Project 2025 - Department of the Interior (BLM)

[Bigbuckbandit]

https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_CHAPTER-16.pdf

Definitely worth a read to see what changes could be coming down the pipe for our public lands with a potential administration change.

 

[TaperPin]

Trump has distanced himself from the entire document lately and claimed not to know the people who authored it even though they were in his administration. The document as a whole is so looney tunes I have no doubt it turns off many many voters, thus the back pedaling.

 

[Beendare]

Its a good read...and pretty accurate.

Personally, I think the economic and security interests can co exist with Environmentalists. for example, why should some BLM properties be restricted from zero public use- No hunting, no hiking, no driving, no development of any kind whatsoever?

 

[Bigbuckbandit]

Its a good read...and pretty accurate.

Personally, I think the economic and security interests can co exist with Environmentalists. for example, why should some BLM properties be restricted from zero public use- No hunting, no hiking, no driving, no development of any kind whatsoever?

You can already recreate on BLM land.

 

[GSPHUNTER]

I'm setting my time on this post.

 

[Presswood_936]

Tldr : orange man bad ?

 

[KHNC]

Is this the entire Project 2025? If so, why are many women so upset about it? I dont see anything that address females or womens rights specifically.

 

[Andrew12gauge]

I don’t see a whole lot to be concerned with in there, biggest concern I have is with the Native American land buyback program mentioned at the end. American public lands should be for everyone not just Native American tribes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[5MilesBack]

Is this the entire Project 2025? If so, why are many women so upset about it? I dont see anything that address females or womens rights specifically.

There's no such thing as "women's rights". Women have the exact same rights every American has.

 

[KHNC]

There's no such thing as "women's rights". Women have the exact same rights every American has.

Im not disagreeing with you, however, this didnt answer my question about this. Plenty of women are complaining about this Project 2025 and i am wondering why. But, to address your statement, women dont really have same rights as every american. If they want , or need to get an abortion, now they cant. That only affects women specifically. So thats one thing they lost for sure.

 

[Mojave]

You can already recreate on BLM land.

Not 100% true. Some BLM lands are administered by DOD like parts of fort bliss.

 

[IdahoBeav]

If they want , or need to get an abortion, now they cant. That only affects women specifically.

Medically speaking, "need" is quite a stretch, but yes they can get an abortion. They just have to travel to a blue state, a minor inconvenience for a serious situation. By the way, much of the pro life movement and some of their loudest voices are female, and approximately half of fetuses are female, so the "women's rights" definition is out the window. Nonetheless, the left claims that LGBT people are greatly affected by abortion restrictions, some even say they are the most affected. This makes no sense biologically.

It's all just a bunch of nonsensical screaming to push their politics and the people they want in power.

 

[Marshfly]

Is this the entire Project 2025? If so, why are many women so upset about it?

They were told to be upset by the influencers they follow. Pretty simple really.

 

[Broomd]

LOL...'2025' (a Heritage Foundation thesis) is now a *desperate* DNC-pushed farce to somehow paint DJT and his potential admin as radical.

BBB, you're drinking their koolaid.
And btw, most of that thesis is fine, but given the people involved and labeling, it's a distraction.

 

[JFK]

Is this the entire Project 2025? If so, why are many women so upset about it? I dont see anything that address females or womens rights specifically.

The link is just to one chapter of Project 2025 that deals with federal lands. The whole thing is like 400+ pages and addresses many other aspects besides public land management. Public health, labor, etc.

 

[txjustin]

End all alphabet agencies


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Wyo_hntr]

LOL...'2025' (a Heritage Foundation thesis) is now a *desperate* DNC-pushed farce to somehow paint DJT and his potential admin as radical.

BBB, you're drinking their koolaid.
And btw, most of that thesis is fine, but given the people involved and labeling, it's a distraction.

Correct.

None of this is going to be done.

But in contrast what would you rather have, project 2025 or u.n. agenda 2030?

News flash both kinda suck.

 

[ElDiablito]

 

[Bigbuckbandit]

LOL...'2025' (a Heritage Foundation thesis) is now a *desperate* DNC-pushed farce to somehow paint DJT and his potential admin as radical.

BBB, you're drinking their koolaid.
And btw, most of that thesis is fine, but given the people involved and labeling, it's a distraction.

I'm curious why posting an article is indicative of drinking any parties koolaid? If you feel comfortable with the proposals, why is there an issue with posting the full text to allow our users to make their own informed decision? This is a forum full of hunters and anglers that find themselves recreating on Department of the Interior lands every year. What better forum to post the full text than Rokslide?

BHA recently posted their own take on the proposals which you can find here: https://www.backcountryhunters.org/what_project_2025_means_for_public_lands_and_waters

I think it's good that Trump is distancing himself from the proposals noted above, but it is worth noting that 64% of their 2016 prescriptions were included in his budget during his presidency.

Perhaps you should lay off the koolaid yourself and work on your critical thinking skills.

 

[MuleyFever]

Perhaps you should lay off the koolaid yourself and work on your critical thinking skskills.

That's a tall ask around here.