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

[Ozarkansas]

He really isnt wrong I know alot of people who have moved to indifferent that used to be really invested in being against PLT. Western influencers and con orgs have pushed people away with the sky is falling every week for the last so many years.

I agree that some people have become indifferent over the past year, but imo it’s a matter of the issue coming up too much rather hunting conservation orgs have been saying the sky is falling. So I’d say it’s more of an issue of indifference due to oversaturation.

This is anecdotal so take it with a grain of salt:
Generally when I’ve seen a conservation org discuss public land selloffs in the past few years, it’s been in regards to blatant state-level attempted sell-offs, federal proposals by certain anti-public land congressmen, or speculation about potential public land selloffs under the Trump admin.
The first two certainly aren’t “Boy who Cried Wolf” scenarios, and the latter really isn’t either if the Trump admin ends up defunding/selling public lands, which seems likely at this point.

 

[2buffalo]

I can't understand giving up on public lands due to annoying "influencers"

I don't think anyone here that I have read said give up on public lands. I would say I spend around 250 days a year on public land between hiking, hunting, skiing, and snowboarding. The reality is people have different opinions on what it should be used for. If it's the people's land than their voice should be heard also. Some think it should be oil a d minerals, some think it's hunting, some think it's logging, others think nobody should kill an animal on public land, then there are off-road vehicles that people want to use the land for, and the point of this thread development, and on and on. Many of these if not all have conflicts with each other. Life is a negotiation and everyone isn't going to get exactly what they want. For example 12,000,000 acres Biden wanted to cover with windmills and solar panels imo was a travesty. Its interesting going back through threads and not seeing the same people panic stricken over that but they are over a couple hundred thousand for housing near cities? The best thing to do would be to get off the forums and spend that time lobbying to make a constitutional amendment to never sell any federal land. You see you can sit here typing away complaining about it or actually work for a final answer. After that the negotiations can start on what it can and cannot be used for. Just remember your interests may or may not be represented well enough to continue what you want to do. Anytime you go into a negotiation you need to have an understanding of what you are willing to give up and where you draw the line. If the line is giving up nothing you will lose every time.

 

[KurtR]

I agree that some people have become indifferent over the past year, but imo it’s a matter of the issue coming up too much rather hunting conservation orgs have been saying the sky is falling. So I’d say it’s more of an issue of indifference due to oversaturation.

This is anecdotal so take it with a grain of salt:
Generally when I’ve seen a conservation org discuss public land selloffs in the past few years, it’s been in regards to blatant state-level attempted sell-offs, federal proposals by certain anti-public land congressmen, or speculation about potential public land selloffs under the Trump admin.
The first two certainly aren’t “Boy who Cried Wolf” scenarios, and the latter really isn’t either if the Trump admin ends up defunding/selling public lands, which seems likely at this point.

That’s a talking point I hear said but didn’t Trump increase land open to hunting and fishing his first term if I remember right.

 

[KurtR]

I can't understand giving up on public lands due to annoying "influencers"

You forgot con orgs with the never ending inflammatory head lines. The end is always just around the corner. It seems all the land should have been gone 7 years ago but for some reason it’s not. Only so many times you can yell fire before people ignore you

 

[mostlybirch]

I don't think anyone here that I have read said give up on public lands. I would say I spend around 250 days a year on public land between hiking, hunting, skiing, and snowboarding. The reality is people have different opinions on what it should be used for. If it's the people's land than their voice should be heard also. Some think it should be oil a d minerals, some think it's hunting, some think it's logging, others think nobody should kill an animal on public land, then there are off-road vehicles that people want to use the land for, and the point of this thread development, and on and on. Many of these if not all have conflicts with each other. Life is a negotiation and everyone isn't going to get exactly what they want. For example 12,000,000 acres Biden wanted to cover with windmills and solar panels imo was a travesty. Its interesting going back through threads and not seeing the same people panic stricken over that but they are over a couple hundred thousand for housing near cities? The best thing to do would be to get off the forums and spend that time lobbying to make a constitutional amendment to never sell any federal land. You see you can sit here typing away complaining about it or actually work for a final answer. After that the negotiations can start on what it can and cannot be used for. Just remember your interests may or may not be represented well enough to continue what you want to do. Anytime you go into a negotiation you need to have an understanding of what you are willing to give up and where you draw the line. If the line is giving up nothing you will lose every time.

