BHA seems “all-in” with Biden

[CJ19]

Very familiar with this in fact, and nowhere did I say "it's just a few solar panels." But if you add up all the acreage covered by the 10 largest solar arrays, you still get less than 50k acres. So I'm not exactly sure how you jump from there to 20M, even in your kid's lifetimes.

You (like most folks) misunderstand what these "orders" and the term "available" actually mean in this context, and from the surface it appears you are using them either to scare yourself or more deliberately for fear mongering for political purposes, or both. If anything has been proven in the past four decades, it's that people who identify as conservative are easily motivated by scare tactics.

Rofl. Fear monger for political political purposes. You write this in a bha thread. How ironic. I guess we will wait watch.

 

[Newtosavage]

As planned by BHA. Good luck getting BHA to reveal who their real funding comes from.

Let's see if I understand this logic... Create an organization by and for hunters and anglers who are not just casual hunters and anglers but who are backcountry focused which by definition means they are pretty well informed and dedicated. Then, somehow convince all those hunter and angler members, most of whom have a lot of experience in the western backcountry, to volunteer their time to oppose hunting.

Seems legit.

 

[Newtosavage]

Rofl. Fear monger for political political purposes. You write this in a bha thread. How ironic. I guess we will wait watch.

Like I said from the outset, you have an agenda against BHA and that is obvious. You were never interested in the facts to begin with.

 

[CJ19]

Like I said from the outset, you have an agenda against BHA and that is obvious. You were never interested in the facts to begin with.

I am trying to remain very polite. But please by all means continue your condescending tone. Enlighten us on how many acres of public land development should we expect over the next 10 years bc the numbers you generated are not even reflective what BLM has in house under review at this time. What is your back ground? I would assume you have an extensive background in conservation amd resource management given your impressive knowledge of energy developmemt. I bet you are a licensed engineer arent you.

So let me ask the other hunters here. How excited are you to hunt under windmills or next to a solar array, transmission line, or substation out in your favorite mule deer or antelope range. Are you excite to look over the 4000 acres of glistening panels or do you think the impact area is bigger than just the exact acreage of the panels that Mr. Newtosavage is calculating. We only want facts now.

 

[BBob]

How excited are you to hunt under windmills or next to a solar array, transmission line, or substation out in your favorite mule deer or antelope range.

Not at all. We already have lots of that blight that's been popping up over the last 20 years. We've lived with the existing transmission lines from the dams for far longer but I suspect those will have to multiply greatly for all those proposed towers and arrays. Save the planet they say but wreck it while doing so. The hucksters in charge care not a whit about saving the planet.

 

[Newtosavage]

I am trying to remain very polite. But please by all means continue your condescending tone. Enlighten us on how many acres of public land development should we expect over the next 10 years bc the numbers you generated are not even reflective what BLM has in house under review at this time. What is your back ground? I would assume you have an extensive background in conservation amd resource management given your impressive knowledge of energy developmemt. I bet you are a licensed engineer arent you.

So let me ask the other hunters here. How excited are you to hunt under windmills or next to a solar array, transmission line, or substation out in your favorite mule deer or antelope range. Are you excite to look over the 4000 acres of glistening panels or do you think the impact area is bigger than just the exact acreage of the panels that Mr. Newtosavage is calculating. We only want facts now.

my level of condescension is jealous of your level of sarcasm. But I promise to try harder.

At least one of your assumptions is correct though. Extra points for that one. I've actually spent decades working to keep private ranchlands from becoming solar arrays and wind farms but don't let that get in the way of your tantrum.

I think friend you need to calm down and understand who your allies are in this war against renewables on public lands. Nobody that I know "likes" the sight of windmills or solar arrays. For decades I drove by the otherwise pristine desert valleys of SW New Mexico and SE Arizona and dreamed of a world where those valleys didn't contain pecan and pistachio farms irrigated by water that belonged in the Colorado River and ultimately the Gulf of California. I drive through the farmlands of the midwest and often wonder what a sea of bluestem, switchgrass and gramma might have once looked like. You see, I've spent a lifetime trying to make a difference where I am, when I can, with whatever I have. Never once did I think I would accomplish that by throwing a fit on a discussion forum.

