Senate vote public lands sale

[Mattman215]

Very sad the route this country continues to go down. I hope this bill does, but the fact it’s even a real possibility is very sad.

 

[CorbLand]

Never said that, good deflection though.

Deflection from what?

 

[WRO]

Where did I say you can replace a buck with a doe there?

You’re making the assumption that every unit is at carrying capacity which most aren’t.

If you look at mortality studies out of Oregon, there does have a very high mortality rate, common sense would dictate that if a predators eat more bucks, then more does would survive. Having enough bucks to breed the vast majority of the does in first estrus, all the fawns drop at relatively the same time allowing for more escapement.

Anyways back to the topic at hand inspector gadget.

 

[CorbLand]

Where did I say you can replace a buck with a doe there?

You’re making the assumption that every unit is at carrying capacity which most aren’t.

If you look at mortality studies out of Oregon, there does have a very high mortality rate, common sense would dictate that if a predators eat more bucks, then more does would survive. Having enough bucks to breed the vast majority of the does in first estrus, all the fawns drop at relatively the same time allowing for more escapement.

Anyways back to the topic at hand inspector gadget.

You can post or PM me those studies. I am still willing to learn something new.

 

[Idaboy]

Any Utes on this thread? Maybe Utah constituents can apply some pressure to Lee, or least senator Curtis

If you live in below states, your senator is on the committee with Lee

 

[TaperPin]

These are some of the types of BLM land that cities want to develop, and it’s not for the benefit of the people already living there. Raise your hand if you want low income housing and all the problems it brings to be built next to your street. Raise your hand if you’d rather look at more houses than patches of sage. Rather than a place every kid with a remote control car can rip around, or fly a kite, who wants their kid to even walk through the parking lot of a low income apartment complex on their way home from school.

It’s a bunch of bs from developers who just want handouts, and it’s perpetuated at the national level just to keep it in the news cycle to distract away from the main purpose of the spending bill to take money from the lowest income levels, provide trillions in tax breaks for the wealthiest, and stick the middle class with the debt. Follow the money.

What ever happened to people using their brain rather than listen to billionaires trying to convince people to trust they have the average person’s best interest in mind.

 

[Idaboy]

Also, a phone call to your senators office, also may carry more weight then the emails they get swamped with

 

[WyoWild]

https://wilderness.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/basic/index.html?appid=821970f0212d46d7aa854718aac42310

I case this has not been shared this is a link that shows what public lands would be prioritized for sell/disposal.

 

[WRO]

https://wilderness.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/basic/index.html?appid=821970f0212d46d7aa854718aac42310

I case this has not been shared this is a link that shows what public lands would be prioritized for sell/disposal.

Its a map of what fits the criteria laid out in the bill.

The actual totals would be between .5% and . 75% of that.

 

[Gila]

For any policy wonk type folks this is a breakdown of what is actually in the senate version of this bill.

3 Million Acres of Public Lands for Sale in 11 States

Podcast Episode · Your Mountain · 06/13/2025 · 1h 16m

podcasts.apple.com

This podcast together with the map provided by Outdoor Life has opened my eyes. The Bill text is a ubiquitous sea of uncertainty. The 2.8-3.2 million acres that qualifies for sale at the present time is a misnomer. Sen Lee’s process targets land for sale that may be exempt from sale today but could be nominated for sale within the next five years. I believe that may be why some conservation groups have put the total acres that could be sold to be more like 120 million acres across 11 states.

Wildlife habitat, hunting, fishing, trapping is not even on the radar. Completely ignoring a 1.3 Trillion dollar industry makes no sense what-so-ever. The provision bypasses FLPMA which has been a process for selling public lands since 1976. This anything goes, let’s make a deal with Monty, cannot be allowed to continue.

 

[WyoWild]

Its a map of what fits the criteria laid out in the bill.

The actual totals would be between .5% and . 75% of that

Regardless we know they won't stop at 0.5%. Once the precedent is set they will just keep whitling away at it. The map gives you a good idea of their ambition.

