I was just looking for data...actual numbers like George Bush Sr Did X number of acres, Clinton did Y, Bush Jr. did Z, Obama did ?...Trump has done? in his first 3+ years? The original article I cited had these numbers and it didn't put our current administration in a good light. Perhaps it was a biased article of the "elite leftest deep state media". Or perhaps their numbers are factual. I haven't see anyone put up any links, any articles or any facts yet. I put up a link to a big bipartisan senate bill that seems promising, but I can't give any credit to our President because he hasn't touted, promoted or signed it yet. Currently based on the record of the Obama administration Biden appears more likely to continue to protect our public lands.
I'm guessing if we looked at the true data objectively without our personal bias about who is the worst person then one could determine who is the better candidate on the public lands issue. I need to see multiple sources. As its been said in this thread just adding more wilderness to our public land acreage isn't always a positive for hunting and fishing due to lack of access. Same goes for National Monuments. They are great and all but don't do a lot for recreation beyond looking at some cool feature or historical figure. Having more BLM or National Forest Land likely better due to accessibility. In general though having some care for our public land heritage is a nice quality in any candidate who wishes to hold public office at the Federal level. I certainly don't want someone that only see Natural resources as $$$ to be had by the wealthy capitalists and the corporations. Our public lands provide a lot more than just timber, grazing, mining, oil and gas. I don't mind that they provide that and hope they can be managed to sustain that for as long as possible. IMO that should be balanced with the rights of the other citizens to share in that wealth, as well as recreate in whatever capacity hunting, fishing, hiking, etc. they wish.
As far as thinking that maybe because Don Jr and Eric may hunt at times that the Donald might be more pro hunting well that may be, but seems like a stretch. There is a big difference between the regular Joe hunting public and Don Jr.
Don Jr can afford to pay for someone to hunt for him...essentially when you got that much $$ you can just go out and have a good time getting a trophy. I don't know that equates to having a love and respect for the American Public Land Heritage. Now don't get me wrong I'd do that too at times if I could, but my guess is someone raised jet setting in NYC doesn't have the same love of our public lands as us regular guys and gals. A lot of us were raised in the outdoors, taken hunting/fishing/camping in the forests from the beginning. Of course maybe I'm wrong...Maybe they cherish National parks, National Monuments, National Forests etc.??? Seems like they might cherish the $$$ that can be produced by public resources then had by them and their cronies. Biden might see it the same way though???
As far as the 2nd amendment which again I support. A well regulated militia can be interpreted many ways. Back in the late 1700s I don't think our forefathers contemplated tanks, F22 jets, and thermonuclear warheads. There will always be limits put on that particular constitutional right agreed on by both the citizens and the government. Or does the 2nd entitle me to have a stock of nukes and an A10 in a hangar out back?
