazing leases. I guess we’ll all just have to wait and see how it plays out. Either way, I’m sure it will be headed to the courts next.

They have already made the decision. The 15 day protest period has come and gone…American Prairie along with Defenders of Wildlife submitted a protest during the protest period. This is part of the rationale for that decision:
———————————————————-
The applicant has also indicated that it seeks to manage its bison as “wildlife according to the

Public Trust Doctrine” for the common good of the public. American Prairie Reserve, Bison

Management Plan, at 117 (2018). In addition, the applicant previously indicated that its goal is to

purchase “500,000 acres and stitch together three million acres of existing public lands. When

these public and private lands are connected, the Reserve will be the size of Connecticut, the

largest of its kind in the Lower 48 states, one and a half times larger than Yellowstone.” Email

from American Prairie Reserve to the BLM, dated July 20, 2017. In yet another statement, the

applicant is plainly explicit about its intentions:

“They’re allowing us to use government public land, without any kind of product like oil

and gas, timber, mining or cattle ranching. They’re not asking us to use it for commercial

purposes. That’s fantastic. And we’re one of the only ones they’re allowing to do that.

It’s just never been asked before. “Hey, can we use millions and millions of acres for

absolutely nothing, except the public’s enjoyment?”4”

——————————————————————————
3 https://americanprairie.org/bison-restoration/, last visited January 16, 2026.

4 Talks at Google: Sean Gerrity, American Prairie Reserve (April 14, 2015),

.
————————————————————————————

https://gov.mt.gov/_docs/governor/AmericanPrairieProposedDecisionJanuary162026.pdf

 

[Greenstig]

They have already made the decision. The 15 day protest period has come and gone…American Prairie along with Defenders of Wildlife submitted a protest during the protest period. This is part of the rationale for that decision:
———————————————————-
The applicant has also indicated that it seeks to manage its bison as “wildlife according to the

Public Trust Doctrine” for the common good of the public. American Prairie Reserve, Bison

Management Plan, at 117 (2018). In addition, the applicant previously indicated that its goal is to

purchase “500,000 acres and stitch together three million acres of existing public lands. When

these public and private lands are connected, the Reserve will be the size of Connecticut, the

largest of its kind in the Lower 48 states, one and a half times larger than Yellowstone.” Email

from American Prairie Reserve to the BLM, dated July 20, 2017. In yet another statement, the

applicant is plainly explicit about its intentions:

“They’re allowing us to use government public land, without any kind of product like oil

and gas, timber, mining or cattle ranching. They’re not asking us to use it for commercial

purposes. That’s fantastic. And we’re one of the only ones they’re allowing to do that.

It’s just never been asked before. “Hey, can we use millions and millions of acres for

absolutely nothing, except the public’s enjoyment?”4”

——————————————————————————
3 https://americanprairie.org/bison-restoration/, last visited January 16, 2026.

4 Talks at Google: Sean Gerrity, American Prairie Reserve (April 14, 2015),

.
————————————————————————————

https://gov.mt.gov/_docs/governor/AmericanPrairieProposedDecisionJanuary162026.pdf

You are your own worst enemy when it comes to your credibility.

What is the complete title of the proposal (hint, hint) document you just linked?

 

[WRO]

View attachment 1050858

This will take a while, if you're reading this put on your waders as the BS gets pretty deep..

Here are a bunch of Truths, labeled by post number that have basis only in your fantasy world.

#1

"The absence of APR bison will increase hunting and fishing opportunity on BLM lands as well as improve public access for outdoor activities. The improvement to the State and Regional economies will also benefit wildlife management for public lands."

-Federal Access rules have nothing to do with bison and multiple studies have shown that bison are better for riparian areas than cattle, which are good for fish and streams.

#4

Buffalo need to be contained or they will wreck fences and the land scape. Also Elk, Pronghorn and Mule deer tend to leave when bison show up. Wildlife comes back when the buffalo leave. Been that way for thousands of years before the buffalo were extirpated from the landscape. Wildlife has learned to co-exist with cattle though.

- Said no study ever..

