What would you suggest to the BLM?

U

Uncle Ben

New member
The following text is a local update from the NRA, and I'm just looking to get some input on what kinds of suggestions I should include in my communication to the Bureau of Land Management. Even if you're not from California, I would still love to hear your general suggestions. Thanks!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CALIFORNIA: Management of Public Lands Under Review in California: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is beginning to revise the Caliente Resource Management Plan (RMP) that guides the management of approximately 600,000 acres of public land within Kings, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Tulare, Ventura, and western Kern counties. Hunting and recreational shooting are allowed on these lands. The current RMP was completed in 1997. A copy is available for reference at: www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/bakersfield/Programs/planning/rmpcontents.html.

The public is invited to submit ideas on how these public lands should be managed and used into the future. Comments may be submitted via email by sending them to: cacalrmp@ca.blm.gov, or by mailing them to: RMP Revision, Bureau of Land Management, 3801 Pegasus Dr, Bakersfield, CA 93308. Comments will be accepted through May 5.

In order to assure that sportsmen's interests are anchored in this planning process, it is important that hunters and recreational shooters take the time to submit comments.
 
What needs to be done in a lot of county parks in the PRK is to get them to remove any signs or policies against carrying a sidearm. If you're not in city limits you can open carry unless there is a policy against it--and the antis apparently go out of their way to make sure that most places have policies against it. That needs to be reversed.
 
These public input periods are sometimes (not always) just a sham to give the appearance of due process. Participation can be an educational eye-opener, but don't get your hopes up. The ultimate decision is often made for political reasons far removed from the wishes of the local residents. I'd research the key players in the chain of command, i.e. state level blm bosses, and see where they fall out on recent related issues. If you start seeing these folks in tuxedos, as keynote speakers for groups like Trust for Public Lands, WWF, etc., its a bad sign.

The ultimate tone is often set by the Sec. of Interior, now Kempthorne (from Idaho) I believe. Cursory search shows the enviros bitching about him. Who knows who the Interior Sec. will be 9 months from now? I'd wager a new dem. cabinet would throw out the playbook, for these type decisions.
 
The BLM doesn't have anything to do with "county parks". BLM manages some of the federal lands.

If I were still living in SoCal, I would like to see more designated shooting areas with facilities such as benches and rest rooms along with onsite range officers.
 
"If I were still living in SoCal, I would like to see more designated shooting areas with facilities such as benches and rest rooms along with onsite range officers."

I would leave hunting and shooting on BLM land as unregulated as possible. Setting up specific shooting areas would make it easy for the bureaucrats to prohibit shooting anywhere else. Providing facilities like benches and rangemasters would cost money, making the shooting areas easy budget-cutting targets in hard times.

Tim
 
As a former Californian and presently an Arizonian I have upset BLM folks with my simple assesment of their function . I tell them "It's NOT BLM land !!! It's PUBLIC land !!! You only work there "
 
The public is invited to submit ideas on how these public lands should be managed and used into the future.
Click to expand...
I'm not clear on what's being asked for I guess. What options does the BLM have with public lands, other than to leave them open to the public, for public use?
can the BLM people ban hunting/shooting on public BLM land? Is that even possible in the Dept of Interior/BLM "rules"? Not being sacrastic or anything, I really dont knwo the answer. I honestly thought BLM land had to pretty much just sit there and be open to the public for whatever LAWFUL purposes people want to do there, like hunting, shooting, camping, swimming etc, but obviously not things like build a cabin, live there in a ten permanantly, set up a cattle corral, etc.

I'm not all that familiar with BLM land, even though OR has a TON of it. ALL of the BLM land I have tried to get onto is surrounded by private land, and those private owners have all put up locked gates on the raods leading into the BLM land, cutting off any access by car, and thus, IMHO, have annexed the land for themselves, since essentially only they can now access it.:mad:

And yes, I have spoken to the BLM/Interior people, and they know about it, but cant do anything, as I'm told the gates are legal based on some old deal/law in OR involving railroads and public land from the 1800's or such. I still say it's crap. I want to buy up a tiny bit of land, on both sides of I-5 somewhere, then put a gate across I-5 where it goes thru my land. Somehow I think the state would not think being able to gate up public roads that cross your property is such a good thing.:eek::D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top