Those are all good points. My personal feeling is that when you start negotiations with the statement that some land is for sale, well then maybe everything is for sale at the right price or correct talking point. My radical opinion is that all public lands are off limit for privatization, however I am not talking about long term leases such as O&G.

The great thing about BLM land in particular is that all those user groups and activities you mentioned are more or less congruent. For the most part you can recreate, hunt, fish, mine, and pump oil. That is not the case when you remove them from public ownership.

And this isn't just from a sportsmans prospective. Selling public lands means mining or O&G will never be able to explore there again. Mining and exploration east of Colorado is basically non-existent outside of quarries or coal mines because it nearly all private land.

 

[Ozarkansas]

That’s a talking point I hear said but didn’t Trump increase land open to hunting and fishing his first term if I remember right.

You’re correct, but most hunting conservation orgs applauded that, and the Great American Outdoor Act, blocking Pebble mine, and a lot of other things he did.
The main thing I remember he personally got flak for was his first pick for Sec. of Interior, and he fired that guy pretty early on. All the conservation wins in his first term got cited a lot as a point for why he wouldn’t possibly sell public lands or slash conservation funding.
I heard about all of those wins via BHA, TRCP, RMEF, NWTF, and Meateater. I’m not saying they gave him glowing coverage, but I disagree with this idea that these groups “cried wolf” so much (pre Project 2025) that it made the public apathetic to selling off public lands.

(Non-hunting conservation orgs were obviously a different story)

 

[littlebigtine]

You forgot con orgs with the never ending inflammatory head lines. The end is always just around the corner. It seems all the land should have been gone 7 years ago but for some reason it’s not. Only so many times you can yell fire before people ignore you

Is it not possible that this is a persistent issue that requires our attention?

Do you think that TRCP is politically geared? It seems to me that they represent a varied group of conservation organizations from all sides of the aisle.

I think instead of claiming these orgs have purposeless motives, you should look in the mirror and ask yourself what your motives are.

 

[KurtR]

Is it not possible that this is a persistent issue that requires our attention?

Do you think that TRCP is politically geared? It seems to me that they represent a varied group of conservation organizations from all sides of the aisle.

I think instead of claiming these orgs have purposeless motives, you should look in the mirror and ask yourself what your motives are.

Sorry you don’t like to hear the truth but they have pushed me to the side of indifference when it comes to the land is getting sold issue. I know a bunch of people who feel the same between getting priced out and not drawing tags why would they care if it’s not directly affecting them. It’s to bad it’s got that way but that’s how it is.

 

[littlebigtine]

Sorry you don’t like to hear the truth but they have pushed me to the side of indifference when it comes to the land is getting sold issue. I know a bunch of people who feel the same between getting priced out and not drawing tags why would they care if it’s not directly affecting them. It’s to bad it’s got that way but that’s how it is.

Would you feel differently if you knew this is all going according to plan? That getting priced out, and tags getting harder to draw, is exactly what those who want to privatize public land have been working toward, slowly undermining public access and pushing out the average hunter?

I believe you do care about hunting and wildlife, you're on this forum for a reason. But if you've really given up or feel like it's not worth fighting for, that's disheartening. Because people like you are the last line of defense. If we don’t continue to stand for everything we’ve worked for over the last century our wildlife, our access, our traditions will keep getting chipped away until it is gone.

