Speaker 1: This is the Meat Eater Podcast coming at you shirtless, severely,
Speaker 1: bug bitten, and in my case, underwear. Listening to podcast,
Speaker 1: you can't predict anything. The Meat Eater Podcast is brought
Speaker 1: to you by First Light. Whether you're checking trail cams,
Speaker 1: hanging deer stands, or scouting for ELK. First Light has
Speaker 1: performance apparel to support every hunter in every environment. Check
Speaker 1: it out at first light dot com. F I R
Speaker 1: S T L I T E dot com. Oh for months,
Speaker 1: all summer, all last summer. Still now, I've been working
Speaker 1: on a new project that I haven't talked about before.
Speaker 1: It's kind of a little bit. It was Secrety, but
Speaker 1: it's no longer Secrety. I did a new show. I'm
Speaker 1: doing a new show with History Channel, which premieres Tuesday,
Speaker 1: January twenty eighth at ten pm Eastern. Okay, So we
Speaker 1: filmed eight one hour standalone episodes of a new show
Speaker 1: called Hunting History with Steven Ranella, and we dive into
Speaker 1: eight what we call outdoor mysteries. Okay, So the premiere
Speaker 1: episode has to do with details surrounding the disappearance of
Speaker 1: the skyjacker dB Cooper. So the only unsolved skyjacking in
Speaker 1: American history. We dive into the disappearance of D. B. Cooper.
Speaker 1: We're doing an episode on the lost colony of Rono.
Speaker 1: We did an episode on one that was close to
Speaker 1: home to me. Is that kind of blows my mind.
Speaker 1: The first ship, okay, the first ship ever built to
Speaker 1: operate on the Upper Great Lakes was if you ever
Speaker 1: heard of a dude named lasl like Lasal was the
Speaker 1: first guy to descend, the first European to descend the
Speaker 1: Mississippi down to the goldf of Mexico. Well, Lasol built
Speaker 1: this ship above Niagara Falls, a fur trading vessel. Okay,
Speaker 1: in sixteen hundreds. That thing's missing. And what's crazy is
Speaker 1: there's still people trying to look. A competitive search of
Speaker 1: people still trying to look for and find his missing ship,
Speaker 1: which is somewhere in the Great Lakes called the Griffin.
Speaker 1: Did an episode on that, did an episode around first
Speaker 1: humans in North America. So check it out. Hunting History
Speaker 1: premieres on the History Channel at ten pm Eastern on Tuesday,
Speaker 1: January twenty eight. Thank you, cal.
Speaker 2: If you were if someone were to ask you, uh,
Speaker 2: come on, what political office guy Fieri holds of what town?
Speaker 3: What would you say?
Speaker 4: Boy, it'd be awesome if it was like health inspector.
Speaker 3: No, no, what town?
Speaker 1: What what town?
Speaker 5: The contentious language was elected official, elected official.
Speaker 1: We all know he's it's it's it's it's just I
Speaker 1: wasn't even there is the mayor, he's the mayor of
Speaker 1: Flavor Town. But if he says elected official, he has
Speaker 1: to admit that it was wrong. How many points did
Speaker 1: you win by?
Speaker 6: One point one?
Speaker 7: So?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it was the game, I said, I if we
Speaker 2: if we were to ask, uh, what animal is the
Speaker 2: king of the jungle?
Speaker 1: The elected king of the jungle? I mean, it's that's what.
Speaker 1: It's a bad analogy, man, It's not the same. What
Speaker 1: if turn the machine on Phil machines? Okay, ladies and gentlemen, Now,
Speaker 1: non of this happens where we start a show and
Speaker 1: there's already a conversation occurring.
Speaker 3: In the race.
Speaker 1: In the old days, we would just start. No one
Speaker 1: even knew when it started. Phil wasn't even born yet.
Speaker 1: Now we started, don't we feel?
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's right. I think it. It introduces a lot
Speaker 5: of fun energy.
Speaker 1: When I just hom it, you're contradicting what I'm saying.
Speaker 5: What does I think people like when you say, like
Speaker 5: turn the machine on. People have sort of an anticipation.
Speaker 5: They're anticipating they're in the middle of something, but I
Speaker 5: want to hear what's going on.
Speaker 1: Moments ago, in this very studio, I wasn't there for it.
Speaker 1: There was a trivia tournament. In the trivia tournament, the
Speaker 1: host says, I don't want Randall to say it because
Speaker 1: he's like the other side of the fight. Can you
Speaker 1: do the question, Phil, just for listeners, so me inner trivia.
Speaker 1: We've got a great show coming up for you today,
Speaker 1: ladies and gentlemen, and me inater tribute. It was just
Speaker 1: happening here a minute ago. This question was read.
Speaker 5: Yes, the official wording was rock star chef Guy Fieri
Speaker 5: is an elected government official of what municipality?
Speaker 1: Okay, Randall says, flavor tone o. Everybody else has a
Speaker 1: ship fit because of the word choice elected.
Speaker 3: When I think of Guy Fieri.
Speaker 1: It's not fiery for starters, it's Fietti, Like there's a
Speaker 1: guy named Eddie, you owe him a fee Fieedti. Really, yes,
Speaker 1: that's what he says.
Speaker 5: This is the Sicilian coming out and Steve right now.
Speaker 2: Well, well, when I think of Guy, when I think
Speaker 2: of Guy The first thing that comes to mind is
Speaker 2: his his trademarked nickname, the mayor of Flavortown.
Speaker 1: That's his nickname.
Speaker 3: Yeah, if you, if you, if.
Speaker 2: You pull up his bio on Instagram, it's the first
Speaker 2: thing that it says.
Speaker 1: So I think a better question would Brooks. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: Brad Books came up from from Idaho to talk about this.
Speaker 1: He's something of a guy FIEDI expert.
Speaker 8: A lot of people say that about me, Steve. A
Speaker 8: better question would have been, like, what is his trademark
Speaker 8: nickname that.
Speaker 1: Denotes yes, governmental position?
Speaker 3: But I think that would have.
Speaker 1: Been too obvious.
Speaker 3: This is fun. This is a fun question.
Speaker 1: It's not what if.
Speaker 4: You said one place is a state of mind where
Speaker 4: fun and food meat in perfect harmony.
Speaker 1: And he's the and he's the and what position does
Speaker 1: he hold in this? Like would you say that? If
Speaker 1: if you said, like, okay, like Jimmy Buffett is the
Speaker 1: elected official of what municipality, I'd be thinking, ship did
Speaker 1: he get into politics? I would be thinking, oh, Margaritaville.
Speaker 2: I mean if he's known as the mayor of Margaritaville.
Speaker 4: But he's not an elected position, like Okay, the guy
Speaker 4: Fieri is downtown.
Speaker 3: It's tongue in.
Speaker 5: Not in Montana.
Speaker 4: He is in Pigeonforge, Tennessee, and a bunch of other locations.
Speaker 4: Is there some sort of election that's going on?
Speaker 1: And was it rigged?
Speaker 3: I think Spencer. I think Spence Cumban.
Speaker 2: He made a clumsy attempt to not use the word
Speaker 2: mayor in the question.
Speaker 1: Here's where the problem comes up to me, and we'll
Speaker 1: get on the show eventually, right, Just punt it crindles,
Speaker 1: Just punt. The episode will stay on this for two hours.
Speaker 1: The problem for means up being that he used such
Speaker 1: formal language, and if I had been in the room,
Speaker 1: I would have gotten it wrong because I would have
Speaker 1: been thinking, what the hell town is he from? And
Speaker 1: maybe he was elected?
Speaker 2: So that's what I said to That's what I said
Speaker 2: in the moment. I said, because Spencer used important sounding words,
Speaker 2: You guys thought it was a real thing.
Speaker 8: I thought he was like an honorary doctorate, like some
Speaker 8: town had given him, like an honorary mayoral position. You know,
Speaker 8: That's what I thought.
