Project 2025 and public lands and environment

[Gila]

Some outdoor sports groups deal with habitat management and access. Other organizations deal with hunter and angler opportunity. Those organizations work with State Game and Fish Commissions who set seasons and bag limits, tag allocation etc.

Definitely add HOWL and your state chapter of the Wildlife Federation. I have donated to the state chap.of the Wildlife Federation in every state I have hunted.

 

[elkhunter505]

The problem is truly defining a DEI hire or what gets accused of being a DEI hire when that gets thrown around. A lot of people make accusations of a DEI hire but the person is absurdly qualified compared the next person who receives no audit because they don’t look “DEI”.

If the only thing “evidence” that someone has to say that someone is unqualified for their position is just saying that they’re a “DEI hire” that says way more about their qualifications than anything else can. After being on multiple hiring committees in systems that promote DEI, I can tell you that regardless of those traits that DEI focuses on, the most qualified candidate is being hired every time. I’ve seen multiple people that would meet the traditional “DEI” definition passed over for white men or women (no judgement at all just illustrating a point) because they were the most qualified person for the job. I think DEI is wildly misunderstood and is weaponized by both sides if the aisle because the extremely limited understanding whether that be out of pure ignorance or how complicated/controversial some of the groups that are considered in DEI are. Personally, I don’t give a damn about people’s gender, ethnicity, sexual preference or anything because it is not impacting me and if they’re the best candidate for the job, that’s the person I want for the job. None of these traits make anyone better or worse at their job in my career field. I just feel that the right side of the aisle has done a very good job at making white men feel as though they’re being discriminated against when in my own limited experience, I have not seen that in the hiring searches I have been a part of.

 

[elkhunter505]

That being said, DEI funding is an extremely controversial thing and from the conversations that I have had, if those funds are being used to provide a wage that makes sure people from all economic backgrounds could thrive on that wage, I think it is a valid use of funds. There are tons of seasonal jobs in my field that pay absolute garbage and at this point that’s what you have to do to excel in this career path; however, there are people that cannot afford to do those positions or volunteer their time because they come from worse socioeconomic backgrounds. After talking with people in those DEI demographics, that is the vast vast majority of the feedback that I have received. Wages that are livable for someone and the other thing is getting rid of any stigmas that make work environments harder for those groups of people. Let’s be real, there are people that judge people based on their gender, race, ethnicity, sexual preference, etc. and those people are in the workforce. While it may be less prevalent than it was, it is still a real concern for those people. And in my opinion if offering living wages is the biggest impediment for those groups, we are ruling out people that may be brilliant because they cannot live on those wages while somebody who may have more financial support from their family can do it since they can help them get started out in those first seasonal jobs.

 

[CJ19]

You don’t burn the house down to fix a broken window. When a project is defunded it is dead. RIP

I will refer you to post#6 in this thread.

 

[PLhunter]

Some outdoor sports groups deal with habitat management and access. Other organizations deal with hunter and angler opportunity. Those organizations work with State Game and Fish Commissions who set seasons and bag limits, tag allocation etc.

Definitely add HOWL and your state chapter of the Wildlife Federation. I have donated to the state chap.of the Wildlife Federation in every state I have hunted.

HOWL has done a great job easing engagement and communication. I know BHA is triggering to people but in my state, other than OHA, they have had the most tangible “wins.”

Going along with the tide and directing it favorably has been a successful approach here. Being able to use your hunting license as your permit in permit required wilderness areas and seasons. A win for BHA locally. Keeping a wilderness archery hunt valid for the entire wilderness area Instead of broken into arbitrary subunits, win for our local BHA. Those had very tangible real world benefits for the areas I hunt and I’m glad they were in the arena during those decisions, because the all or nothing, approach of other orgs was clearly going nowhere.

 

[PLhunter]

I will refer you to post#6 in this thread.

Keep in mind, to many of us, your pointed out justification for going nuclear just isn’t strong enough. Being challenged doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want next time around without being rightfully called out when it’s excessive.

In the window analogy your post seems to follow this logic.

We tried to fix the window last time. People didn’t like the quality of the replacement window and wanted it to be different. They left a bad review. So now we get to burn the house down on the next time out because you didn’t like my window the first time. No other option. Which isn’t true there are many available options.

Again I like the slogan of waste fraud and abuse but I do not trust and see much to make me trust that one those cuts will benefit us and two that they are doing a thorough and just job of actually identifying and proving waste fraud and abuse.