#21

That isn’t entirely accurate. Some private ranchers in the area are implementing the Mortensen Principles to restore the short grass prairie to its original natural state. As a result, more cattle can be grazed…Research has shown that cattle and bison grazing habits are very much the same.

-There's not a study that says bison and cattle graze the same, and you even admitted that you have no clue the prevalence of Mortensen principles on public land. Funny thing, 2 of the best known regenerative ranchers are the APR and Nature conservancy.

#38

I posted this because it sets precedent for public land grazing in every state and most certainly does affect hunting opportunity on public as well as private lands. Most of the hunters on this forum understand APR for what it is and the only hunting organization and forum that supports them…..only one and guess who? APR has nothing to do with the North American Conservation Model. If anything APR is the anti-thesis of that conservation model. A model we must have in place to continue hunting.

I am familiar with the land that APR now occupies and I understand why they want a contiguous three million acre wildlife preserve that includes grizzlies and wolves. That land is the closest to the natural original short grass prairie ecosystem as any other land on planet earth. During the good times thousands, no tens of thousands of Pronghorn and Deer covered the roads from sunset to sunrise. That is all I have to say, take it or leave it…

-I don't think you even know what the North American conservation model is, once again a funny fantasy with no basis in truth or reality.

#54

There is some use for AI if you know how to use it…Beats typing all of that stuff. The biggest problem with AI that I see is it crawls the internet and weeds through all of the garbage posted on social media. If AI finds enough of the same garbage in different places it will establish that garbage as fact. Just look at this thread alone, there are posters here who knowingly put out false information in an attempt to undermine my creditability.

I'm just reposting this gem here because the IRONY is too apparent.

#62

Once you understand the system and why we have checkerboards to begin with, you won’t whine about lease fees. If cattle ranchers can’t lease BLM for reasonable fees, then the Gov’t will sell off BLM grazing lands to the highest bidder which will not include organizations like ARP. Public land activists like Newberg and BHA are shooting themselves in the foot with their stance to eradicate family owned cattle ranches and BLM grazing. And furthermore - Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota state legislatures will never allow conservation leases on cattle ranches either.

-Literally not one sentence in here is true. There are conservations easements put on ranches in nearly every state, REMF and other groups put them together all the time. BHA was one of the biggest voices against public land sales.

#64

I have given you the facts and you are labeling it as mis-information for what purpose? My agenda and my only agenda, the same agenda I have held for 40 years — is to advance hunting and fishing opportunity. The first and most obvious AGENDA is to have a place to hunt: ON PUBLIC AS WELL AS PRIVATE lands. That correlates to the number of tags that are put into the public draw.

-APR opens land locked public, has tags in the Montana state draw, and is the number 2 or 3 program in the BMA. Seems like a strange take given those facts.

#74

Some outdoor writers support ARP and are politically motivated so I’m not really impressed with their “numbers”.

- Given your grasp of numbers, this is strong take.

#80

Most of the tribes could care less about bison because they are mostly farmers and cattle ranchers themselves

- Over 50 tribes submitted letters of protest on the BLM's decision, seems like a lot of effort for groups that could care less.

#89

Why is it too difficult to understand that Elk, Deer and Pronghorn tolerate cattle better than bison?

Bison aren’t bad for the landscape if there is enough landscape for them to roam on. This whole “re-wilding” thing is a wrecking ball!

- No basis in reality

 

[WRO]

#163

I wouldn’t count on AP getting much more land anytime soon. They were outbidding the locals on estate sales and the sellers couldn’t back out because of the commission fees. They are going to private auctions now so the sellers can sell to their neighbors and lease holders. They still get top dollar for their land and the lease holders can continue to keep their grazing leases in their portfolio. Like I said before, the local ranchers/farmers look out for each other and determine their own economy as it has been and will continue to be.

APR just closed 2 more properties in the last couple of months

#177

The tribes are not suing. There is a letter of support by several tribes gathered by EarthJustice and Center for Biological Diversity. Years ago AP in Montana went out and signed up some 50 tribes (of about 500 tribes in the USA) to support their agenda to raise bison on acquired private lands in Montana. In return those Tribes were given bison (or other compensation) from AP. Like I stated before, many of those tribal members eventually acquired deeded acres with BLM allotments around reservation and trust lands.

