Wow.. don't claim to know what his hang up is on this, but that was hard to listen to.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OvjXookTq38&feature=youtu.be


Embed isn't working, try the link

So now the goal is to make wilderness areas handicapped accessible? Wow....

Yeah. Pretty piss poor argument. Makes me wonder what's really going on .

What's going on is that the present administration in the Department of the Interior is committed to not allowing even one more acre of designated wilderness. Heinrich has offered to show Zinke the area, and I believe that Zinke is going to accompany Heinrich on a helicopter flyover when he is in New Mexico next month to look at the recently designated Organ Mountains and Desert Peaks National Monument in Dona Ana County. However, the word out of Interior is that a visit by Zinke to any of the National Monuments designated in the period covered by Trump's order means that the monument will be "adjusted" or nullified. I suspect that it will be the same for the parcel that would permit public access to the Sabinosa Wilderness.

Mudhen

I have 2 ??

1. Why do they NOT want to allow more designated Wilderness ?
---- to allow more oil exploration or to allow more public USE ?

2. Aren't there ENUFF designated Wiildernessi (grin) ?

Jerry

Pretty easy to write off Zinke as a total POS.

When they built a new hockey arena and ACA forced them to make the penalty box wheelchair accessible I realized the rational people had left the room...

We do not need more wilderness and national monuments. Very few national monuments are open to hunting and in some cases-such as Wyoming-wilderness is closed to non-residents, unless they hire a guide.

1. For the die-hard conservatives in the GOP, wilderness is a "job killer."

2. Whether there is enough or too much designated wilderness is obviously a question that is still subject to debate. In the case of the parcel that would provide public access to the landlocked 16,000-acre Sabinosa Wilderness, the owners of the parcel are willing to donate 3,000 acres of private land that will allow the public to access the Sabinosa. However, they have stipulated that once the parcel is transferred to the federal government (in this case, the BLM), it must be designated as wilderness and managed as such along with the 16,000 acres of existing wilderness. The only controversy is in Washington--the local communities, as well as hunters and other outdoor enthusiasts, are overwhelmingly in favor of the terms of the donation.

Thnx Mudhen.

At the moment I don't have an opinion - except on large tracts, wilderness with only FOOT/pack animal access,
that restricts many people - older hunters - opportunity to hunt.

What's the % of hunters today who are serious PACK IN hunters. I know some do, but IMO they are a small %.
I understand there are many factors involved -- that's why I don't have any strong opinion.

Jerry

Well, I am 74 a supporter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, as well as someone who still hunts, hikes and (occasionally) fishes in designated wilderness. I belong to a small, but influential sportsmen's group in Las Cruces, most of whom are about my age--a couple younger and the rest older. As far as I know, all of them not only favor wilderness designation where it is appropriate, but also spend a significant portion of their outdoor pursuits in designated wilderness. When I get too old to go on foot or on a mule, I will leave the wilderness to younger folks whom I hope will appreciate it as much as I do. But I will still feel good about the protection that a wilderness designation gives to some of the best and critical wildlife habitat that remains.

Knee jerk? So the private easement should be turned down and the area remain land locked?

I follow zinke on twitter, I'm not a "tweeter" but i use it to follow a lot of politicians, it's a surprisingly good way to keep up with what they are/aren't doing, better than the news anyway.

So far I've seen a whole bunch of Indian affairs and special interests attention from zinke. Not thrilled with him, but he hasn't been at it very long. Still have hope he will shape up on a few things.

National monuments designated on public lands that are managed for multiple use, such as those managed by the BLM and the Forest Service, are almost all open to hunting. Those managed by the National Park Service usually are not. The difference is that large monuments are designated to protect landscapes, wildlife habitat and ecosystems. Most existing roads are left intact and codified in the designation.

NPS-managed monuments tend to protect small parcels with unique features--either natural or man-made. Most are geological formations, prehistoric sites, historic sites and other cultural features. Few are large enough to allow hunting, and NPS managed lands are closed to hunting, anyway.

This! The Wyoming wilderness rule is a state of Wyoming caused issue. Has nothing to do with the federal land management agencies. And you don't have to "hire" a guide to hunt wilderness in Wyoming...

mudhen -

THANKS for your personal involvement and input. It has weight as far as I'm concerned.