 

[elkhunter505]

Another thing that I find weird with this government efficiency push is that they ordered federal workers back to the office rather than allowing them to work from home despite many studies showing higher productivity when working from home. That and now the expenses of office spaces and fuel to and from home spaces depending on the agency just seems counterintuitive. So we want to make certain things less efficient but then we want to cut funds to increase efficiency? It just doesn’t make sense. Working from an office should be an option rather than required when the job is able to be done remotely. I know there’s a lot of pushback on that because it does allow people to live anywhere and pushes up housing costs but if it’s more efficient to work from home for some people, and likely costs less money in both the short and long term, isn’t that in line with the mission of DOGE and the administration?

 

[CJ19]

Keep in mind, to many of us, your pointed out justification for going nuclear just isn’t strong enough. Being challenged doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want next time around without being rightfully called out when it’s excessive.

In the window analogy your post seems to follow this logic.

We tried to fix the window last time. People didn’t like the quality of the replacement window and wanted it to be different. They left a bad review. So now we get to burn the house down on the next time out because you didn’t like my window the first time. No other option. Which isn’t true there are many available options.

Again I like the slogan of waste fraud and abuse but I do not trust and see much to make me trust that one those cuts will benefit us and two that they are doing a thorough and just job of actually identifying and proving waste fraud and abuse.

You 2 can cope and seeth all you want. I laid out what happened and why the conservation industry is in the position its at. This is a monumental political problem the conservation industry and public union has now put at the feet of the american public. So like the dei thing. You can say whatever you want. I am simply telling why we are at this point. Looks like you amd others can not accept the facts when they are laid out. Its a problem because the major of american people don't give a crap about most public land or conservation funding.

Another thing that I find weird with this government efficiency push is that they ordered federal workers back to the office rather than allowing them to work from home despite many studies showing higher productivity when working from home. That and now the expenses of office spaces and fuel to and from home spaces depending on the agency just seems counterintuitive. So we want to make certain things less efficient but then we want to cut funds to increase efficiency? It just doesn’t make sense. Working from an office should be an option rather than required when the job is able to be done remotely. I know there’s a lot of pushback on that because it does allow people to live anywhere and pushes up housing costs but if it’s more efficient to work from home for some people, and likely costs less money in both the short and long term, isn’t that in line with the mission of DOGE and the administration?

You and others are not fooling any one with the "more gets done at home" line. I am familiar with what goes on and how metrics are used. The public is not served better with employees in their underwear on the couch. Maybe cheaper. Not better public service. 1 or 2 days a week maybe fine. Fulltime. Doubtful.

 

[elkhunter505]

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/13/forest-services-fires-3400-employees-00204213?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR36tDDuEUvw3McoPgrUr-U3-9Qdk6qcSwRHiyqpV0Tuig-jadYbymWCZAs_aem_1PzgrTA9iy0oYt8iv0XU-w

Here you go. All your trails are not going to be cleared this year. All those seasonal workers that some of us rely on to do surveys and field work, gone. Please, at least just think for yourself rather than falling in line with an entire party. I voted for both republicans and democrats on my ballot this year so I encourage people to at least be a free thinker and realize it’s not an all or nothing system.

 

[elkhunter505]

You 2 can cope and seeth all you want. I laid out what happened and why the conservation industry is in the position its at. This is a monumental political problem the conservation industry and public union has now put at the feet of the american public. So like the dei thing. You can say whatever you want. I am simply telling why we are at this point. Looks like you amd others can not accept the facts when they are laid out. Its a problem because the major of american people don't give a crap about most public land or conservation funding.




You and others are not fooling any one with the "more gets done at home" line. I am familiar with what goes on and how metrics are used. The public is not served better with employees in their underwear on the couch. Maybe cheaper. Not better public service. 1 or 2 days a week maybe fine. Fulltime. Doubtful.

The rise in remote work since the pandemic and its impact on productivity

The COVID-19 pandemic brought about dramatic changes in the work environment. Although 6.5 percent of workers in the private business sector worked primarily from home in 2019, the pandemic was the start of a massive experiment in full-time remote work for most workers and firms. People often...

www.bls.gov

Conclusion: “Remote work rose dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic. Total factor productivity growth over the 2019–22 period is positively associated with the rise in the percentage of remote workers across 61 industries in the private business sector, even after accounting for pre-pandemic trends in productivity. This is because unit costs, especially unit nonlabor costs, grew less in industries where more work was done from home. The productivity gains accrued to businesses, however, did not result in increased compensation to workers. Productivity gains can potentially result in higher wages and benefits for workers, greater investments by businesses to improve their products or services, increased profits, and/or lower prices for consumers.”

This is a 2 pronged thing too. Even this shows that the people in the highest classes of society are gaining while no one else is. Even with productivity increases, no compensation to workers.