Speaker 1: And that's what'd you write down? Atlantic City? Why that?
Speaker 8: I just, can I be honest, pulled out of my ass.
Speaker 8: I was just like the East Coast guy.
Speaker 1: He reached into his button. Atlantic City was in there.
Speaker 9: Well.
Speaker 2: I initially thought Flavortown because that's the only word I
Speaker 2: associated with Guy Fiertti, and then I took ten seconds
Speaker 2: to think about it. I thought, oh, yeah, he's the
Speaker 2: mayor of Flavortown.
Speaker 1: I would have had you know that there's a sports expression,
Speaker 1: but leaving it all on the field. Yeah, I'd left
Speaker 1: all on this mic. If I would have been in
Speaker 1: that room.
Speaker 2: I think everybody in the room at in the moment
Speaker 2: recognized that that would have been the case. And it's
Speaker 2: it's good that you weren't there, because there was quite
Speaker 2: a stink in your absence. I'd be worried for Spencer's
Speaker 2: well being had you been in the room and reach.
Speaker 1: Yannis almost quit.
Speaker 8: Yeah, he almost walked out, almost walked out.
Speaker 1: Well, I would have done that with him, like a
Speaker 1: little protest. I'd have done that with him.
Speaker 4: When I set super early alarms for Turkey season, I
Speaker 4: name him and off and it's like Turkey Town, USA, Gobblerville, right,
Speaker 4: and so now I'm gonna be like, now, who would
Speaker 4: be the elected official of Gobblerville.
Speaker 1: I always you know when you're doing a protest and
Speaker 1: you walk out, Do you say, hell, no, we will go.
Speaker 3: I think so.
Speaker 1: I can picture a protest where you're not gonna leave,
Speaker 1: but a protest where you leave what you chant, I don't.
Speaker 2: It depends on what you're leaving, Like if you're leaving
Speaker 2: an airplane that's gonna take you somewhere, or a bus.
Speaker 2: You know, if you march off of a vehicle that's
Speaker 2: about to move you. I think that we won't go.
Speaker 2: Still holds Ye, that's true, because it's leaving.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Brooklyn, House Business, bend Man, we're getting I'm starting
Speaker 1: the actual show now, Philip, you didn't like any of that,
Speaker 1: you can start the machine now.
Speaker 5: It's all standing.
Speaker 1: Okay, Brooklyn's here the second time you've been on the show.
Speaker 1: Introduce yourself Brooklyn like Brooklyn or brook better, doesn't matter,
Speaker 1: It doesn't matter. Where's your new job at though you
Speaker 1: got a part time job. You're working down.
Speaker 10: At meet your flagship store.
Speaker 1: Do you like working down there? Oh? Yeah you do?
Speaker 1: Do you feeld a lot of dumb questions when you're
Speaker 1: down there? How do you rate the clientele?
Speaker 5: What's the hot gossip down there?
Speaker 9: I'm not really sure, to be honest, a lot of
Speaker 9: people think it's a restaurant, Is that right? Yeah, Like
Speaker 9: they'll walk in.
Speaker 1: They'll be like, I have a five o'clock reservation.
Speaker 9: Well, they'll like walk in and they just kind of
Speaker 9: like stand at the front and just like stare and
Speaker 9: then they'll just walk.
Speaker 4: Out next time, go are you ready to be seated?
Speaker 4: And then just walk them back to the TV.
Speaker 1: And you don't try to sell them when that happens.
Speaker 1: You don't try to sell them something real quick, no.
Speaker 9: Because you just kind of like it happens in like
Speaker 9: a span of ten seconds, if that, so.
Speaker 1: You can tell like that person didn't know what they
Speaker 1: were coming. When you're down there, do you engage with
Speaker 1: the customers?
Speaker 10: Oh? Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2: Someone was across the street and overheard a passerby saying,
Speaker 2: I bet that place is good steaks.
Speaker 1: Pence they do. So how many hours are you working
Speaker 1: down there?
Speaker 10: Just a couple of days a week. I'm not sure,
Speaker 10: hour wise.
Speaker 1: Okay, And then you're still running your school cleaning business,
Speaker 1: and that you've been on the show before about your
Speaker 1: school cleaning business. Yeah, here you have my daughter's buck
Speaker 1: from this year, impeccably clean. Can I take a look
Speaker 1: In fact, Brooklyn was set to come on the show
Speaker 1: a week ago and didn't do it because she is
Speaker 1: too much perhaps too much of a perfectionist, and didn't
Speaker 1: want to come down because it wasn't ready yet. It's
Speaker 1: not over boiled. I can tell you that.
Speaker 4: No obvious residues sticking to it.
Speaker 5: No smell.
Speaker 1: Oh he had a funky tooth.
Speaker 6: I saw that.
Speaker 1: It's not like all crumbly from getting over boiled, beautifully bleached.
Speaker 1: You didn't bleach way the hell up the antler.
Speaker 10: No, no, I hate doing that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you didn't make it that. This is all crumbly
Speaker 1: and nasty. It looks perfect.
Speaker 10: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Are you getting much business for your school cleaning business?
Speaker 10: Yeah? I am really busy, really busy.
Speaker 1: This is the busy time of year.
Speaker 10: Yeah. My garage is way over stuffed.
Speaker 1: You got a lot of work.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Is it bad that you hear because you don't want
Speaker 1: more work? Are you always looking for more work?
Speaker 10: Oh? I'm always looking for more.
Speaker 1: Okay, So tell people how they come and find you
Speaker 1: to bring you a skull. You should talk about your
Speaker 1: pricing a little bit too, just so people know or
Speaker 1: don't you want to get into.
Speaker 9: That for just as deer just standard your one ELK
Speaker 9: one sixty five, that's just basic analypus, same as Deer
Speaker 9: one twenty five. Okay, okay, I'm on Instagram at four
Speaker 9: oh six Bone Works or I think the if you
Speaker 9: go to the meter store, I have a a few
Speaker 9: flyer down there.
Speaker 1: That's fly in the window. I was dropping off some
Speaker 1: amimal there today and saw the flyer. That's a good idea. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: and then people can send it to you.
Speaker 10: Yeah, you just message me and I'll tell you where
Speaker 10: to drop it off.
Speaker 1: Yep. Uh, we're gonna pass us around and we're going
Speaker 1: to do a thing. You can. You know Nate that
Speaker 1: we work with that pointed out to me that ten
Speaker 1: four isn't a thing. Oh no, no, yeah. Have you
Speaker 1: been all your whole life heard people say over and out?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, you can't say over and out. Wait, why not,
Speaker 1: because you're contradicting yourself. Over means it's your turn to talk.
Speaker 1: Out means we're done. So he's sort of like, it's
Speaker 1: sort of like saying, what do you think, Bob, I'm out.
Speaker 5: You can talk to yourself.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's out of the military. Okay, he said, if
Speaker 1: you can make this correction and broadcast it to the world.
Speaker 1: Ham radio operators and Bradley Fighting vehicle people will forever
Speaker 1: thank you. You do not say over and out. You
Speaker 1: just say over, over or out?
Speaker 6: What about him protest if you? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Yeah, because he called me saying over Now he's like
Speaker 1: over like you're saying, like, I say, what's your phone number?
Speaker 1: What's the name of your company? Brook?
Speaker 11: Over?
Speaker 1: No, you say, yeah, say something. I can't see you.
Speaker 10: He's around the radio A four six bone works over.
Speaker 8: Out click, yep, hey, Brook, Can I say I think
Speaker 8: you're I think you should charge more for your work.
Speaker 1: This is like, it's not your turn to comment.
Speaker 6: Oh okay.
Speaker 1: Ate came to me and said he also came to
Speaker 1: me today to say this. You know, I like to
Speaker 1: do one to ten. Rate things. On one to ten,
Speaker 1: he says, it's a lot better to go negative five
Speaker 1: to five because a one sort of leaves this like, right,
Speaker 1: how is the restaurant one picture that it's a negative five?