 

[IdahoBeav]

These are some of the types of BLM land that cities want to develop, and it’s not for the benefit of the people already living there. Raise your hand if you want low income housing and all the problems it brings to be built next to your street. Raise your hand if you’d rather look at more houses than patches of sage. Rather than a place every kid with a remote control car can rip around, or fly a kite, who wants their kid to even walk through the parking lot of a low income apartment complex on their way home from school.

It’s a bunch of bs from developers who just want handouts, and it’s perpetuated at the national level just to keep it in the news cycle to distract away from the main purpose of the spending bill to take money from the lowest income levels, provide trillions in tax breaks for the wealthiest, and stick the middle class with the debt. Follow the money.

What ever happened to people using their brain rather than listen to billionaires trying to convince people to trust they have the average person’s best interest in mind.

Yeah, because a new multi family development on the outskirts of town creates a cliche inner-city ghetto, lol.

There are a lot of people that are being pushed out of the mountain west because they can no longer afford it, so your drivel about no benefit to the people already living here is nonsense.

It never ceases to amaze me how little some people on RS know about development and how loudly they speak. I shouldn't be surprised, though. It's standard procedure when emotions outweigh facts.

 

[Loo.wii]

The (R)okslide boot lickers told me selling off public lands was a good thing

 

[Bearded Bowhunter]

Regardless we know they won't stop at 0.5%. Once the precedent is set they will just keep whitling away at it. The map gives you a good idea of their ambition.

Agree completely and even mentioned the slippery slope of this when i wrote my senators. I think the potential precedent needs to be a focal point in the argument against this.

 

[Gila]

We aren’t biting on that housing BS. Sen Lee speaks with forked tongue. I grew up on Ag land and have retired to Ag land. The small towns and villages nearby are businesses that support ag operations. Those urban areas don’t grow and they don’t shrink. Further more, ranchers and farmers determine their own local economy. The cities can keep their problems. We just want to be left alone.

 

[KurtR]

Interesting conundrum here. We want all the people to help save public land but we dont want all the people to come hunt public land.

 

[Poser]

I can tell you that, based on my time spent trying to rally some different user groups this weekend, the ORV groups don't seem to be on board with our cause here. They generally think that there is too much useless wilderness, these democrat states are just trying to blame their problems on republicans, or people need to stop complaining and support the president.

It seems largely lost on this crowd that they mostly use public lands. I know the IQ of the average SxS user really dumbs down the average user, but I'm not really even sure what to say here.

 

[wind gypsy]

Interesting conundrum here. We want all the people to help save public land but we dont want all the people to come hunt public land.

What are talking about?

 

[WaWox]

I can tell you that, based on my time spent trying to rally some different user groups this weekend, the ORV groups don't seem to be on board with our cause here. They generally think that there is too much useless wilderness, these democrat states are just trying to blame their problems on republicans, or people need to stop complaining and support the president.

It seems largely lost on this crowd that they mostly use public lands. I know the IQ of the average SxS user really dumbs down the average user, but I'm not really even sure what to say here.

ORV have been consistently terrible on land use everywhere and always. But here in particular I am not surprised. They love Lee because Lee has been fighting BLM and others regarding closing previous wilderness land to overland driving.

Another org that's very prone to disappointing: SCI. I knew SCI is always in favor of removing wilderness status and in favor of building roads to let their ancient user base shoot trophies off the back of their trucks. But still sad to see the org has been conspicuously silent on this too. They are so bought in on Trump being pro hunting (based on Hr wearing Kuiu basically) they can't even see what's happening.

 

[elkhunter505]

I can tell you that, based on my time spent trying to rally some different user groups this weekend, the ORV groups don't seem to be on board with our cause here. They generally think that there is too much useless wilderness, these democrat states are just trying to blame their problems on republicans, or people need to stop complaining and support the president.

It seems largely lost on this crowd that they mostly use public lands. I know the IQ of the average SxS user really dumbs down the average user, but I'm not really even sure what to say here.

Their argument doesn’t hold water though. Removing wilderness land from the public ownership doesn’t increase the amount of OHV trails available to the public. Your assessment of the IQ does seem to track. All it does is make the land they like to ride on closer to the chopping block. Wild that they can’t see down the line.