 

[Ozarkansas]

You really like to fixate the transgender thing.

Because it was the most obviously misrepresented point you’d made.

cope and seeth

I don’t think I’ve seen “cope and seethe” used on this part of the internet before before.It feels like you want this to be an argument with crybaby liberals, but it’s not.

I wish I had as much faith in Musk acting impartially as you do, but unfortunately I don’t. And I think blaming the current system of public land management for our current govt spending issues is a red herring.

Here you go

I thought we established that Politico articles weren’t legit sources? It needs to be a link to a tweet of a screenshot on DOGE.gov to count

 

[elkhunter505]

I thought we established that Politico articles weren’t legit sources? It needs to be a link to a tweet of a screenshot on DOGE.gov to count

Well if that’s the case for those of us that can’t live with DEI money going to reporting agencies, then I know people personally in the Forest Service and Fish and Wildlife Service. Probationary employees were laid off as of the end of the day today. That includes permanent seasonal employees like park interpretation staff and other people that help keep national parks sites clean and protect the dumbasses from getting attacked by bison and grizzlies in YNP and GNP. No 2 weeks notice or anything, many were not eligible for the buyout either.

 

[Gila]

So, Donald J. Trump wanted to use "a meet in the middle" approach initially. We know this because his first appointment was Ryan Zinke in his first term. A MT guy who stated openly he did not want to sell public land, in a group that had some public land enemies. It was going to be hard for Zinke to be perfect in the eyes of the public land crowd. instead of working with this ally, almost every single public land group worked openly or behind closed door to demonize Zinke and get him removed.

Same can be said for the GAOA. Trump worked to get this legislation passed to permanently fund some of the most important parts of conservation. When the funding landed a little bit short of what was promise, instead of working with it knowing that it was in place permanently and adjustments could be made in the not too distance future, some of the biggest names and groups in conservation went full on attack trying to smear Trump and his administrations commitment to conservation.

So it looks to me that Trump has been the one that wanted to do this with precision and meet in the middle. Conservation lobbyists did not want to do that because it stopped the gravy train. DOGE is now here to find WASTE, FRAUD, and ABUSE. Sorry. The chance was there for the conservation industry to have their seats at the table. The conservation lobby and industrial said no. I laid this out in the first thread about this topic.

Don’t forget about Executive Order 3388 now…. Another “red herring”

 

[PLhunter]

Coping is a lot different than pointing out logical incongruities and pointing to real world examples of inconsistent application of waste and fraud, What facts are being denied? Where is the seething? Your post 6 is simply not a fact it’s an interpretation of how we got where we are. One that we do not see as justifying or sufficient cause for some of what is happening

There was a better way. There is a better way. Being challenged with your compromise solution isn’t justification for throwing a tantrum even if it is indeed the reason for the tantrum. Things are the way they are because they are…. Doesn’t mean you don’t say, “You know what that’s not the best way to do this. I’m going to challenge that. Which is what we are wanting to do.”

You point to your opinions as the reference for why your opinion is correct. Which is circular and certainly interesting. I do not point the blame for the current condition to the people window shopping when the house is being burnt down. I point to the angry contractor who started the fire in spite.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

Another thing that I find weird with this government efficiency push is that they ordered federal workers back to the office rather than allowing them to work from home despite many studies showing higher productivity when working from home. That and now the expenses of office spaces and fuel to and from home spaces depending on the agency just seems counterintuitive. So we want to make certain things less efficient but then we want to cut funds to increase efficiency? It just doesn’t make sense. Working from an office should be an option rather than required when the job is able to be done remotely. I know there’s a lot of pushback on that because it does allow people to live anywhere and pushes up housing costs but if it’s more efficient to work from home for some people, and likely costs less money in both the short and long term, isn’t that in line with the mission of DOGE and the administration?

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/13/forest-services-fires-3400-employees-00204213?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR36tDDuEUvw3McoPgrUr-U3-9Qdk6qcSwRHiyqpV0Tuig-jadYbymWCZAs_aem_1PzgrTA9iy0oYt8iv0XU-w

Here you go. All your trails are not going to be cleared this year. All those seasonal workers that some of us rely on to do surveys and field work, gone. Please, at least just think for yourself rather than falling in line with an entire party. I voted for both republicans and democrats on my ballot this year so I encourage people to at least be a free thinker and realize it’s not an all or nothing system.

Forgive the drive by posting but I haven't and probably won't have time to engage.

1) I have been working 100% remote since before covid, those "studies" are done by people that work from home justifying it lol. I've worked in several capacities and most people I've seen are probably getting 20% of the work done that they would if they were in the office. Companies do save money on office space, but it's not even close to making up for lack of efficiency they lose in productivity. I've seen it first hand, and I'll even catch myself getting caught up in it.

