Mike Lee back in the news

[TurkeyReaper69]

Senator Lee Is Back with His Attack on Public Lands. This Time He Wants to Butcher the Wilderness Act Under the Guise of Border Security

Utah Sen. Mike Lee is back with his attacks on public lands. This time, he introduced an unfounded bill under the pretense of border security.

www.outdoorlife.com

Mike Lee introduced a bill effectively disbanding the wilderness act within 100 miles of the border in the name of "border security".

I believe anyone who thinks this bill is about border security has a few screws loose, thoughts?

 

[JeffRaines]

Ah yes, because the drug smugglers are flooding in through the pasayten, mt baker, and Stephen Mather wildernesses.

Dont forget the migrant train that came in through the Salmo priest!

 

[jonesn3]

Is wilderness in MT excluded from this bill, too? Jk, but it’s getting ever more frustrating these attacks on public land.

 

[Rock’N Tacos]

Utah needs to get rid of this guy…

 

[CorbLand]

Utah needs to get rid of this guy…

Cruz sponsored the bill…

@CMF so did Cindy Hyde-Smith.

Start the emails and phone calls again.

U.S. Senate: Contacting U.S. Senators

www.senate.gov

 

[MTtrout]

Mike Lee is that chatty person that will never go away. UT is in for what’s best for the church.

 

[hunthikecamp]

Over a dozen wilderness areas, 2 National Parks, and a ridiculous amount of roadless public land within 100 miles just in this section shown of WA, ID, and MT. Not even mentioning the other 5000+ miles of north and southern border.

Every time I think it can't possibly get more ridiculous, I am surprised...

 

[hunthikecamp]

Direct link to the senate bill: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2967

 

[EdP]

I don't know the specifics of the proposed bill but removing the "wilderness" designation doesn't take the land out of the public domain. It does remove certain restrictions, some of which are detrimental to the wildlife populations we like to hunt and also restrict access. There is a lot of national forest land that is not designated wilderness but is open to hunting. In the National Forest near where I live, the wilderness designations prevent management of the forest in a way that would benefit our deer populations.

 

[Fireflyfishing]

Grr. This sucks.

 

[Yoteassasin]

So what # of miles would be reasonable to you to secure the borders ?

 

[cal30_sniper]

So what # of miles would be reasonable to you to secure the borders ?

0.

 

[Fireflyfishing]

So what # of miles would be reasonable to you to secure the borders ?

They don’t need to mow down 100 miles across the border to accomplish this task. It is being accomplished now without them chipping away at our public lands. Do you really think that is the main purpose of this bill? Immigration? C’mon man.

 

[MTtrout]

I don't know the specifics of the proposed bill but removing the "wilderness" designation doesn't take the land out of the public domain. It does remove certain restrictions, some of which are detrimental to the wildlife populations we like to hunt and also restrict access. There is a lot of national forest land that is not designated wilderness but is open to hunting. In the National Forest near where I live, the wilderness designations prevent management of the forest in a way that would benefit our deer populations.

You’re right it doesn’t take it out of public hands but it gives Mike Lee and company one less hoop to jump through for full transfer. Having more roads into wilderness areas aren’t going to benefit much wildlife. Often, summer grounds aren’t the limiting factor. Not sure why you mentioned “FS are often open to hunting” when so are wilderness areas! We all wish the FS could do better with timber management to improve habitat but that’s on the damn litigators blocking every effort. Plus we have an administration that seems gung ho on defunding the folks that are trying to make a difference. I’m friends with FS employees that can’t even put a gate in without being sued over it, let a lone following through on a timber harvest that is part of their management plan without major suing.

Until we have a mechanism to stop the bs lawsuits and an administrative that supports our “working” federal employees in the FS, I see no benefit. The Wilderness Act was put in place for a reason.

 

[MTtrout]

So what # of miles would be reasonable to you to secure the borders ?

You do realize we are talking about the Canadian border, right? Is that what keeps you up at night…

 

[Yoteassasin]

So what # of miles would be reasonable to you to secure the borders ?

You do realize we are talking about the Canadian border, right? Is that what keeps you up at night…

for this conversation yes . How many miles ?

 

[Fireflyfishing]

for this conversation yes . How many miles ?

Are you familiar with how CBP is set up on the border now? What equipment they use, etc?

I can tell you they don’t need 100 miles of land converted out of wilderness. All they need is direction and funding that says they can do their job and protect the border…that’s it. Again, they’re getting that direction now and are now effectively managing the border.

So tell me why do they need a 100 mile strip across both borders if they’re able to effectively manage as is? This is coming from the guy who wanted to sell off public land. See the connection yet?

 

[hunthikecamp]

for this conversation yes . How many miles ?

0. I'll even put up a welcome sign! If someone is illegally smuggling drugs or people into the US via some of the most rugged wilderness out there...they are a pretty bad smuggler, and i'm not worried. It's not exactly tunneling under the Rio Grande we're talking about here.

If you're smuggling yourself in that way, and you make it...well, welcome in, you'll fit right in!

 

[Deadspace]

The northern border has a giant slash/ fence line going across it already. Just add a border road to it so agents can patrol it, deploy tech on it, and respond in a timely manner and you’re good. This whole 100 mile thing is ridiculous and I’m betting he’s playing off the 100 mile rule setup for border patrol to operate within 100 miles of the border.

 

[COelk89]

CBP already has a mounted patrol. Much of the rugged southern border is never going to be accessible by vehicle without significant investment in infrastructure, wilderness designation aside. I am not really interested in my tax dollars going towards that kind of investment personally.

Hasn't the current administration already declared the border as closed? If so, why is any of this necessary?