Speaker 10: Mm hmm. Yeah, that's good.
Speaker 1: So he's like, don't do one to ten, negative five
Speaker 1: to five hmmm. So we're going to pass this around.
Speaker 1: You're gonna assess the work negative.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Brad, I'd also hold that comment. I have a
Speaker 2: few skulls that I plan on.
Speaker 1: Respect after a respectable period of time for for Randall
Speaker 1: to submit his specimens. He thinks that the price increase
Speaker 1: might be in order.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I've got a question for you, Brooke about So
Speaker 7: I was texting with you a little bit when I
Speaker 7: was like trying to boil this coyote skull and anyway,
Speaker 7: I definitely over boiled it and the teeth fell out,
Speaker 7: and so I've got a second one to do. I
Speaker 7: tried doing it like a couple of times. Yeah, it
Speaker 7: just I don't know. There's so I've got a second
Speaker 7: one I can work with. But with the first one,
Speaker 7: when I was trying to clean out the nostrils, I
Speaker 7: like jammed a chopstick in there, and I probably probably
Speaker 7: shouldn't have done that because there's like that really cool
Speaker 7: I don't know what do you call it, like filament
Speaker 7: type stuff that's like what do you call them?
Speaker 10: I just called those curls or a nasel.
Speaker 7: Cab, Like what would you what would you do for
Speaker 7: like a kyo? Would you like poke those out because
Speaker 7: they're so delicate or no.
Speaker 9: So I was actually after my last podcast, the guy
Speaker 9: had emailed me and he did like a bobcat or something,
Speaker 9: and he told me to for those smaller skulls to
Speaker 9: use a water pick because it's like a mini pressure washer,
Speaker 9: one of those. And so that's what I do on
Speaker 9: bear To for Spencer. Actually, I just finished a muskrat,
Speaker 9: so it's muskrats, the smallest I've done, but it works.
Speaker 1: From bear to charging him for a muskrat.
Speaker 9: I can't remember because I have never done It was
Speaker 9: like forty Gabe good.
Speaker 8: Okay, so we're going to go around the room for
Speaker 8: a score. I give you a four out of Yeah,
Speaker 8: I give you a four.
Speaker 1: Mostly was nine.
Speaker 8: Yeah, and then part of that will just say that
Speaker 8: like I've done, I haven't done enough taxidermy to know
Speaker 8: what a what a five would look like, but I
Speaker 8: think that's really good and really clean. The teeth aren't loose, uh,
Speaker 8: the nasal cavity looks really in good shape. Like it's
Speaker 8: really good. But you gotta have something to work for,
Speaker 8: so can't be perfect.
Speaker 1: Yeah, cold just turn eighteen. Yeah, so if you have
Speaker 1: a five, you got nothing else, meaning a ten? Yeah,
Speaker 1: what the hell would you wake up for tomorrow?
Speaker 10: True?
Speaker 1: Now you know what it's like to be one of
Speaker 1: my kids.
Speaker 6: I'm just going to totally disagree. I think it's a five.
Speaker 6: I think we should tell everybody it's a five. And
Speaker 6: I agree with Brad, you should be charging more.
Speaker 1: Okay, I listen, I'm into her for twent one hundred
Speaker 1: and twenty four. I guess it's not gonna change. You're
Speaker 1: not gonna proact, You're not gonna retroactively.
Speaker 6: I'm saying I paid like one hundred and fifty bucks
Speaker 6: or one hundred and sixty bucks for an ELK in
Speaker 6: twenty nineteen, and inflation's been rampant. That's all we've heard
Speaker 6: about in entire right now.
Speaker 1: This is this is toppling administrations.
Speaker 6: It's toppling. So you should be raising your prices by
Speaker 6: thirty forty and you turned that around in a week.
Speaker 6: There should be an date.
Speaker 1: The normal thing is they're like, uh, you know, my
Speaker 1: dad used to have a joke. You know, I don't
Speaker 1: know what help went, Like, you call the guy that's
Speaker 1: fixing your shoes and it's been like three years. Oh,
Speaker 1: I'm just finishing them up right now. Yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: but the turnaround time is amazing.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 10: I try to keep it.
Speaker 9: I mean like I'm a hunter myself, and so I know, like,
Speaker 9: you want your stuff back, you want your head back.
Speaker 9: That and I don't like all of the heads stinking
Speaker 9: in my garage, so I'm gonna try and get them
Speaker 9: done as fast as you can so they don't.
Speaker 10: Stink up my griage.
Speaker 1: This is your parents' gridge too, right, How do they
Speaker 1: think about this little business? They give it a negative.
Speaker 9: Probably they don't mind it. They kind of think it's funny.
Speaker 10: I don't know.
Speaker 9: I recently started getting into more tanning, and so I
Speaker 9: have a lot of highs and I had freezer. All
Speaker 9: my highes stuffed in the freezer, so I resigned to
Speaker 9: buy my own freezer because I didn't like it in
Speaker 9: the freezer.
Speaker 1: This year, overheads going up to me.
Speaker 9: So within the couple years they will Yeah, everyone.
Speaker 6: Tells me to and expedited pricing turn around a week.
Speaker 1: One thought about that charging for the prompt.
Speaker 6: No, that's smart day.
Speaker 1: If you said to me, let's say you stick stuck
Speaker 1: with current pricing, and you'd said to me, like, it's
Speaker 1: one hundred and twenty five bucks expedited as one thirty five,
Speaker 1: you're just like making up. It could have been more
Speaker 1: I'd been like, ye, I'll.
Speaker 3: Do that mm hmmah.
Speaker 1: And you don't even have to tell them that you
Speaker 1: would have done it just as fast no matter what.
Speaker 10: True.
Speaker 1: Then the guy that doesn't pay for it, he's gonna think,
Speaker 1: my god, imagine if I had paid for it, how
Speaker 1: fast it would have been?
Speaker 2: Yeah, Randall, Yeah, yeah, I mean I'm a mixed opinion here.
Speaker 2: Initially my initial reaction was a four because I have
Speaker 2: a hard time giving a perfect score. You know, I
Speaker 2: think I think of these things similar to Brad. You
Speaker 2: got to always have room for improvement. But I don't
Speaker 2: know what I would do, uh, what I would want
Speaker 2: differently if that were my deer skull.
Speaker 3: I think it looks fantastic.
Speaker 1: He'd be like I would. I would have liked the
Speaker 1: antlers to get bigger. Yeah, what do you charge for that?
Speaker 1: How much does that cost? Yeah?
Speaker 3: No, I mean it looks great.
Speaker 2: It doesn't stink, it's clean, it's bright.
Speaker 1: Mm hmmm.
Speaker 2: We should all be so lucky to have a deer
Speaker 2: that looks like that.
Speaker 1: Damn straight.
Speaker 7: She gets a five from me. I know she's super
Speaker 7: detail oriented about it. Here about it from her mom
Speaker 7: all the time.
Speaker 1: She likes picking Oh, yeah, what's the business called again? Forks,
Speaker 1: I'd called straight fives.
Speaker 3: Out of and then parentheses.
Speaker 7: You can add four and zero and six and be
Speaker 7: like eleven.
Speaker 1: That's the top. I'd rather send it to a place
Speaker 1: that gets all tense. But well, hold on, it started
Speaker 1: a negative five.
Speaker 4: I got a charge for you, okay, And I think
Speaker 4: this would revolutionize the world of European mounts. Is if
Speaker 4: you yeah, for a couple bucks extra, I will apply something.
Speaker 4: You'll have to figure this part out to the nose
Speaker 4: area that your dog will not chew on it.
Speaker 5: Many many.
Speaker 2: The sour apple spray you get like the sour apple spray.