 

[Sccritterkiller]

You forgot con orgs with the never ending inflammatory head lines. The end is always just around the corner. It seems all the land should have been gone 7 years ago but for some reason it’s not. Only so many times you can yell fire before people ignore you

It's like they took a page from the global warming folks...saw an old clip of Dan Rather doing th nightly news like 35-45 years stating that Florida would under water in 20 years..smh

 

[COelk89]

Here is a story where land was transferred to energy companies to allow them to develop the resources that we desperately needed at the time. Guess what, the energy resources still are not developed and likely never will be. Meanwhile, some of the biggest companies that we all have in our portfolios now own this land and it is closed to public hunters and has been since the early 2000's. For those arguing a slippery slope for this transfer...news flash, we have been sliding down the slope for a while now...


GRAND JUNCTION -- Under an agreement with state wildlife officials, two major energy companies have agreed to keep several large private parcels in western Colorado open to hunters.Shell Frontier Oil & Gas Co. and EnCana Oil & Gas (USA) have separate agreements with the state to allow hunting on land each company owns.EnCana will keep about 17,000 acres of private land on the Roan Plateau near Rifle open during this year's big game hunting seasons. The area is home to some of Colorado's largest deer and elk herds and large reserves of natural gas and oil shale.Shell leases more than 19,000 acres of land to the Division of Wildlife for $1 a year to provide access to hunters under a 10-year agreement signed last year.The agreements with the companies identify specific areas where hunting is allowed to ensure the safety of their workers.The land was originally overseen by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. A 1980 agreement allowing energy companies to acquire the land included a section requiring the area to remain open to the public for 25 years.The agreement expired in August 2005 and signs declaring it private property started appearing."It was frustrating for some of our hunters when they arrived in these areas where they may have hunted for years, or in some cases generations, only to find that they were no longer welcome," said Bill DeVergie, the Division of Wildlife's area manager. "It's great that these two companies have agreed to keep these lands open to hunters."For more information about hunting access locations, contact the Colorado Division of Wildlife Meeker office at (970) 878-6090 or P.O. Box 1181, Meeker, CO 81641.
https://www.aspendailynews.com/energy-companies-keep-private-land-open-to-hunters/article_5bae202a-b1ab-5b39-9239-d0ed8f9bdea9.html

 

[KurtR]

Would you feel differently if you knew this is all going according to plan? That getting priced out, and tags getting harder to draw, is exactly what those who want to privatize public land have been working toward, slowly undermining public access and pushing out the average hunter?

I believe you do care about hunting and wildlife, you're on this forum for a reason. But if you've really given up or feel like it's not worth fighting for, that's disheartening. Because people like you are the last line of defense. If we don’t continue to stand for everything we’ve worked for over the last century our wildlife, our access, our traditions will keep getting chipped away until it is gone.

I do care about hunting but there are to many fights and the prairie pot hole region is more important to me than land in the west. Which in itself is a problem among the hunting or people who use the land. Its 50 different users with 50 different opinions and no one will come to any compromise. Residents should have first and priority over nr but that causes another problem when the residents need the nr help they have no incentive to help. So in the end the biggest money and voices will win against a bunch of small ones.

 

[Billinsd]

the prairie pot hole region is more important to me than land in the west. when the residents need the NR help they have no incentive to help. So in the end the biggest money and voices will win against a bunch of small ones.

I totally agree! I’ve come to LOVE the Prairie Pot Hole Region, ND and SD!! The hunting is excellent, the few people around are so nice!! My mom’s Scandinavian family is from SW Minnesota, and many elderly at church are snowbirds from SD/ND and the Prairie feels like home. I’ve hunted, skied, and fished the hell out of Colorado, Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada, Utah and Rockies since the 70s, great times loved the mountains and the people. I’ve got a few more elk and deer hunts, but the majority of my life hunting will be in the Prairie. The mountains have the HIPSTERS, the Prairie has SOUL! BillinSD&ND

 

[littlebigtine]

I do care about hunting but there are to many fights and the prairie pot hole region is more important to me than land in the west. Which in itself is a problem among the hunting or people who use the land. Its 50 different users with 50 different opinions and no one will come to any compromise. Residents should have first and priority over nr but that causes another problem when the residents need the nr help they have no incentive to help. So in the end the biggest money and voices will win against a bunch of small ones.

You mostly hunt private in ND and SD?

 

[KurtR]

You mostly hunt private in ND and SD?

