Going Feral
Sunday, July 20, 2025
Lex Anteinternet: State of American Men 2025
Saturday, July 19, 2025
Game and Fish commissioners shrug off pressure, reverse hike in hunting Laramie Mountains lions
Friday, July 18, 2025
New Harmful Cyanobacteria Bloom (HCB) Recreational Use Advisory
|
What history shows us about Utah’s push to take control of federal lands
Hageman Wants Answers About Prosecution Of Grand Teton Trail Runner
Thursday, July 17, 2025
After Hours Of Testimony, Commission Rejects Changes To Landowner Hunting Tags
Carpetbagger asks Supreme Court to decide corner crossing’s legality, says lower court ‘inverted’ law
On the North Platte, where anglers maim 1 in 4 trout, Wyoming goes barbless, bans some bead rigs
Wednesday, July 16, 2025
Monday, July 14, 2025
Lex Anteinternet: Hundreds Of Landowners Angry Over Proposed Wyoming...
Hundreds Of Landowners Angry Over Proposed Wyoming Hunting Tag Changes
Frankly, even the proposed change really means a person can get a landowner tag with fewer acres than should really be the case.
Hundreds Of Landowners Angry Over Proposed Wyoming Hunting Tag Changes
Wyoming Rite Of Passage: 600 4-H Kids Show Out At State Shooting Competition
Saturday, July 12, 2025
Lex Anteinternet: Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week...
Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week to convince SCOTUS to hear corner crossing case
Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week to convince SCOTUS to hear corner crossing case: Eshelman has until July 16 to state why the court should consider the corner-crossing conflict between public access to public land and private property rights.
Rancher owner?
Well, yes, he owns a ranch. But a working owner he is not. He's a pharmaceutical industry titan.
In a more just society, frankly, he wouldn't own the ranch at all. It'd be owned by those who actually derived a living from it.
Also of interest, Iron Bar Holdings, the petitioner, is represented by Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP of Denver, with Robert Reeves Anderson as counsel of record. The respondent is represented by a local Wyoming firm. I note this as there's no reason that the common attorney bullshit claim "I'm only doing my job" really ought to hold, for civil litigation. If you run into a Colorado attorney in Wyoming, ask them who they work for. if they work for this outfit, tell them to go home, we don't want them here.
For that matter, if you are a Colorado user of public lands, as they want to take part of what you own, there's no reason to accommodate them with a seat at the table, literally. "Want a cup of coffee sir? Drive to Texas. . . ."
At the trial court level, Iron Bar had been represented by Gregory Weisz, who is a Wyoming attorney. He's left private practice and is with the AG now. A lawyer with his firm took his place, but the case was well developed by then, and in the appeal stage, so they really had no choice.
So, what am I saying. Well, I'm saying that people who don't derive their income principally form a ranch, ought not to own it. And I'm saying that by representing carpetbaggers, you are a carpetbagger. The old lawyer bromides about serving the system are BS. Regular people, including other lawyers, don't have to excuse your choice of clients when you are taking on a plaintiff. It's not like being assigned a defendant.
Lex Anteinternet: Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week...
Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week to convince SCOTUS to hear corner crossing case
Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week to convince SCOTUS to hear corner crossing case: Eshelman has until July 16 to state why the court should consider the corner-crossing conflict between public access to public land and private property rights.
Rancher owner?
Well, yes, he owns a ranch. But a working owner he is not. He's a pharmaceutical industry titan.
In a more just society, frankly, he wouldn't own the ranch at all. It'd be owned by those who actually derived a living from it.
Also of interest, Iron Bar Holdings, the petitioner, is represented by Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP of Denver, with Robert Reeves Anderson as counsel of record. The respondent is represented by a local Wyoming firm. I note this as there's no reason that the common attorney bullshit claim "I'm only doing my job" really ought to hold, for civil litigation. If you run into a Colorado attorney in Wyoming, ask them who they work for. if they work for this outfit, tell them to go home, we don't want them here.
For that matter, if you are a Colorado user of public lands, as they want to take part of what you own, there's no reason to accommodate them with a seat at the table, literally. "Want a cup of coffee sir? Drive to Texas. . . ."