The vast majority of tribal bison come from Ft Peck via Yellowstone.

#Deleted, luckily still quoted

Since people are putting words in my mouth, let me be clear. i stated that Elk, Deer and Pronghorn have learned to tolerate cattle better than they do bison. Rutting bull bison will chase down and attack just about anything in their path. Cattle bulls are aggressive but nothing like bison bulls. Cattle don’t run very far when they herd up.

-0 basis in buffalo attacking and killing elk, deer, antelope etc. In fact antelope like to drop their fawns in bison herds because they provide protection from Coyotes etc

#285

Hunting only exists because of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model. American Prairie is not part of that model.

- I'm not sure you know what the north American conservation model is..

North American Model of Wildlife Conservation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

#307

Not enough that cattle can’t accomplish the task of rejuvenating the prairie.

I'll just leave this gem here, 200 years of grazing, maybe 300 and it will be rejuvenated?

#320

“In September 2021, Gov. Gianforte, the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Montana Department of Livestock, and the Montana Department of Agriculture objected to BLM’s environmental analysis and proposed permit issuance, explaining the deficiencies and requesting the permits be denied. Despite these objections, BLM authorized the grazing change in July 2022”

EIS showed no negative impacts, everything to do with politics..

#322

During Deb Haalunds reign, the BLM was run by emotion not science. The science of wildlife management and the science of economic data. Both tenets of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model.

Once again I don't think you understand the North American Wildlife model (BTW lead to reintroductions of elk, deer, sheep, turkeys across the US)

#354

The tribes are primarily cattle, sheep ranchers and farmers with deeded acres. If they wanted large herds of bison they would have them by now.

-Tribes are actively working to reintroduce Bison across the west on their reservations..

Introducing Grizzlies and wolves to the landscape will render cattle and sheep ranching unprofitable to the point that ranching will no longer be feasible. The goal of introducing large numbers of apex predators is to replace hunting as a wildlife management tool.

-Private landowners and groups can't reintroduce wolves and bears legally, they can migrate in, which they are.

 

[WRO]

426

Lots of AI nonsense here, not worth responding too other than "Their enriched lands have benefitted wildlife. You want to blame the fat cats for a reason to grab that land and put it all into a reserve for your own piece of mind. The reality is the family rancher, who has been the good steward of that land, is being displaced."

Simply not true, Elk MO's are artificially low at the request of ranchers across the west (well proven fact) Wolves get the blame, yet 1000's of elk are slaughtered every year to help them UPOM is a great example of this getting the killing of 50K elk approved.

#455

I never intended that…that wasn’t even written anywhere. American Prairie had to put up special fences to contain the buffalo on the grazing allotments. They paid for the fences, but none the less; Bison are difficult to contain when they can’t roam. Buffalo will attack anything in their path, especially rutting bulls will go on a rampage. A bull elk is no match for them. I have seen those rutting bull bison attack trees and bushes…anything. Anyone who has spent time around bison knows this. Just because you haven’t seen it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

- You literally contradicted your earlier posts. Oh the bushes

#456

“The sales pitch has worked, over and over. American Prairie won’t release its full list of donors, citing privacy concerns, but it has received millions of dollars from some prominent philanthropists. They include a German billionaire, a handful of New York City-based investment bankers, and heirs to the Mars Candy company.”

-Where are the Russian Oligarchs you said were squarely behind this?

#471

In Yellowstone those species have been around each other for quite a while and are somewhat used to each other. On the prairie….in those grazing allotments….The elk, pronghorn and deer have never seen a bison before. And conversely the bison haven’t been around those species either. I only said that elk, deer and pronghorn tolerate cattle better than bison. That is because cattle are docile. We bred them that way. Cattle don’t usually stampede. It is the bison’s nature to stampede on the plains. I have never been to Yellowstone. But I don’t consider Yellowstone to be part of the short grass prairie biome. Prairie Bison apparently act differently.

-0 studies show that prairie bison act any differently than Yellowstone bison.

#472 - Same AI thats already been proven false.

#475 - Are they wild animals are zoo animals, you tend to use the words confusingly?