2) Politico we know now is bought and paid for, and you can feel the slant in that article. "According to sources familiar" doesn't really mean anything. It hasn't even happened yet, just another clickbait alarmist article from a bought and paid for rag. Let's wait and see what happens and then we can get our pitchforks. Seems this whole thread is arguing positions based on a bunch of "what-ifs" and speculations for the worst case scenarios based on slanted political bias to start with. Again, my pitchfork is ready in the garage if things come to that but I don't tend to waste time sharpening the tips for what-ifs and speculations.

 

[CJ19]

Forgive the drive by posting but I haven't and probably won't have time to engage.

1) I have been working 100% remote since before covid, those "studies" are done by people that work from home justifying it lol. I've worked in several capacities and most people I've seen are probably getting 20% of the work done that they would if they were in the office. Companies do save money on office space, but it's not even close to making up for lack of efficiency they lose in productivity. I've seen it first hand, and I'll even catch myself getting caught up in it.

2) Politico we know now is bought and paid for, and you can feel the slant in that article. "According to sources familiar" doesn't really mean anything. It hasn't even happened yet, just another clickbait alarmist article from a bought and paid for rag. Let's wait and see what happens and then we can get our pitchforks. Seems this whole thread is arguing positions based on a bunch of "what-ifs" and speculations for the worst case scenarios based on slanted political bias to start with. Again, my pitchfork is ready in the garage if things come to that but I don't tend to waste time sharpening the tips for what-ifs and speculations.

Bingo. Explained very well

 

[PLhunter]

Don’t forget about Executive Order 3388 now…. Another “red herring”

What’s concerning is that a lot of the cuts and major complaints etc.. were things that actually came from the first Trump administration.

Meaning that regardless of who came up with it, it’s under threat, and some things like the GAOA were solid Trump era investments. But people have short memories and if folks are successfully getting away with blaming a trade deal that they signed just 5 years ago on someone else… Then nothing is off the chopping block. The only things I don’t think we have to watch for is probably cuts to SpaceX. Otherwise, regardless of signature on the paper we need to remain watchful to see if we view the spending as waste, abuse, and fraud. If not. We need to speak up.

 

[elkhunter505]

Forgive the drive by posting but I haven't and probably won't have time to engage.

1) I have been working 100% remote since before covid, those "studies" are done by people that work from home justifying it lol. I've worked in several capacities and most people I've seen are probably getting 20% of the work done that they would if they were in the office. Companies do save money on office space, but it's not even close to making up for lack of efficiency they lose in productivity. I've seen it first hand, and I'll even catch myself getting caught up in it.

2) Politico we know now is bought and paid for, and you can feel the slant in that article. "According to sources familiar" doesn't really mean anything. It hasn't even happened yet, just another clickbait alarmist article from a bought and paid for rag. Let's wait and see what happens and then we can get our pitchforks. Seems this whole thread is arguing positions based on a bunch of "what-ifs" and speculations for the worst case scenarios based on slanted political bias to start with. Again, my pitchfork is ready in the garage if things come to that but I don't tend to waste time sharpening the tips for what-ifs and speculations.

Well per my previous post, I have talked to multiple people who work for USFS and FWS and it happened today. All probationary employees are laid off starting tomorrow. So there’s factual information on the ground from people who directly work for those agencies…

Also, either way, I don’t work from home because my productivity suffers, so I do think there are people that can do it and those that can’t. I’m not one of those people that can. But what is the reason for stopping those who can?

 

[PLhunter]

I started this thread because the previous thread on the topic was told to wait and see and it was all alarmist. It wasn’t a real document or strategy. Trump isn’t associated. The narrative has been very very different now.

However, those alarms turned out to be more true than false considering the appointments and first days of the admin. When waiting and seeing has shown more seeing than waiting it’s important to acknowledge the trend and act accordingly.

 

[elkhunter505]

I started this thread because the previous thread on the topic was told to wait and see and it was all alarmist. It wasn’t a real document or strategy. Trump isn’t associated. The narrative has been very very different now.

However, those alarms turned out to be more true than false considering the appointments and first days of the admin. When waiting and seeing has shown more seeing than waiting it’s important to acknowledge the trend and act accordingly.

I appreciate you bringing it up to make sure we are on the same page. Despite all of our differences, I’d bet 99% of us have benefited from public land and I for one am ready to absolutely raise hell if they try it. And I’m already going to be writing my representatives about these large layoffs in our conservation organizations. So I for one am with you and ready to make a stink.