So, hate them if you want, but organizations like BHA, and before them the Issac Walton League and The Nature Conservancy and before them Audubon have been putting their money (and others that they can convince to help) where their mouth is. You don't have to agree with their politics or even their priorities, but at least they are trying. I'm sure there is an organization out there that fits your political leanings and your priorities that could use you as a member, and use your membership dollars. Go find them, join and volunteer and maybe spend less time on these forums complaining. Because actions are what matter, not words.

 

[fwafwow]

my level of condescension is jealous of your level of sarcasm. But I promise to try harder.

At least one of your assumptions is correct though. Extra points for that one. I've actually spent decades working to keep private ranchlands from becoming solar arrays and wind farms but don't let that get in the way of your tantrum.

I think friend you need to calm down and understand who your allies are in this war against renewables on public lands. Nobody that I know "likes" the sight of windmills or solar arrays. For decades I drove by the otherwise pristine desert valleys of SW New Mexico and SE Arizona and dreamed of a world where those valleys didn't contain pecan and pistachio farms irrigated by water that belonged in the Colorado River and ultimately the Gulf of California. I drive through the farmlands of the midwest and often wonder what a sea of bluestem, switchgrass and gramma might have once looked like. You see, I've spent a lifetime trying to make a difference where I am, when I can, with whatever I have. Never once did I think I would accomplish that by throwing a fit on a discussion forum.

So, hate them if you want, but organizations like BHA, and before them the Issac Walton League and The Nature Conservancy and before them Audubon have been putting their money (and others that they can convince to help) where their mouth is. You don't have to agree with their politics or even their priorities, but at least they are trying. I'm sure there is an organization out there that fits your political leanings and your priorities that could use you as a member, and use your membership dollars. Go find them, join and volunteer and maybe spend less time on these forums complaining. Because actions are what matter, not words.

I don’t have a dog in this fight - I’m too uninformed and I admit it. But you are projecting. He didn’t throw a tantrum and gave a response to your points without hyperbole, condescension or insults (“read a book sometime”). I have to give you props though, you are consistent in your tone.

What say you?

(Rhetorical question.)

 

[Newtosavage]

I don’t have a dog in this fight - I’m too uninformed and I admit it. But you are projecting. He didn’t throw a tantrum and gave a response to your points without hyperbole, condescension or insults (“read a book sometime”). I have to give you props though, you are consistent in your tone.

What say you?

(Rhetorical question.)

"read a book" wasn't an insult. It was advice. What's a guy gotta do to be helpful around here.

 

[william schmaltz]

Interested in hearing some examples. TIA

A few quick examples:

GMU23 caribou 8 million acres federal lands CLOSED to R and NR hunters
GMU23 moose 20 million acres federal lands CLOSED to R and NR hunters
GMU24A and 26B sheep 1.5 million acres federal lands CLOSED to R and NR hunters
Yukon Charley sheep CLOSED to R and NR hunters

There are a half dozen others that will be voted on this winter including extensions for the ones mentioned above. In addition, the DOI is working on reverting back to the Obama-era rule to ban bear baiting in the Kenai Refuge (2 million acres). Brown bears are like rats in there and impossible to hunt in the lowland and thick environment. Every single one of the meetings for these closures included comments and presentations from state biologists with comprehensive facts and figures. The state game agencies have strongly opposed every single one but in the end, our current Secretary of the Interior and her DOI have overstepped and closed the land to hunters.

All closures were pushed through by yielding the tyrannical hammer of the Federal Subsistence Board. The board is made up of 3 public members that are appointed by the Secretary of the Interior (almost always vote to restrict) as well as one member each from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (DOI), Bureau of Land Management (DOI), National Park Service (DOI), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (DOI), and the U.S. Forest Service (USDA). BIA, BLM, NPS, and USFWS vote at the discretion of whoever the Secretary of the Interior is at the time. As you can imagine, science and conservation are never the driving force of those decisions.