At the trial court level, Iron Bar had been represented by Gregory Weisz, who is a Wyoming attorney. He's left private practice and is with the AG now. A lawyer with his firm took his place, but the case was well developed by then, and in the appeal stage, so they really had no choice.
So, what am I saying. Well, I'm saying that people who don't derive their income principally form a ranch, ought not to own it. And I'm saying that by representing carpetbaggers, you are a carpetbagger. The old lawyer bromides about serving the system are BS. Regular people, including other lawyers, don't have to excuse your choice of clients when you are taking on a plaintiff. It's not like being assigned a defendant.
Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week to convince SCOTUS to hear corner crossing case
Thursday, July 10, 2025
Southern Rockies Nature Blog: From Sagebrush Rebellion to Tech Bro Megacities: S...
Monday, July 7, 2025
Wars on the West
Friday, July 4, 2025
The art of the fly: Angler relishes the meditation and creation of tying
Lex Anteinternet: A Lummis reply.
A Lummis reply.
Well, now that the Big Ugly moved on the House and its safe to say something, I received an emailed letter from Sen. Lummis.
It stated:
Senator Cynthia Lummis
State of Wyoming
(202) 224-3424
July 2, 2025
Yeoman
Dear Yeoman:
Thank you for contacting me about public lands.
As you know, Wyoming and other western states are blessed with beautiful public lands that offer endless opportunities for outdoor enthusiasts. The outdoor recreation industry also generates thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in revenue for our state.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is responsible for administering federal lands to support a range of uses, including for commercial, recreation, and conservation activities. Currently, BLM manages over 245 million acres of land, primarily in the 11 westerns states. In Wyoming alone, the BLM manages over 18.5 million acres, or 48% of the state’s land.
While the BLM is generally mandated by Congress to retain public lands in public ownership, under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), the agency may dispose of lands on a case-by-case basis and deemed in the public interest. FLPMA outlines the criteria for these land dispositions, allowing the sale of lands that are difficult and uneconomic for BLM or other agencies to manage, are no longer needed for the purpose it was acquired for, or would serve important public objectives, such as establishing houses, parks or schools.
Recently, Democrats have mischaracterized multiple proposals and put forward bad faith efforts to obstruct President Trump’s agenda, rather than protect our federal lands as they claim. One example was a proposed amendment by the U.S. House Natural Resource Committee that would have allowed for the sale of less than 1% of federal lands in Utah and Nevada. This would have allowed those states to utilize underused parcels for economic development, a reservoir, vital infrastructure projects, and the expansion of an airport. However, this was mischaracterized by Democrats as an attempt to privatize land.
I am aware of a proposal from Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) that would require BLM to establish a robust public nomination and identification process to identify underutilized federal land near existing infrastructure to address the current housing crisis. I understand the proposal would focus on less than 0.5% of BLM land in 11 western states and would include protections for existing rights and uses like grazing permits, mineral leases, mining claims, and special use authorizations. Ultimately, this proposal was not included in the Senate budget reconciliation package.
It is one of my top priorities to maintain and improve public access on public lands for activities such as hunting, fishing, snowmobiling, hiking, and biking. However, we must address the significant challenges for local communities, state government, and efficient land management practices that comes from federal ownership of nearly half of all Western land. It is important that we empower Wyoming-based stakeholders and local experts to enact thoughtful management systems that serve our communities while protecting our national treasures.
I welcome the opportunity to communicate with you regarding issues impacting Wyoming. Please do not hesitate to contact my office if I can ever be of any assistance.
Kind regards,
Cynthia M. Lummis
United States Senator
Once again, everything is reduced to the Big Bad Democrats are picking on us wee little Republicans, lying, stealing our lunches, etc.
Horseshit.
I've read these bills. I will contact Sen. Lummis, but part of the reason I will is to state that without a massive public retraction on this, I won't be casting any votes for her if she seeks to retain her job in the future.
I'd also note, for somebody accusing the Democrats of lying, there's a lie in here. The Lee bill didn't pertain to just Nevada and Utah, but everywhere with public land save for Montana.
Lex Anteinternet: State of American Men 2025
Lex Anteinternet: State of American Men 2025 : State of American Men 2025 State of American Men 2025 Well worth reading.