Speaker 4: Many a good animal has been had its face chewed
Speaker 4: off before it can be real pretty.
Speaker 1: And I've told you I'm sorry many times about my
Speaker 1: puppy last year.
Speaker 10: Ryan.
Speaker 1: That's a good point. This pulls you into chemistry.
Speaker 10: You can try vinegar.
Speaker 1: You said you got to figured out.
Speaker 2: I always called it the unintentional skullplate conversion, like it
Speaker 2: rolls off the bookshelf, you know, or a dog gets
Speaker 2: ahold of it.
Speaker 1: Skullplate Now, dude, yeah, I had one. I had a
Speaker 1: nice white tail hanging in a area where like in
Speaker 1: a breezeway and now and then you get just this
Speaker 1: insane wind if someone opened if the garage doors open
Speaker 1: on one end and someone opens the door on the
Speaker 1: other end, and that thing has more times uh boom
Speaker 1: falling down. And now it's basically like it's like it's
Speaker 1: gotten a lot smaller.
Speaker 5: Yeah, And there's.
Speaker 1: Pieces of boat. I come home, you know, and on
Speaker 1: my desk are a little chunks of bob.
Speaker 4: And there's no point in an antelope euro amount if.
Speaker 5: The nose is chewed off.
Speaker 6: Yeah, like, it's just.
Speaker 5: Not yeah, there's nothing.
Speaker 1: This is what happened to yours.
Speaker 4: I mean, this has had to have happened to your animals.
Speaker 1: You had it sounds like you guys have some I
Speaker 1: had that was last Are you still bitter about this?
Speaker 5: No, I'm sound still.
Speaker 1: You sound like you have said about it.
Speaker 8: So what happened, just to clear the air is Ryan
Speaker 8: shot a very nice buck.
Speaker 1: I took it home.
Speaker 8: I had a new puppy, and she got into both
Speaker 8: our deer. But she chewed more of Brian's nose than mine.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 4: The crazy thing is she opened the door where the
Speaker 4: skulls were, got into the secured area where they were
Speaker 4: because you know, obviously you wouldn't put them someplace where
Speaker 4: a puppy could get to them.
Speaker 1: Yeah, of course, so a very special dog. You know,
Speaker 1: I've always said she's smart. I remember this happening. Now,
Speaker 1: this is all coming back to me. I remember this happening.
Speaker 1: I remember hearing about this before.
Speaker 5: I feel like it's a very common thing.
Speaker 4: Anyway, it would be a great way for you to
Speaker 4: be like, yeah, your mouth's done.
Speaker 5: For a couple extra bucks.
Speaker 1: For forty bucks, you'll dip it in like whatever the
Speaker 1: hell dogs happen.
Speaker 2: That's what happened to Uh, that's what happened to Chile's
Speaker 2: first antelope. Yeah, his roommate's dog.
Speaker 1: You know what you might put on there. They make
Speaker 1: this thing for little kids. I didn't know about this.
Speaker 1: You know, if a kid winds up chewing his fingernails
Speaker 1: too much, Yeah, they make this ship you put on
Speaker 1: his fingernails and they about vomit. Really, Yeah, it's bad,
Speaker 1: So you take you tell him I need forty bucks
Speaker 1: to dog proof it. Put that shit all over it
Speaker 1: unless something tastes it. They don't know, and that dog
Speaker 1: gets his tongue on that. You got a dog, I
Speaker 1: do get a bottle of this stuff and swab his
Speaker 1: tongue with it and see what he does.
Speaker 2: The only thing is my dog's like throwing up. Just
Speaker 2: based on the frequency with which they do it, I'm
Speaker 2: not sure that would be a huge deterrent.
Speaker 10: Try that, well, do I've never heard of that.
Speaker 1: I have a dog. I'll put it on my own
Speaker 1: dog and I'll report back to you. Okay, but she
Speaker 1: just had surgery, so I'm gonna wait till she feels better.
Speaker 1: She's very depressed. She's gotten wrong with that humiliating cone on.
Speaker 1: It's all the things she normally does she can't do.
Speaker 1: She thinks she's in trouble constantly because like she can't
Speaker 1: do any of the fun stuff she does. She's totally depressed.
Speaker 1: She's probably gonna kill herself later. I'll hit her with
Speaker 1: that stuff right now, right now, it'd be like it'd
Speaker 1: be like too much, it'd be too much. She jump
Speaker 1: off a dog cliff. Yeah uh, thanks for coming in.
Speaker 1: Remind people how to find you. You can stay and
Speaker 1: hang out, but remind people how to find.
Speaker 9: You through Instagram for our six Bone works or just
Speaker 9: word of mouth. Really, people have my phone number and
Speaker 9: just I don't want to put my phone number out there.
Speaker 1: No, no, no, don't, but put it out there like this,
Speaker 1: go like put it out there, like here's how to
Speaker 1: find me? By god?
Speaker 10: What is it through Instagram?
Speaker 1: Okay? And they do what just message me? Okay? So
Speaker 1: message Brook at Instagram, find her on Instagram at.
Speaker 10: Four O six bone works.
Speaker 1: Yeah, support young business, American entrepreneurship. How do you say
Speaker 1: that word? Entrepreneurship, preneurship American elbow, grease real entrepreneurs straight fives,
Speaker 1: yep and uh and and keep keep hope your business
Speaker 1: keys blooming.
Speaker 10: Yeah, for sure.
Speaker 1: There was the thing we're gonna talk about by kind
Speaker 1: of want to get to the main subject. Brody. The
Speaker 1: other day we're doing the live show and we were
Speaker 1: doing our thing about where you indefensible law, Like if
Speaker 1: you could just make a law that's totally indefensible, but
Speaker 1: it would satisfy some pet peeve. Brody was saying, why
Speaker 1: he's floating, maybe it should maybe it would be illegal
Speaker 1: to catch and release fish, And we had to laugh
Speaker 1: about that, and then someone wrote in and says, in Germany,
Speaker 1: in most parts of Germany it is el it is
Speaker 1: illegal to catch and release a fish. They don't want
Speaker 1: you doing it for that reason. If you catch it,
Speaker 1: eat it. I don't know if this is true. A
Speaker 1: guy named Lucas says it is with a k. Trust
Speaker 1: that's a German all right. I went to the main show. Brad,
Speaker 1: do you mind introducing yourself for real? And then Dave,
Speaker 1: can you introduce yourself? Yeah?
Speaker 8: Brad, founder CEO of a company called their Galli. We're
Speaker 8: back at youn Gear and Equipment company for this I
Speaker 8: for this gig.
Speaker 1: I also worked stint in public Lands too, so mm
Speaker 1: hm and dat. He been on the show probably four
Speaker 1: or five times.
Speaker 6: Yeah, not as many as uh folks like heavile finger.
Speaker 6: Uh No, I don't know. He gives me a hard time.
Speaker 2: It's like you're right your neck and neck with hell
Speaker 2: we might be, but he writes in a lot.
Speaker 6: But president, Yeah, yeah, David Wilms, I'm based in Wyoming.
Speaker 6: I work for the National Wildlife Federation. Now I'm our
Speaker 6: associate vice president of public Lands and also oversee our
Speaker 6: hunting angling advocacy work as well, And prior to that,
Speaker 6: worked for Governor of Wyoming, worked for the Attorney General's Office,
Speaker 6: did work with our State Game and Fish Department. Have
Speaker 6: been an attorney for I won't say how long long
Speaker 6: enough now long time? Yeah, a long time since you
Speaker 6: were a child. Feels like it. No, I mean look
Speaker 6: at my pictures and it looks like it.
Speaker 1: And of course doctor Randall's here and also joined by
Speaker 1: Ryan Callahan, and we're here to discuss the subject of
Speaker 1: great importance that has been brewing in the background. Like
Speaker 1: I've been hearing about it and hearing about it, and
Speaker 1: you're hearing about it. We keep saying we want to
Speaker 1: do something about it. I kind of thought it would
Speaker 1: go away by now. You're probably dying what we're talking about.
