"DOI will work with HUD to identify lands to offload for the development of affordable homes"

[RyanT26]

“Most of the proposed land sales or exchanges appear to be aimed at building affordable housing on U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land outside Las Vegas and Reno, Nevada and in fast growing southwestern Utah around the tourist town of St. George, Utah.”

Unless you hunt right outside of town, it doesn’t look like they’re selling your honey hole. You’ll be fine.

Unless you’re in the solar industry, Tracy Stone Manning is not a friend to you. Don’t get it twisted. She’s against this, but if it was solar farm she’d be all in.

 

[CoMulies]

“Most of the proposed land sales or exchanges appear to be aimed at building affordable housing on U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land outside Las Vegas and Reno, Nevada and in fast growing southwestern Utah around the tourist town of St. George, Utah.”

Unless you hunt right outside of town, it doesn’t look like they’re selling your honey hole. You’ll be fine.

Unless you’re in the solar industry, Tracy Stone Manning is not a friend to you. Don’t get it twisted. She’s against this, but if it was solar farm she’d be all in.

Do you really think this is the end of it? This is just the beginning.

 

[Ozarkansas]

As an appointed BLM official, Tracey stone manning led the effort to ensure more than 20 million acres of public land was industrially developed AND expedited the review process to ensure environmental regulations did not get in the way. An effort that big conservation incorporated lobbying firm The Wilderness Society cheerled and officially lobbied for. I wonder what her salary is for The Wilderness Society just a short time after leaving her government position. Looks swampy to me. If this article is accurate, the amount of land to be transfered is less than 1 of the dozens of solar farms big conservation inc and democrats are desperate to get built on wildlife habitat in exchange for publicly funded kick back to say the other side hates public land.

Why not just push back against whichever party is trying to sell public land, instead of justifying by saying that the liberals want to do it too?

 

[LCguy]

This thread is a perfect encapsulation of this entire forum. People arguing against their own best interests. After some public lands that you deem insignificant are sold to developers, where do you draw the line? Just constantly moving the goalposts.

Say this isn't a big deal, then come on here and complain that there are too many people in your spot, the State isn't giving enough tags, I haven't drawn in 5 years etc. Why do you think will happen as public lands shrink? How is this different from the solar and wind farm issues you all claim to oppose? The answer is, it's not at all. It's a slippery slope. Any effort to sell publicly held lands should be strongly opposed.

If you don't think this is, at best, a get-rich scheme for political favors or, at worst, a stepping stone/test case for a wholesale transfer of public lands, I've got an affordable housing unit outside Reno to sell you.

 

[CJ19]

Why not just push back against whichever party is trying to sell public land, instead of justifying by saying that the liberals want to do it too?

Because public land transfer is not the only issue that matters. In fact, contrary to what you have been told by big conservation inc, most usa citizens do not give 2 shts about public land transfer. As for me, i care about PLT but unfortunately liberals have made it significantly less important compared other issues. I repeatly make this point, but instead we are repeatly fed BS by big conservation that PLT is a really important issue to most voters. Following the lead of the people in charge of the current liberal conservation movement has resulted in catastrophy for me as a western hunter. And that is not even going into the joke that is the rest of big conservation incs platform such as net zero, dei, illegal immigration, predator reintroduction, and gun control.

 

[grainhog]

Because public land transfer is not the only issue that matters. In fact, contrary to what you have been told by big conservation inc, most usa citizens do not give 2 shts about public land transfer. As for me, i care about PLT but unfortunately liberals have made it significantly less important compared other issues. I repeatly make this point, but instead we are repeatly fed BS by big conservation that PLT is a really important issue to most voters. Following the lead of the people in charge of the current liberal conservation movement has resulted in catastrophy for me as a western hunter. And that is not even going into the joke that is the rest of big conservation incs platform such as net zero, dei, illegal immigration, predator reintroduction, and gun control.

This deflection is almost uninterpretable.