I'm very pleased that you are still able to hunt 'wilderness' -- foot only -- areas AND there are others older than can as well.
I'm 67 but have 1 issue that prevents me from '-extended-' physical strain. I don't hunt from a vehicle. I don't unload my 4 wheeler TILL I need to recover game. I hunt ON FOOT not using stands BUT that is a WHOLE different thing from PACKING in equipment and then PACKING out game. THOSE are all together different parameters.

Being an outdoorsman, hunter, shooter, GUN FREAK, etc. I support everything that allows and encourages more people to USE the National Forests, and all lands open to the PUBLIC. ALSO even tho it doesn't affect me personally, it DOES affect many hunters who WOULD use BLM lands that are LANDLOCKED !! That irritates me to no end.

SOooo, I'm naturally apprehensive, wary, suspicious, etc. about "Wilderness" designations that sound good on the surface but have so many limitations to those who would take advantage of opportunities.

I can't find a place to quit... but I think you understand where I'm coming from. (grammar not withstanding)

Thank You Again

Jerry

Someone is paying zinke under the table.

I think that he is playing two games. It all goes down to local politics.

He immediately announced that the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument in his home state of Montana would be spared. It is very popular among Montana sportsmen and, if he decides to go back to Montana and run for Governor or the Senate, it would be remembered by the voters in a state that treasures its hunting and fishing.

The ones in his sights are those in states with Republican congressmen and senators who opposed the monument designation. Utah's Republican congressional delegates are unanimously opposed to the size of all three of the national monuments slated for review in their state. I suspect that all them will be "adjusted".

Here in New Mexico, Zinke is leaving the Rio Grande del Norte monument alone, probably because our only Republican congressman Steve Pearce, here in southern New Mexico, has announced that he is running for Governor. Northern New Mexico is largely Hispanic and Liberal, and Pearce can't afford to antagonize them any more than they already are. Southern New Mexico is Pearce's stronghold, so he probably believes that he can get away with having the Organ Mountains and Desert Peaks monument in his district radically downsized and get back at most of his political opponents in the process. Independent polls showed local support for OMDP at anywhere from 68% favorable to 83% favorable, but he pretty much ignores Dona Ana County as a lost cause, and I think that he figures that he can win without them.

As a nonresident? Unless you're related to a resident, I think you do.

Wrong. Don't have to be a related to a resident. A resident can take you hunting in a designated wilderness area with a free permit. Thus, it's overall "free" and you don't have to hire anyone. Don't get me wrong, it's a BS rule, but not the result of the federal agencies. It's the state of Wyoming being swayed by the guides/outfitters to write laws to benefit them.

A big +1.

Not accepting a donation of private property that would unlock a public parcel because the owner wants it to be designated wilderness is just stupid. And results in the land remaining inaccessible by anyone.

If I was the owner trying to donate the land I'd tell Zinke to KMA. A piece of property that controls access to a landlocked area is a valuable commodity, and the owner is damn generous to donate it.

In the past thirty years almost every new monument designation or monument/national park expansion has included hunting as part of the conditions. From the Black Canyon of the Gunnison NP to Bears Ears NM. Not every one, but the big majority.

The designation of monuments allows for a different management scheme. The short explanation is in almost every case it will help wildlife habitat.

Casey

In the 90's, when the USFS and BLM (that's the Bureau of Land Management for you urban types), were required to create Travel Management Plans the motorized vehicle groups attempted to use the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to argue against road designation that limited the motorized crowd to designated roads and trails only.

It was amazing, people who I knew all my life bought an ATV and suddenly claimed they had a "disability".....even a couple guys I played softball with.............

Casey

In Brown's Canyon all existing land uses(including hunting and grazing) and roads were maintàined, and even some new roads were part of the overall plan.

Not surprised. Same thing happened here in LA when they legalized crossbows for senior citizens and handicapped hunters. And then, IMO, LA saw that if they legalized crossbows for all that they could make more money.

I have a VERY strong opinion.

I'm now locked out of my lifelong antelope and saghen spots, so the feds can save the feral horses and designate "wilderness study areas". A couple of years ago I walked in and shot my antelope, but I couldn't get it packed out...just too old now and busted up. My wife had to come in cross country on her 4-wheeler to get me and the animal. I was only 1/4 mile from a now closed road I have used for almost 60 years, and we had to do something I don't like doing to retrieve the meat.

YES, this closes out senior hunters from many of their old haunts. We still get out and walk as much as we can, but the closures have locked the door on us effectively.