#484 - Habitat restoration is a red herring. This is about re-wilding public lands while wiping out cattle grazing in the process. The excuse that bison are better than cattle to return the prairie to a natural state is proving to be untrue.

Please cite this without saying Clarence MoRtEnSen (which you have stated principles are not widely in use)

#489 - The Federal and State Governments won’t keep public lands if there are no consumptive users. I would rather harvest game and fish from those lands myself. Good wildlife habitat can graze more cattle.

Not true, we have plenty of lands that have no consumptive use on them. Heavily grazed lands tend to have significantly less wildlife on them.

#491 and 492

The assertation that the people of MT voted for this is a wild stretch. Just like saying everyone who voted for trump wants to sell public lands, see them grazed to dirt, mined, or turned into power plants.

#494

Republicans put the clauses in the bill, only removed it when all of us collectively raised our voices. To say that we voted for that and they listened is a stretch.

#498

Obviously there is no place for cattle grazing or hunting within that management model

- 20 years of operations has proven that false. We still hunt where meso predators roam all across the west.

 

[WRO]

#502

Could grazing bison produce those seeds? Absolutely…but do we really want to replace cattle grazing and hunting? There is no ecological reason to do that. So we are back to the economic and cultural value of cattle grazing and hunting.

-Literally no where is it said that hunting would be eliminated

#505

A few bison would be hunted….no other species would be…but if other species are hunted, it will be exclusive, not public…Just like on the Turner properties. I doubt AP will keep the cattle they have. Basically three million acres lost to hunting, cattle grazing and hay production. A few local maintenance jobs can’t put a dent into the economic decline of the entire region.

- A private organization can not take away access to public lands, not matter what brand of tin foil you're wearing.

#508

Go somewhere else then…Why read this thread! What have you contributed to this subject? Who are you to tell me what to post and not to post? You put words in my mouth when those words aren’t my words. You take things out of context and swirl your garbage around like a top. You insult me because you have no argument to make in the first place. You try to undermine my credibility when that isn’t even possible on this forum. All you do is drool forth redundant crap that has nothing to do with any known facts. You can’t even debate an issue. My recommendation is for you and those on this thread who have like behavior, to go out and get educated at least on the subject matter. That way you might be able to contribute something instead of wasting bytes on a forum.

- I'll just insert this GEM in here, from the guy who can literally cite nothing correctly

#510

The habitat is heavily fragmented with fences and a checker board of public blm lands, cattle ranches. I think we can agree that the end result of predator re-introduction is less hunting and cattle grazing. We could balance the value to the public between eco-tourism, hunting and agriculture production, however the cost of eco-tourism is reduced hunting opportunity and agriculture production.

-Really 50K dead elk in the shoulder seasons would disagree.

#513

AP intends on removing 500,000 cattle from the 3.5 million acres they intend to acquire. Most of that land is public land. And of course repurpose the land that was used to produce hay for those 500,000 removed cattle.

- This statement has been proven wrong by others, perhaps you should have actually listened to what you were citing.

#515

What it boils down to is some sheik in Dubai could determine if you should hunt elk or not.

-This is some tinfoil hat stuff here..

520's - Can we just admit that as much as you spout Clarence, they are not widely used. And they Mimic Bison habits. Wouldn't the real thing just be better?

546 - Removing 500,000 cattle from the landscape in an area that is totally dependent on agriculture is more than just “change”. Think of all of that leather, wool and meat lost to the national economy. How many megatons of hay is lost? How many millions of our tax payer dollars went into the Conservation Reserve Program that paid out to ranchers, farmers over the decades? How many millions of tax payer dollars is recouped by grazing leases?

-The 500k number has been debunked over and over again..

Since the goal is re-wilding and preservation, there isn’t any wildlife conservation goals implemented that are established by the NORTH AMERICAN WILDLIFE CONSERVATION MODEL. AP’s position is that wildlife isn’t owned by the public but is part of the land. Ungulates are considered food for apex predators and are only to be hunted by indigenous humans. Basically leave it all alone and limit any human interaction.

-No basis in reality, access granted for the last 20 years proves otherwise.