Speaker 1: Who wants to dine in, dying to know what we're
Speaker 1: talking about? Who wants to who wants to take take
Speaker 1: this and run with it? The high level what we're
Speaker 1: talking about.
Speaker 5: I'll do the quick overview.
Speaker 1: What is happening?
Speaker 4: Okay, So, uh, this would all fall under sage brush rebellion.
Speaker 4: We could call it. This bubbles up about every ten years,
Speaker 4: it seems like, but it's a movement from certain players.
Speaker 4: In this occasion, the state of Utah kicked it off
Speaker 4: with this idea that really falls back to like the
Speaker 4: federal government can't own land. The argument's kind of they're
Speaker 4: all variations of that, and the motivation is the fact
Speaker 4: that the states want more land because they're of great
Speaker 4: economic value. So the State of Utah currently is suing
Speaker 4: the federal government over unincorporated lands that belong to the
Speaker 4: Bureau of Land Management or fall under the management of
Speaker 4: the Bureau of Land Management. About eighteen and a half
Speaker 4: million acres in that fall in the State of Utah's borders.
Speaker 1: Eighteen and a half million acres.
Speaker 5: Yes, yep.
Speaker 4: And they are suing the federal government saying that.
Speaker 5: That land.
Speaker 4: It's illegal for the BLM to control that land, and
Speaker 4: the State of Utah wants that land to basically do
Speaker 4: with as they please. And there's some versions of what
Speaker 4: that is. But they do use in their lawsuit the
Speaker 4: word divest, which means sell, So there's yeah, basically, they're
Speaker 4: going to hold the acres that are of the greatest
Speaker 4: economic importance and divest the rest, which would be sell
Speaker 4: off the rest of those public acres, and then kind
Speaker 4: of the ball of axe grows from there as far
Speaker 4: as what the implications of this lawsuit could be. But
Speaker 4: if the federal government can't maintain and own Bureau of
Speaker 4: Land Management land, what does that mean for US Forest
Speaker 4: Service land, Bureau of Reclamation, and on down the line.
Speaker 1: So the lawsuit the Idaho's or that Utah has fought.
Speaker 1: The State of Utah is filing a lawsuit saying BLM
Speaker 1: land is somehow they don't have the authority to own it,
Speaker 1: therefore it shoulblong to the states. They're focused particularly on BLM.
Speaker 1: Is this true? For now?
Speaker 6: That's true?
Speaker 1: That's why do they feel that BLM land is fundamentally
Speaker 1: different than any other land management agency?
Speaker 6: That's a great question. You know me to take the first.
Speaker 1: You're the lawyer here, I'll take it. Oh, why why
Speaker 1: are we talking about Bureau of Land Management land?
Speaker 6: That's a great question. It's because that's what they've told
Speaker 6: us to talk about. Oh okay, right, So here's the
Speaker 6: way I describe the case to people. First of all,
Speaker 6: the lawsuit has been filed in from the United States
Speaker 6: Supreme Court, right, but and they've asked the State of
Speaker 6: Uta has asked the United States Supreme Court to accept
Speaker 6: what they called original jurisdiction, which means an original jurisdiction case,
Speaker 6: you bypass federal district court, federal appeals court, you go
Speaker 6: right to the U. S. Supreme Court, and the Supreme
Speaker 6: Court serves as the trial court.
Speaker 1: How often is that successful? Well, I can tell you
Speaker 1: to have them not defer it down court.
Speaker 6: So I can tell you I I've been involved in
Speaker 6: a couple I was. The last one I was involved
Speaker 6: in was actually a case the State of Montana sy
Speaker 6: the State of Wyoming, and it was Original Action number
Speaker 6: one thirty seven in the history of the country, the
Speaker 6: one hundred and thirty seventh original jurisdiction case in the
Speaker 6: history of the country. That was about ten years ago.
Speaker 6: There have been a handful since then. It doesn't happen often.
Speaker 6: There's a high bar to accept jurisdiction. It's typically state
Speaker 6: v state or state versus federal government, and it tends
Speaker 6: to fall on these instances on issues of constitutional questions
Speaker 6: where there's immediate massive economic carm if we don't resolve
Speaker 6: it right away, or some other really high bar.
Speaker 1: Got like who won the presidency.
Speaker 6: That's a pretty high bar.
Speaker 1: Might be like a thing like we're just gonna have
Speaker 1: to take this out.
Speaker 6: That's exactly right. So that's the ask, right, and in
Speaker 6: it they ask for the Supreme Court to accept yourisdiction
Speaker 6: to hear this case and the argument is these eighteen
Speaker 6: and a half million acres of BLM lands, of these
Speaker 6: unappropriated lands, that it is unconstitutional. They're making a constitutional argument.
Speaker 6: They're saying it's unconstitutional for the United States to hold
Speaker 6: land in perpetuity. And this is why it's interesting to
Speaker 6: me that they focus on eighteen and a half million acres,
Speaker 6: because what they're fundamentally arguing is saying, look, the United
Speaker 6: States is only able to own the land that is
Speaker 6: that it's expressly authorized to own under the Constitution. They cite,
Speaker 6: and I'm sorry to get super wonky, but they'll they'll get.
Speaker 1: Get as wonky as you want, because I was just
Speaker 1: gonna ask why can't Maryland sue and take the White House?
Speaker 6: There you go, You're asking the right question, right. So
Speaker 6: under Article ten, which is what states often your reference
Speaker 6: are ten of the Constitution is all of the powers
Speaker 6: that are not expressly articulated in the Constitution are reserved
Speaker 6: to the state. And what Utah says is the express
Speaker 6: authority to own land for the federal government's own land
Speaker 6: is only found in one place in the enclave clause.
Speaker 6: This is their argument, and in the enclave clause, the
Speaker 6: only property that the federal government can own are and
Speaker 6: I'll just very be very general because there's a series
Speaker 6: of words, but it boils down to military installations in Washington, DC.
Speaker 6: And so outside of those two things, the argument from
Speaker 6: Utah is the federal government cannot own any other land
Speaker 6: but those.
Speaker 1: Lands military bases in DC.
Speaker 6: Yeah, effectively, right. And so then to then argue that
Speaker 6: they're limiting their lawsuit to eighteen and a half million
Speaker 6: acres of just BLM is something that I'm it's like
Speaker 6: mental gymnastics for me, because as the lawyer in me says,
Speaker 6: I'm looking at facts in law, right, and I'm saying,
Speaker 6: if it if their argument is true, and it is,
Speaker 6: and it is unconstitutional to own any lands besides military
Speaker 6: installations in Washington, d C. Then why in the world
Speaker 6: would they only be entitled to the eighteen and a
Speaker 6: half million.
Speaker 1: Yeah, why wouldn't whyomi make a play for Yellowstone National Park?
Speaker 1: What a windfall? Right, I mean, maybe that'd be like
Speaker 1: one chunk of public land that if they took the
Speaker 1: state would actually make money off it.
Speaker 6: Probably, Yeah, I mean you'd think so, at least tourism alone,
Speaker 6: dollars alone. Right. But so, so that's the thing I
Speaker 6: like to start off with I'm I'm a pretty, you know,
Speaker 6: I'm a pretty measured too much?
Speaker 1: So yeah, maybe maybe so, but that's why you get
Speaker 1: to keep coming back.
Speaker 3: So it did go with a five.
Speaker 6: I did go with the five that was, but it
Speaker 6: was a measured five. It's like, it's like, there's room
Speaker 6: for improvement. You could charge more sure services, but your
Speaker 6: work is so good it's a five. Yeah, But I
Speaker 6: so I'm very measured. But then I look at this
Speaker 6: and say, it's not hyperbolic to say that all six
Speaker 6: hundred and forty million acres are at stake in this
Speaker 6: of public lands in the United States are at stake
Speaker 6: in this litigation, because if it is unconstitutional to own
Speaker 6: lands in perpetuity, then it's unconstitutional on all lands except
Speaker 6: those expressly authorized by the Constitution according to Utah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, like Gettysburg. Wouldn't Gettysburg be not listed?