 

[wyosam]

Because public land transfer is not the only issue that matters. In fact, contrary to what you have been told by big conservation inc, most usa citizens do not give 2 shts about public land transfer. As for me, i care about PLT but unfortunately liberals have made it significantly less important compared other issues. I repeatly make this point, but instead we are repeatly fed BS by big conservation that PLT is a really important issue to most voters. Following the lead of the people in charge of the current liberal conservation movement has resulted in catastrophy for me as a western hunter. And that is not even going into the joke that is the rest of big conservation incs platform such as net zero, dei, illegal immigration, predator reintroduction, and gun control.

It’s ok to be vocally opposed to something “your party” (or your guy, if he trips your trigger more than the Republican Party prior to 2016) does. It’s called individual thought. You don’t have to like and accept everything they do or stand for just because they are the party you best align with. It’s also ok to like some things the other party does. You know what happens when people, and by extension their representatives, try to stay aligned with the party across topics? We get the dumpster fire we currently find ourselves in where both parties are functioning out on the loony fringe, and no semblance of common sense exists in government.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CJ19]

This deflection is almost uninterpretable.

whatever you think. say whatever you want. A lot more people including hunters and sportsman in this country feel the way I do than you.

 

[CoMulies]

You’re allowed to vote for an administration and then also disagree / push back on things they’re doing. Frankly we’re 100 days in and this administration has shown they will be absolutely terrible for the environment and preservation of public lands.

You claim to care more about other things like immigration and gun control. I care about those things too. But reality is deportation numbers have been less than impressive and my state just passed one of the most restrictive gun laws in the country with not a peep from the White House… going back to the issue on hand here, the absolute last thing the west needs is more development and people. The Colorado is about to be dry as a bone this summer, the landscape can’t support more people. I’m failing to see where all the winning is at the moment

 

[Billinsd]

Why not just push back against whichever party is trying to sell public land, instead of justifying by saying that the liberals want to do it too?

Because many of us don't want to give ANY support, aid, or even associate with any liberal organizations or politicians that are committed to taking away our liberty and freedom. We value our freedom and independence far above all else, EVEN perceived hunting opportunities.

 

[CoMulies]

Because many of us don't want to give ANY support, aid, or even associate with any liberal organizations or politicians that are committed to taking away our liberty and freedom. We value our freedom and independence far above all else, EVEN perceived hunting opportunities.

lol laying down and taking it while public lands are sold off and more people are crammed into the last wild places in our country just to own the libs. Great strategy

Newsflash, losing access to public lands is 1000x worse than any magazine capacity restriction they could pass.

 

[Billinsd]

You’re allowed to vote for an administration and then also disagree / push back on things they’re doing.

You claim to care more about other things like immigration and gun control. I care about those things too. -----the absolute last thing the west needs is more development and people. The Colorado is about to be dry as a bone this summer, the landscape can’t support more

I push back on the administration not releasing the Epstein files that they promised to provide, and strongly oppose Trump's imminent domain usage to build private developments! You care most about over development most and much less about Freedom and Liberty.

 

[grainhog]

whatever you think. say whatever you want. A lot more people including hunters and sportsman in this country feel the way I do than you.

Or, at least, so the 24 year old administrator of the White House tick tock account would have you believe.

 

[CoMulies]

I push back on the administration not releasing the Epstein files that they promised to provide, and strongly oppose Trump's imminent domain usage to build private developments! You care most about over development most and much less about Freedom and Liberty.

Being able to go out and recreate on our nations public lands are one of the last freedoms we have. There is nothing I do where I feel more “free” than spending a week in the backcountry. So yea, selling that land off to cram more houses on and bringing more people out here to crowd that land is a major issue for me. Forgive me if I care more about that than which celebrities and politicians are diddling kids (hint: it’s a lot of them on both sides of the aisle)

 

[TaperPin]

That sinking feeling we are all frogs in a luke warm pot of water with a fire slowly bringing the temps up.