I see an argument here with comparison of people defending NRA and BHA. I'm the opposite of a fan of Trump and don't really care for the NRA; but at least when Trump overstepped his authority on gun laws, the NRA (who endorsed Trump) had the stones to stand up and condemn him. I don't think it's too much to ask from BHA and their members to do the same with some of these tyrannical politicians they endorsed who are walking all over our hunting opportunities contrary to what the science and wildlife experts suggest.

 

[svivian]

I don’t have a dog in this fight - I’m too uninformed and I admit it. But you are projecting. He didn’t throw a tantrum and gave a response to your points without hyperbole, condescension or insults (“read a book sometime”). I have to give you props though, you are consistent in your tone.

What say you?

(Rhetorical question.)

Dont feed the troll.... he lives for these kinds of threads

 

[Newtosavage]

Dont feed the troll.... he lives for these kinds of threads

You give trolls far too much credit. Don't take your eye off the ball though. This thread has a topic friend.

 

[Newtosavage]

A few quick examples:

GMU23 caribou 8 million acres federal lands CLOSED to R and NR hunters
GMU23 moose 20 million acres federal lands CLOSED to R and NR hunters
GMU24A and 26B sheep 1.5 million acres federal lands CLOSED to R and NR hunters
Yukon Charley sheep CLOSED to R and NR hunters

There are a half dozen others that will be voted on this winter including extensions for the ones mentioned above. In addition, the DOI is working on reverting back to the Obama-era rule to ban bear baiting in the Kenai Refuge (2 million acres). Brown bears are like rats in there and impossible to hunt in the lowland and thick environment. Every single one of the meetings for these closures included comments and presentations from state biologists with comprehensive facts and figures. The state game agencies have strongly opposed every single one but in the end, our current Secretary of the Interior and her DOI have overstepped and closed the land to hunters.

All closures were pushed through by yielding the tyrannical hammer of the Federal Subsistence Board. The board is made up of 3 public members that are appointed by the Secretary of the Interior (almost always vote to restrict) as well as one member each from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (DOI), Bureau of Land Management (DOI), National Park Service (DOI), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (DOI), and the U.S. Forest Service (USDA). BIA, BLM, NPS, and USFWS vote at the discretion of whoever the Secretary of the Interior is at the time. As you can imagine, science and conservation are never the driving force of those decisions.

I see an argument here with comparison of people defending NRA and BHA. I'm the opposite of a fan of Trump and don't really care for the NRA; but at least when Trump overstepped his authority on gun laws, the NRA (who endorsed Trump) had the stones to stand up and condemn him. I don't think it's too much to ask from BHA and their members to do the same with some of these tyrannical politicians they endorsed who are walking all over our hunting opportunities contrary to what the science and wildlife experts suggest.

Probably the most well reasoned, informed post I've seen yet.

 

[Okhotnik]

A few years ago I contacted BHA leader land Tawney on BHA's views on construction of huge solar farms on endangered sage grouse habitat. He said green energy was more more important for the future and that gas and oil projects were much more of a concern. lmao

 

[Jimbee]

A few quick examples:

GMU23 caribou 8 million acres federal lands CLOSED to R and NR hunters
GMU23 moose 20 million acres federal lands CLOSED to R and NR hunters
GMU24A and 26B sheep 1.5 million acres federal lands CLOSED to R and NR hunters
Yukon Charley sheep CLOSED to R and NR hunters

There are a half dozen others that will be voted on this winter including extensions for the ones mentioned above. In addition, the DOI is working on reverting back to the Obama-era rule to ban bear baiting in the Kenai Refuge (2 million acres). Brown bears are like rats in there and impossible to hunt in the lowland and thick environment. Every single one of the meetings for these closures included comments and presentations from state biologists with comprehensive facts and figures. The state game agencies have strongly opposed every single one but in the end, our current Secretary of the Interior and her DOI have overstepped and closed the land to hunters.

All closures were pushed through by yielding the tyrannical hammer of the Federal Subsistence Board. The board is made up of 3 public members that are appointed by the Secretary of the Interior (almost always vote to restrict) as well as one member each from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (DOI), Bureau of Land Management (DOI), National Park Service (DOI), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (DOI), and the U.S. Forest Service (USDA). BIA, BLM, NPS, and USFWS vote at the discretion of whoever the Secretary of the Interior is at the time. As you can imagine, science and conservation are never the driving force of those decisions.