Speaker 8: It's yeah, I think so it's a I mean it
Speaker 8: was it's a national monument, national monument or nationalment.
Speaker 1: Do they give you constitutional authority to own a monument?
Speaker 1: Probably not?
Speaker 6: No, No, I mean according to that lawsuit. Accordin to
Speaker 6: the lawsuit, I mean I would argue, yes, well.
Speaker 1: Know what I'm saying. If you if someone was literally like,
Speaker 1: I'm not a constitutional scholar, so I don't know if
Speaker 1: that's surprised. But if you look at this, this thing
Speaker 1: they're pointing to that says what kind of land they
Speaker 1: could own, I'm just trying to capture the extent of
Speaker 1: like sort of the bombshell you're dropping to beat it.
Speaker 1: Not just BLM, but you could say the same thing
Speaker 1: about national parks. You say anything about national monuments, you
Speaker 1: can say anything about whatever.
Speaker 6: National forest, national forests, US Fish and Wildlife Service lands,
Speaker 6: Bureau of Reclamation lands.
Speaker 1: So is there in this suit? And there's a lot
Speaker 1: we got to get into here, like other states joining
Speaker 1: all that, but in this suit, is there any articulation
Speaker 1: about why we're talking about BLM, Like what is it
Speaker 1: about the Bureau of Land Management that to them seems
Speaker 1: that to them seems like riper for exploitation than if
Speaker 1: they were going after Zion National Park.
Speaker 4: I mean, I think it's the unincorporated lane. Like how
Speaker 4: the BLM came to be is it was kind of
Speaker 4: like all the undesignated land that was left over, So
Speaker 4: there's like a low hanging fruit type of deal. But
Speaker 4: also Utah on BLM ground has a real history back
Speaker 4: and forth of like a lot of bears ears, Grand
Speaker 4: Staircase Escalante, that is BLM land that then went into
Speaker 4: a monument status and then went back to non monument status.
Speaker 4: And that's where you hear like a lot of that
Speaker 4: Oh yeah, that is public, but you can't access it
Speaker 4: type of talk.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, the national forest system as we know
Speaker 2: it was set aside as forest reserves, right, like we've
Speaker 2: always had. The federal government has always acquired new land
Speaker 2: through purchase or military conquest basically, right. But most of
Speaker 2: the public land system as we know it, those chunks
Speaker 2: of public land were set aside for a certain purpose.
Speaker 2: And BLM is essentially what was left over that wasn't,
Speaker 2: you know, either reserved or disposed of. So it's sort
Speaker 2: of like the accidental God. Historically speaking, it's sort of
Speaker 2: like accidentally the federal governments because in theory, it should
Speaker 2: have all been disposed of.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean, if you were going to take the argument,
Speaker 6: why are we here, what is there? Right, it's exactly that.
Speaker 6: It's we had a system where as states were originally
Speaker 6: admitted into the Union, they were required to disavow any
Speaker 6: claims to lands that were within their borders that were
Speaker 6: unappropriated lands. And at the time we're talking in the
Speaker 6: seventeen hundreds here, we're talking at the time unappropriated meaning
Speaker 6: lands that weren't already in private ownership. The state had
Speaker 6: had to disavow claims to them and it would go
Speaker 6: to the federal estate. And then the federal government set
Speaker 6: up a whole series of laws for how they were
Speaker 6: going to dispose of these lands. It's the way I
Speaker 6: that's the way I describe it. You know, we had
Speaker 6: things like that. There were laws that gave land to
Speaker 6: veterans of wars early wars or were you know, we
Speaker 6: all know about Homestead Act. There were a series of
Speaker 6: well bequeaths to the railroad as they you know, to
Speaker 6: connect the east to the west. So they're they're actually.
Speaker 1: Like the railroads were compensated with land instead of money. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Like you get the land your tracks on, and then
Speaker 1: checkerboard everything within twenty miles you get half of it
Speaker 1: or whatever to help.
Speaker 6: Yeah, So we had this system that ran for you know,
Speaker 6: until nineteen seventy six really and starting in really I
Speaker 6: was going to say eighteen ninety one. It's really starting
Speaker 6: in more like eighteen seventy six, which I think is
Speaker 6: when Yellowstone was first created. Right, That was sort of
Speaker 6: the first time that the government said, Okay, not this. Yeah,
Speaker 6: we're going to try and sell a bunch of stuff,
Speaker 6: but not this. And then eighteen ninety one comes the
Speaker 6: Force Reserve Act and Congress again says there's a lot
Speaker 6: of economic value to this timber. We're seeing in some
Speaker 6: places unsustainable timber harvest. We need it for expanse, for
Speaker 6: home building, rail building. We're going to reserve all these
Speaker 6: timber lands. Okay, So now we start establishing the national Force.
Speaker 6: Then we roll into the early part of the century
Speaker 6: and we have the Antiquities Act, and we start seeing
Speaker 6: more monuments and parks created. And we're still having homesteading
Speaker 6: during this time, and we had the Tailor Grazing Act
Speaker 6: that comes into place into play to deal with how
Speaker 6: do we manage grazing on some of these lands, but
Speaker 6: you can still homestead. And then nineteen six rolls around
Speaker 6: when we passed the Federal Land Planning Management Act, Right
Speaker 6: Policy and Management Act, Shoot policy. Thank you. I always
Speaker 6: mess it up. And I've been in this space for
Speaker 6: twenty years.
Speaker 4: Well, you can here bless your heart for avoiding the acronyms.
Speaker 1: I try to avoid the acronyms right doing great jobs.
Speaker 6: So nineteen seventy six happens, and all the land that
Speaker 6: has not been put into national parks or monuments or
Speaker 6: wilderness areas or you know, list the whole list of
Speaker 6: the things national wildlife refuges. The federal government says they're
Speaker 6: looking at it, and they're seeing there's a lot of
Speaker 6: value to these lands too. Like nobody was home homesteading.
Speaker 6: It looked like for the longest time it was viewed
Speaker 6: as of trash land. But they're starting to realize there's
Speaker 6: a lot of value here. There's oil and gas resources
Speaker 6: that are you know, pretty incredible, there's recreation resources that
Speaker 6: were starting to see there's value to and so they
Speaker 6: passed this law.
Speaker 4: This it was pretty scary, it turns out.
Speaker 6: Yeah, And so they passed this law that says, once
Speaker 6: and for all, it's the policy of the federal government
Speaker 6: to keep this land in the federal estate. And it
Speaker 6: effectively ends the homesteading. Like that's when the homestead Act
Speaker 6: really formally ended. It was nineteen seventy six, not that
Speaker 6: long ago, and you can look at that law and
Speaker 6: it matches pretty perfectly to when the Sagebrush rebellion starts
Speaker 6: to kick off, because this argument is no, no, you
Speaker 6: were always supposed to get rid of that land. You're
Speaker 6: always supposed to get rid of that land. And now
Speaker 6: you're saying it's the policy of the federal government to
Speaker 6: only get rid of it in very limited circumstances and
Speaker 6: in very small amounts if it goes through this long process,
Speaker 6: and that's not what we signed up for. You need
Speaker 6: to be getting rid of it. And so these iterations
Speaker 6: of this, uh, you know it's calvisaying. These iterations of
Speaker 6: the Sagebrush rebellion started coming around really in political cycles,
Speaker 6: you know, like every it like a sin wave, you know,
Speaker 6: every ten years or so.