I love this thread because it was started what seems like a long time ago and so much has happened since. It seemed so horrible at first that anyone is going to make a buck using public land. Since then a fighter jet falls off a carrier once a week, the Secretary of Defense has a makeup room installed in the Pentagon, air traffic controllers are taking trauma leave after radar and radios just stop working, The Secretary of Transportation’s qualifications are he was on MTV as a kid, we’re giving away $1,000 checks and plane tickets to anyone visiting the country without a visa if we don’t ship them off to a prison in a foreign country without a hearing, $30 million is being paid to the chick who breached the door with an armed cop on the other side, we sell Teslas on the Whitehouse driveway, China is well on its way to completely eliminate our exports with lower cost substitutes while developing partnerships to continue importing to us through other countries, insider trading profits are at an all time high, the amount of dark money floating around to influence people is making old school bribery look like child’s play, we’re about to bomb Iran, both houses are on the sidelines watching incapable of functioning and afraid of being primaried, and Rand Paul is the only one saying let’s not add to the national debt, all make some dry BLM land way down on the list of things to worry about. We used to give it away in the old days - what’s left are the areas nobody wanted in the homestead days.

It’s like dating a drama filled gal - you get numb to all the dumb stuff after a while, and eventually when you’ve moved on it’s a weight lifted off. I’ll be glad when something like giving public land to developers seems like a big deal again.

 

[ianpadron]

But so many people in here said this wouldn’t actually happen???

Did you read the article? Of course not.

It states exactly what we were arguing...useless federal lands on the outskirts of metro areas with housing shortages are on the chopping block. Works out to fractions of a percent of land holdings FYI.

The alarmism in this thread is mind numbing.

 

[ianpadron]

This thread is a perfect encapsulation of this entire forum. People arguing against their own best interests. After some public lands that you deem insignificant are sold to developers, where do you draw the line? Just constantly moving the goalposts.

Say this isn't a big deal, then come on here and complain that there are too many people in your spot, the State isn't giving enough tags, I haven't drawn in 5 years etc. Why do you think will happen as public lands shrink? How is this different from the solar and wind farm issues you all claim to oppose? The answer is, it's not at all. It's a slippery slope. Any effort to sell publicly held lands should be strongly opposed.

If you don't think this is, at best, a get-rich scheme for political favors or, at worst, a stepping stone/test case for a wholesale transfer of public lands, I've got an affordable housing unit outside Reno to sell you.

Do you live in a house by chance?

 

[CoMulies]

Did you read the article? Of course not.

It states exactly what we were arguing...useless federal lands on the outskirts of metro areas with housing shortages are on the chopping block. Works out to fractions of a percent of land holdings FYI.

The alarmism in this thread is mind numbing.

Yes I read it. Once again, we are ~100 days in, are you genuinely naive enough to think this will be the end of it? You also still, after weeks now, have not addressed the impact that bringing more and more people out west will have on the landscape. Of course you don’t care given selling houses is what puts a buck in your pocket. The issues and impact are not isolated to the land they will be developing. But I forgot, you’re the expert and we all know nothing…

 

[HairyScandinavian]

The alarmism in this thread is mind numbing.

Left gotta find something to complain about so they grasp whatever straws they can.

Yes I read it. Once again, we are ~100 days in, are you genuinely naive enough to think this will be the end of it? You also still, after weeks now, have not addressed the impact that bringing more and more people out west will have on the landscape. Of course you don’t care given selling houses is what puts a buck in your pocket. The issues and impact are not isolated to the land they will be developing. But I forgot, you’re the expert and we all know nothing…

News flash, population is growing everywhere not just the West, it's growing even faster in other states. Housing isn't an optional problem to deal with.

 

[RyanT26]

Do you really think this is the end of it? This is just the beginning.

I don’t know, we’ll cross that bridge when we get there. If there’s BLM ground that’s right next to town and the town is seeking to expand. It makes sense.