I see an argument here with comparison of people defending NRA and BHA. I'm the opposite of a fan of Trump and don't really care for the NRA; but at least when Trump overstepped his authority on gun laws, the NRA (who endorsed Trump) had the stones to stand up and condemn him. I don't think it's too much to ask from BHA and their members to do the same with some of these tyrannical politicians they endorsed who are walking all over our hunting opportunities contrary to what the science and wildlife experts suggest.

What is the purpose or reasoning/excuse for closing those areas to R/NR hunting?

 

[cuerro viejo]

.

lol, your googling is incorrect. I can show you a 20k+ project right now. 10k of it is one land owner.

not that you care about the truth. Its coming to public land near you, just like oil and gas did.

By all means Spin on!!

 

[Newtosavage]

lol, your googling is incorrect. I can show you a 20k+ project right now. 10k of it is one land owner.

not that you care about the truth. Its coming to public land near you, just like oil and gas did.

By all means Spin on!!

Nope, no spin here. If my googling is incorrect, feel free to correct with a link.

While you're at it, google how many acres do the world's oil fields cover so we can make a fair comparison.

 

[diamond10x]

"I don't spin anything, that's all you right wing nut jobs. The truth is what I say it is. If you don't believe me, you must provide a link. Oh and just so you know, the southern border is 100% secure because the white house claimed it." -newtosavage

Thank you for gracing us with your presence oh great one.

 

[11boo]

I have to wonder who is funding BHA.
Found it.
seems legit.
Backcountry Hunters and Anglers is an environmentalist-aligned sportsmen’s advocacy group based in Montana. The organization has faced criticism for its close ties to liberal politicians and for taking funding from environmentalist foundations with ties to prominent anti-hunting animal liberation groups.

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/backcountry-hunters-and-anglers/

 

[cuerro viejo]

Nope, no spin here. If my googling is incorrect, feel free to correct with a link.

While you're at it, google how many acres do the world's oil fields cover so we can make a fair comparison.

Lol, I don’t need to google. I know 90% of the land owners/managers in the project by first name. Next year when Google updates imagery it will be pretty simple. There has been several sections of panels out over over 2 years and no update yet. Regardless My statement is factual. Not googled or an assumption. Vast majority of all solar projects a) do not state acreage just potential energy out put of a phase, One area my have 8 phases etc. b) private companies and private land dont have to disclose acreage paneled or leased/fenced.

Oil/gas fields are still multi use. Solar fields, transmission and converter stations are not multi use

if you want to argue against the truths of multi use vs solar arrays and its high fence areas by all means spin away.

Quoting Aldo Leopolds works while spinning solar shows your true colors. You damn sure arent doing BHA any favors as their new online media guide

 

[Newtosavage]

Lol, I don’t need to google. I know 90% of the land owners/managers in the project by first name. Next year when Google updates imagery it will be pretty simple. There has been several sections of panels out over over 2 years and no update yet. Regardless My statement is factual. Not googled or an assumption. Vast majority of all solar projects a) do not state acreage just potential energy out put of a phase, One area my have 8 phases etc. b) private companies and private land dont have to disclose acreage paneled or leased/fenced.

Oil/gas fields are still multi use. Solar fields, transmission and converter stations are not multi use

if you want to argue against the truths of multi use vs solar arrays and its high fence areas by all means spin away.

Quoting Aldo Leopolds works while spinning solar shows your true colors. You damn sure arent doing BHA any favors as their new online media guide

Leopold's works speak for themselves.

If you think all Oil/Gas fields are multi use, then you are clearly blind to reality or at the very least, spun up by the right wing narrative that oil and gas are good and renewables are bad.

I've said it before and I will again. It's stunning that a forum focused on hunting would be populated by so many who insist on defending the very things that have destroyed so much wildlife habitat.

But this entire thread isn't about renewables vs oil/gas or even BHA. And anyone with a brain can tell that.

Pretty sure post #6 got to the heart of the matter and it was just more than the fragile maga crowd could stand.