#548 - He cut a deal with the Dept of War to lock up some of the Oryx, so now next year there won’t be a public draw hunt for seniors.

-Tags were increased this year across the board for ORYX in NM. This tinfoil theory is complete BS..

#596

Watch Sean Gerrity’s google presentation. The link I posted earlier. He talked about displacing 450, 000 cattle in that presentation. American Prairie’s re-wilding partners have talked about removing 500,000 cattle. AP has lowered its goal of 3.5 million acres under their control

- Proven false by Sean Gerritys own video from 2015 you keep citing.

#605
MONTANA LAND BOARD
“Montana's schools and other public institutions benefit from a unique funding source—state-owned lands known as Trust Lands. These lands are managed to generate revenue that directly supports Montana's public education system. Agriculture and Grazing Leases…”

- They're paying for the leases, so that makes this completely false

#617

Lot of work here on the tinfoil hat stuff.. EJ is representing them for free, hence the connection. While I do not agree with EJ on alot of things, they have done a good job on environmental issues.

#634 The Montana FWP has used science to advance mule deer hunting in that area. Hunting opportunity for any species should be based on the principles of the NAWCM. AP does not own the wildlife, mule deer are in the public trust.

-Montana's mule deer population is in a significant, multi-year decline, dropping roughly 35% from a 2017 peak of over 386,000 to around 249,157 in 2024. Eastern Montana has experienced the steepest decline, with some areas seeing nearly a 56% collapse, often described as a "freefall"

#638 You don’t know anything…

- Please cite this

#644

Replace cattle with bison. So they offer a wee bit of hunting and access to the public. So what? The endgame is the same. I would rather my tax dollars go to cattle grazing on public lands. Apparently so do the American People.

- Numerous studies have been posted showing the opposite on bison reintroduction

#648

A rancher can’t just go out and kill a hundred deer eating up his haystack.

- Actually they can in NM, and do with the permission of states FWP's all across the west

#667 - You left out Clause A to blatantly mislead readers..

#670 - LOL you posted a video you either didn't watch or understand @Greenstig proved you wrong.

#676 - Misquoted your own sources incorrectly

#683 There's going to be a pile of lawsuits to be sorted out before this is can be called fact.

#685 Hunters should be perceived as appreciating the real stewards of wildlife which are the multi-generation ranchers. The cattle ranchers who have practiced the Clarence Mortensen Principles or the like to regenerate the prairie. Hunters should also advocate for habitat improvements by pushing for more logging, more cattle grazing

- Why?

Yet, I have applauded AP for getting public access in the refuge…for putting a good chunk of land into BM and for giving access to adjacent public lands.

-Your posts continually say otherwise.

I'm done with this thread as well. Its interesting to debate with honest intelligent people as it makes one learn more. Debating with dishonest tin foil hat conspiracy theorists is a waste of time.

 

[Gila]

What is the complete title of the proposal (hint, hint) document you just linked?

It is the Notice of Proposed Decision. Apparently you do not know what the document is? Quite a bit of stuff that I post here is way above the “pay grade” of some of the posters on this thread but I try to make it simple to understand. Do you understand what a Protest is and where it comes into the process? I am certainly not going to debunk every ignorant post on this thread simply because someone can’t comprehend the process let alone what I write. I have better ways to spend my time. i will no longer participate in this thread.

The truth will out…

“The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.

—- Winston Churchill

 

[KurtR]

"Im to drunk to taste this chicken" Colonel Sanders

 

[Greenstig]

It is the Notice of Proposed Decision. Apparently you do not know what the document is? Quite a bit of stuff that I post here is way above the “pay grade” of some of the posters on this thread but I try to make it simple to understand. Do you understand what a Protest is and where it comes into the process? I am certainly not going to debunk every ignorant post on this thread simply because someone can’t comprehend the process let alone what I write. I have better ways to spend my time. i will no longer participate in this thread.

The truth will out…

“The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.

—- Winston Churchill

Yes I do understand. That’s…why I commented.

Do you understand the difference between a Notice of Proposed Decision and a Notice of Final Decision?

Fill in the blank question:
The reason you can’t reference the Notice of Final Decision is because ________.