Jaden Bales
Super Moderator
Shoutout to Wyomingite - Brian Nesvik, for actually being the one in the "Trump Admin" that's leading the charge on opening up more NWRs for hunting and fishing. But I'll play here on the broader conversation.
To @Steve O 's point, sometimes more access and kill good hunting, but it's also a case-by-case basis. But ultimately that gives state wildlife agencies the discretion to manage for hunting on these places. Depending on the state or species, that could be a positive or negative. For instance, there are BLM and BOR reservoirs in Wyoming not allowed to waterfowl hunt to just provide a little sanctuary, and that makes for better waterfowling in the surrounding area by keeping birds around longer.
Looking at the factual scorecard that some folks in here have asked for, this administration is largely defined by supporting hunting and 2A, but prioritizing development over long-term habitat connectivity.
Here are a few of the big ones I've paid attention to:
Dec. 22, 2025 - Proposed roll back of sage-grouse protections for more development. Positive for our oil and gas production, negative for sagebrush country.
May 11, 2026 - Officially rescinded the 2024 Public Lands Rule which gave conservation a stronger footing as a legitimate use in the "multi-use mandate" on federal public lands. Again, possibly positive for our gas prices, negative for sagebrush country.
Currently - Administration is working on rolling back the 2001 Roadless Rule. This would to eliminate blanket prohibitions on road construction, reconstruction, and timber harvesting across approximately 45 million acres of National Forest System lands. Possible benefit for managing national forest better (if we can fund the management, or if lumber prices get high enough to bring back local mills & loggers). Possible negative for those of us hunters who specifically look for roadless areas to get into better hunting.
At face value, the Administration itself does not have a heavy-hand in public lands sell-off proposals. It's Congressional representatives like Sen. Mike Lee leading the charge there in the Legislative Branch, not the Executive Branch. The amount those two things are in cahoots is a different deep dive, but you would hav to point the finger at Congressional members and not the Trump Admin for the hard facts of public land sell-off, like Sen. Mike Lee's amendment in the Big Beautiful Bill.
Hope that's what you were looking for @MtnW
To @Steve O 's point, sometimes more access and kill good hunting, but it's also a case-by-case basis. But ultimately that gives state wildlife agencies the discretion to manage for hunting on these places. Depending on the state or species, that could be a positive or negative. For instance, there are BLM and BOR reservoirs in Wyoming not allowed to waterfowl hunt to just provide a little sanctuary, and that makes for better waterfowling in the surrounding area by keeping birds around longer.
Looking at the factual scorecard that some folks in here have asked for, this administration is largely defined by supporting hunting and 2A, but prioritizing development over long-term habitat connectivity.
Here are a few of the big ones I've paid attention to:
Dec. 22, 2025 - Proposed roll back of sage-grouse protections for more development. Positive for our oil and gas production, negative for sagebrush country.
May 11, 2026 - Officially rescinded the 2024 Public Lands Rule which gave conservation a stronger footing as a legitimate use in the "multi-use mandate" on federal public lands. Again, possibly positive for our gas prices, negative for sagebrush country.
Currently - Administration is working on rolling back the 2001 Roadless Rule. This would to eliminate blanket prohibitions on road construction, reconstruction, and timber harvesting across approximately 45 million acres of National Forest System lands. Possible benefit for managing national forest better (if we can fund the management, or if lumber prices get high enough to bring back local mills & loggers). Possible negative for those of us hunters who specifically look for roadless areas to get into better hunting.
At face value, the Administration itself does not have a heavy-hand in public lands sell-off proposals. It's Congressional representatives like Sen. Mike Lee leading the charge there in the Legislative Branch, not the Executive Branch. The amount those two things are in cahoots is a different deep dive, but you would hav to point the finger at Congressional members and not the Trump Admin for the hard facts of public land sell-off, like Sen. Mike Lee's amendment in the Big Beautiful Bill.
Hope that's what you were looking for @MtnW
dementia ridden commander and chief and the word salad cackling VP Harris and their batch of empowered freaks is beyond reality to the outdoorsman I hang with.