Speaker 1: So the logic a little bit is it was like
Speaker 1: it's last in, first out.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 8: Can I just say, though, like I want to make
Speaker 8: I think it's really important though to point out like
Speaker 8: there isn't in most people's mind, and maybe I'm just
Speaker 8: speaking for myself here, like an open legal question about
Speaker 8: whether or not public lands are constitutional. I think there
Speaker 8: is like this assumption that some people have that like, hey,
Speaker 8: this has like been an open question, and we just
Speaker 8: want to push for, you know, some clarity on this, right,
Speaker 8: Like like I don't want there to be I don't
Speaker 8: think it's appropriate or not. I don't want to put
Speaker 8: words of your mouth here to day, but like I want
Speaker 8: to make sure people understand though, because that what you're
Speaker 8: not saying and tell me if I'm wrong here, is
Speaker 8: that there isn't an open legal question since Flipma pass
Speaker 8: in nineteen seventy six about the constitutionality of Bilan lands.
Speaker 6: With one exception, and it's the exception that UTAH is
Speaker 6: putting out there. So there have been a series of
Speaker 6: cases that have said under the Property Clause of the Constitution,
Speaker 6: the federal government can own land, can manage it, can
Speaker 6: exclude people, can regulate. You take, for example, can say
Speaker 6: this forest, we're not going to hunting on it right now.
Speaker 6: It's the stuff that's used today when there's a fire
Speaker 6: and they administratively close it and you're like, well, can't
Speaker 6: hunt there this year? Right, the Supreme Court has weighed in,
Speaker 6: there's a mountain of case law on that. What UTAH
Speaker 6: is arguing is this very narrow piece they're saying, we
Speaker 6: agree with that, we're not contesting those cases. But what
Speaker 6: we're saying is that the court hasn't actually addressed the
Speaker 6: question of whether they can do that im PERPECTI tuity
Speaker 6: the the argument there, and I'm just putting I'm just
Speaker 6: saying what their.
Speaker 1: Claim, right, I'm asking you for your opinion, though.
Speaker 6: I'll get to that. I just want to make yeah,
Speaker 6: but I want to make sure people understand.
Speaker 1: Okay, I really appreciate this because I like to hear
Speaker 1: you know, people should understand the argument. Yeah, right, exactly right.
Speaker 6: So the argument is, yes, the federal government has the
Speaker 6: authority to manage lands as long as it takes to
Speaker 6: dispose of them, and if it takes thirty years to
Speaker 6: dispose of them, they can manage them like any other
Speaker 6: landowner for that thirty years. This is the argument Utah
Speaker 6: effectively makes. They're they're just saying the Supreme Court hasn't
Speaker 6: weighed in on this very narrow issue of can they
Speaker 6: hold those lands in perpetuity? And that's what the claim is.
Speaker 6: And I think they they wrote the their complaint that
Speaker 6: way because it gives them the highest likelihood that a
Speaker 6: court accepts that the court ex jurisdiction, or if they don't,
Speaker 6: because if the Court doesn't accept it, Utah will probably
Speaker 6: turn around and file this case in Federal District Court
Speaker 6: in Utah and just go through the normal process. And
Speaker 6: they're setting it up to hopefully have the Supreme Court
Speaker 6: accept what's called cert a petition for cert, which would
Speaker 6: be when it goes through a normal appeals process, would
Speaker 6: they accept the appeal and hear the case then, So
Speaker 6: they're setting up what we would call a case of
Speaker 6: first impression is what they're trying to set up to
Speaker 6: increase their chances that the Supreme Court will take the
Speaker 6: case on a narrow on a very narrow issue that
Speaker 6: the Court has never weighed in on.
Speaker 1: And to be clear, Utah is trying to set they're
Speaker 1: trying to go to the US Constitution or sorry, they're
Speaker 1: trying to go to the US Supreme Court. So they're
Speaker 1: not arguing this is not necessarily about what is going
Speaker 1: on in Utah, because if the court finds in their favor,
Speaker 1: it finds in everybody's favor.
Speaker 6: That's my argument.
Speaker 1: Other states, every other state that has BLM land would
Speaker 1: be able to be like, well, that applies to me
Speaker 1: as well. Why would it somehow becif to Utah?
Speaker 6: But I say not just BLM land. This is where
Speaker 6: I keep having to dive in and say not just
Speaker 6: BLM land, all public land.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so how how if you look at it like
Speaker 1: like how many acres of BLM land of like how
Speaker 1: many acres of public BLM land or in Utah? How
Speaker 1: many acres of BLM public land are in the US
Speaker 1: in general? Like what's what's if this was to be
Speaker 1: found true, how many acres of hunting and fishing ground
Speaker 1: are at risk?
Speaker 6: Well, so if you're just doing on BLM, I don't
Speaker 6: have the exact numbers on me. Maybe somebody else knows
Speaker 6: about their head. It's I think it's over two hundred
Speaker 6: million acres. If you're talking does it apply to all
Speaker 6: lands federally owned lands that are that are not military
Speaker 6: installations or the the capital. We're talking six hundred and
Speaker 6: forty million acres. We're talking about one third of the
Speaker 6: land mass of the country.
Speaker 1: My daughter's buck here BLM BLM.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I mean I think it's like the.
Speaker 2: It'd be like if you sold some land to your neighbor, right,
Speaker 2: and then you went, you know, you wanted to like
Speaker 2: build a driveway or something, and you said, oh, I
Speaker 2: can do this because the original transaction is void, right,
Speaker 2: and like it's ultimately, if you have to accept the
Speaker 2: argument for this part, it applies to the whole thing,
Speaker 2: because what they're arguing is that the federal government cannot
Speaker 2: possess land with these few exceptions. So it's like there's
Speaker 2: there's no I mean, it's my understanding of it is
Speaker 2: that if the court were to find that argument compelling,
Speaker 2: there's no like safeguard the floodgates are open, right, like
Speaker 2: all of a sudden, that would void the forest reserve system.
Speaker 6: There's you know, like, yeah, there's nothing in the constitution.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's nothing constitutionally different about every other type of
Speaker 2: federal public land that we know of.
Speaker 1: One of the things about this this current legal push
Speaker 1: is it winds up you're shooting for the same thing
Speaker 1: is you've always shot for. This is just the latest
Speaker 1: way you're trying to do it. Okay, So if we
Speaker 1: let's go back to twenty fourteen, twenty fifteen, you're some
Speaker 1: about the ten year cycle. Let's go back ten years.
Speaker 1: The conversation was around and it was coming from Utah
Speaker 1: as well. The conversation was around like divestiture or there
Speaker 1: was this like excess how do they put it, the
Speaker 1: excess public lands?
Speaker 5: Yeah, unincorporated, Yeah, unappropriated.
Speaker 1: That there was a push where they carved off a
Speaker 1: chunk of land that they felt was like like some
Speaker 1: level of excess public lands. Correct.
Speaker 6: Yeah, the lands that hadn't been, in their eyes, set
Speaker 6: aside for some other public purpose like a national park
Speaker 6: or a wilderness area or a national conservation area national forest. Right,
Speaker 6: the ones that didn't have that specific articulated congressional designation
Speaker 6: for specific purpose. They're saying, well, that's what we're that's
Speaker 6: what we're after. It's what's left.
Speaker 1: That was the twenty fourteen argument.
Speaker 6: That's the same one today.
Speaker 1: Okay, So that that was the but no, there was
Speaker 1: a bill. Oh yeah, that's right, like like it was.
Speaker 1: It was like sponsored by Jason chaffits right, Yeah, And
Speaker 1: it was a how does no one remember the hell
Speaker 1: this was? It was like the.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, it was I think it was like the
Speaker 4: Divesting Public Lands Act or something like that.
Speaker 1: They had a word like excess or Yeah.