Don’t hunt nd and mostly private or walk in which is land the state pays land owners access for.

 

[MTtrout]

because you and others cant seem to get the point. This is not a me problem. This is western hunter and resident problem. You want the nation to pay for your hunting land and not give tags to people. Then expect them to care about a resource they have no stake in. You clearly are not getting it if you think this a me problem. People come on this forum weekly, maybe daily complaining about this and they get flamed.....states manage the wildlife bro.

This sounds like a ‘me’ problem. What does the transfer of public lands and cutting funding to wildlife research have to do with your hunting opportunities, or mine for that matter? Your posts have been very clear that you appreciate the axe being widely swung. For myself, I try not to swing that axe so far to cut off my toes

 

[MTtrout]

Rofl

Talk with sasquatch. So what exactly are the public lands that are being sold in UT and NV offering a non resident hunter in CT?

What are they offering a nonresident non hunter that lives in Georgia?


How are you convincing those 2 groups of people PLT is not in their interest?

Have you ever step foot on land that is there for your own enjoyment? I’m talking about town parks, city parks, county land, state land, federal land…? Then wish a private entity owned it so you no longer have access to it?

You may not live where public lands are more accessible but don’t confuse the selling of these lands will result in the lowering of your federal taxes

 

[CJ19]

Have you ever step foot on land that is there for your own enjoyment? I’m talking about town parks, city parks, county land, state land, federal land…? Then wish a private entity owned it so you no longer have access to it?

You may not live where public lands are more accessible but don’t confuse the selling of these lands will result in the lowering of your federal taxes

I don't know how many times the same people in these hunting forums can respond the same thing. They literally shoot the messenger. Guess it just talking past each other and a pretty pointless conversation. Like the mod said people are entrenched on their side. My perspective is a western public land user for 2-4 weeks a year. Local or state land user 100 days or at least it used to be prior to waning interest as I age.

As much as groups like NWF want to try to lobby western reps, this is a national issue. The reliance on lobbying those western reps means you have many of the other reps cast votes more on party allienge to other issues. Less people with a stake in western federal lands means that is the case. Pretty simple logic.

The western hunting model and current wildlife management model is most benficial to residents of about 10 westerns states. You and ithers can tell NR their can use those lands in others ways but its not a winning message to hunters on a hunting forum. Same would be said telling atv riders on an atv site thay they cant ride but can still photograph wildflowers.

The message is not garnering wide spread concern when tweets on the subject and other social media posts from the largest players in the conservation game get likes numbering in the 10s or less.

I can go go on on and on but everything has been said. ITs like one side of this argument is going through the stages of grief. They should be listening bc myself and others are basically the customer ie tax payer here.

Do you or any of the other posters have any experience working the conservation world either priave or government side? Just curious.

 

[littlebigtine]

Don’t hunt nd and mostly private or walk in which is land the state pays land owners access for.

There’s no doubt that in some regions, federally managed public land doesn’t carry the same weight it does in a place like Idaho. South Dakota is one of those places—and I’d say North Dakota fits that description too.

I would argue that the Prairie Pothole Region is a shadow of what it once was prior to the 17th century, largely due to poor land management and extensive habitat fragmentation.

That said, even after the dramatic impacts of early western settlement, the variety of game species in that region isn’t as bad off as it could be largely because of the deep ecological foundation they originated from.

States like Idaho, Montana, Colorado, and Wyoming still have a chance to preserve what the Dakotas have largely lost. That’s what I care about. The North American continent (especially the eastern side of the Continental Divide and the prairie) once supported populations of elk, deer, and bison that rivaled the greatest in history. It’s a special place. And it’s worth protecting

 

[littlebigtine]

Keep Our Public Lands in Public Hands—Speak Out on Video

Call to Action: Keep Our Public Lands in Public Hands— Send your video testimony to Congress. America’s lawmakers are weighing proposals that would make it easier to sell off the very lands we hunt, fish, and recreate on—from late-night amendments speeding disposal of federal acres in Utah and...

www.howlforwildlife.org