Speaker 4: They were trying to identify the chunks of ground that
Speaker 4: weren't all that important to the public and sell those.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it was putting it forward as a bill
Speaker 1: that these would be sold. When I say that this
Speaker 1: is the same you're driving towards the same goal. You're
Speaker 1: just taking different attitudes about it. Like let's say I
Speaker 1: I really wish I definitely don't. Let's say I really
Speaker 1: wanted to get rid of my neighbor, and one year
Speaker 1: I try where I go back into you know, I
Speaker 1: go back into when he initially did his permitting. Did
Speaker 1: he make any mistakes? I'm like, Okay, he didn't make mistakes.
Speaker 1: If someone't get rid of my neighbor, I'm going to
Speaker 1: go back into his criminal record. Maybe there's something there. Nope, Okay,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna has is he up on his taxes?
Speaker 6: Right?
Speaker 1: Meaning my goal is to get rid of the neighbor.
Speaker 1: Definitely don't want to do this. My goal is to
Speaker 1: get rid of the neighbor. I'm just going to keep
Speaker 1: trying things. Utah has been pursuing this for a long time, Right,
Speaker 1: that's right? Is this a fun like? Do you feel
Speaker 1: that this approach is somehow more sound, is going to
Speaker 1: have a different result than the other ways in which
Speaker 1: they've attempted to take the federal public land and make
Speaker 1: it something that they can sell and privatize.
Speaker 6: Here's why it's different. Okay, they've invested. I can't remember, Brad,
Speaker 6: do you know the number twenty.
Speaker 1: It's like twenty the Yeah, I know what you're gonna say.
Speaker 8: It's about twenty million dollars has been approved taxpayer dollars
Speaker 8: Utah taxpayer dollars twenty million dollars for a PR campaign
Speaker 8: to support the lawsuit.
Speaker 1: So so Utah's tax money is paying their own way
Speaker 1: toward not having their public lands.
Speaker 6: Correct, absolutely, one hundred percent. Although it's a campaign that
Speaker 6: the ads.
Speaker 1: Are talk about, like talk about losing control of your
Speaker 1: tax money, Like I got a good idea, I'll pay
Speaker 1: my taxes. Then you take my tax money and make
Speaker 1: it that I don't have any public lands.
Speaker 6: Yeah, although they're they're using kind of a rebranded keep
Speaker 6: it public campaign.
Speaker 8: Oh actually, I mean you're talking Washington Post ads, podcast
Speaker 8: ads like there's I mean, they're going it's a pretty
Speaker 8: serious PR campaign.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 6: So there. That's one thing that's different is they're investing
Speaker 6: in this. But I I argue they're not investing in
Speaker 6: a PR campaign for the litigation.
Speaker 1: Okay, right, you don't need.
Speaker 6: A PR camp. The law is what the law is.
Speaker 6: You're gonna run through the judicial process. Maybe you run
Speaker 6: a small PR campaign in state to convince your constituents
Speaker 6: that this is the right legal move to make. But
Speaker 6: like Brad said, they're running a PR campaign nationally. They're
Speaker 6: they're doing like I don't know if this is one
Speaker 6: hundred percent true, but I got texts from friends of
Speaker 6: mine in d C during the presidential debate that said,
Speaker 6: I'm seeing ads on my phone and during the debate
Speaker 6: in my neighborhood about this, Like.
Speaker 1: It's it's the how do you sell the idea to
Speaker 1: a guy in d C. What are you telling him
Speaker 1: that he's gonna care about?
Speaker 6: Well, I think you're trying. I think you're trying to
Speaker 6: do a couple of things. It's who's in DC.
Speaker 1: No, what I'm saying, what do you Let's say, let's
Speaker 1: say you're in You're in Utah, right, and you get
Speaker 1: campaign money and your cronies and things are in development
Speaker 1: and other issues, and you guys are looking at all
Speaker 1: of the land that will never be generating money for you,
Speaker 1: drowndating business for you, generating profits for you, generating profits
Speaker 1: for the state, and it's sitting there. How would if
Speaker 1: you were ever going to take a message and bring
Speaker 1: it to a guy in Illinois. What would you ever
Speaker 1: tell the guy in Illinois that would make him think, Yes,
Speaker 1: I wish there wasn't a bunch of federal public land
Speaker 1: in Utah.
Speaker 6: So I think it's it's this, it's the overall political
Speaker 6: message of the tenth Amendment should matter. And so who
Speaker 6: are you appealing to in DC? It's the center of
Speaker 6: power in the country. That's where it's where your Senate,
Speaker 6: your house, all of the thousands of staffers that work
Speaker 6: for them live.
Speaker 1: Yeah, John Roberts washing his dishes and in the background
Speaker 1: this adds like subliminal but not just argues in him,
Speaker 1: and he's.
Speaker 6: Like, you know, by God, not just the justices though.
Speaker 6: Remember you're going to have a senator from Utah that
Speaker 6: is going to have an extreme amount of power over
Speaker 6: natural resource issues in this country starting in January, you know,
Speaker 6: Senator Mike Lee. Yeah, I don't you know when we're
Speaker 6: having this conversation. I don't know what how it's going
Speaker 6: to pan out. But he's in line if he wants it,
Speaker 6: to be the chair of the Senate Natural Resources Committe
Speaker 6: Environment Natal Resource Committee. So he'll have any He'll he'll
Speaker 6: have an incredible amount of power on controlling what type
Speaker 6: of legislation is heard in the Senate by the committee
Speaker 6: and what gets passed through for votes. He can hold
Speaker 6: up packages, public lands packages, He can do all sorts
Speaker 6: of things. So there's an opportunity to through this campaign.
Speaker 4: And for folks who don't know, Senator Lee has been
Speaker 4: like very prominent in what what would be considered like
Speaker 4: an anti public lands group. He has been pro anti
Speaker 4: public lands.
Speaker 6: Yes, so it's I've I've viewed this lawsuit as they
Speaker 6: want to they want to win the lawsuit. Obviously they're
Speaker 6: going down this route if they if it doesn't go
Speaker 6: to the Supreme Court, they'll likely file in federal district court.
Speaker 6: Lawsuit buys you time to lawsuit, creates uncertainty because you
Speaker 6: don't know what's going to happen in the legal process
Speaker 6: it and it locks things up and creates time to
Speaker 6: address whatever your concerns might be. So there's actually you know,
Speaker 6: they sure they want to win the lawsuit, but they
Speaker 6: also view this as an opportunity to get political outcomes
Speaker 6: that they want and they know that they have people
Speaker 6: from their state that are going to be in positions
Speaker 6: of power. And now you know, we don't know yet
Speaker 6: how what the administration is going to look like, you know,
Speaker 6: but but there might be opportunities to move legislation that
Speaker 6: could be very favorable to Utah in a new Congress.
Speaker 6: And so yeah, you're going to run a pr campaign
Speaker 6: there to try and influence all those folks to and
Speaker 6: if you have a somebody from Illinois that is likes
Speaker 6: the idea of local control, okay, and that that's the
Speaker 6: message is we don't want a big, bloated federal government.
Speaker 6: You know, this is about local control. The power, the
Speaker 6: power of the people is best at the most local level.
Speaker 6: We can be you know, better managers at the most
Speaker 6: local level. And it's an opportunity to say this is
Speaker 6: a way to deal with big government, shrink the government
Speaker 6: a little bit. And that's the other piece I think
Speaker 6: of this of this of this play, there's the legal play,
Speaker 6: there's the political play. You don't spend twenty million dollars
Speaker 6: on a legal campaign, you spend twenty million dollars on
Speaker 6: a long play that includes, you know, changing hearts and
Speaker 6: minds in a political.
Speaker 4: Campaign, and as well management right is the other one
Speaker 4: which kind of ties in to bowl, but it's well
Speaker 4: who manages land better?
Speaker 6: Right?
Speaker 4: And and that's something that you've heard over and over
Speaker 4: and over again, is well, the Feds don't manage that
Speaker 4: as well as the state does, or everybody knows public
Speaker 4: land is not managed anywhere near as good as private land, right.
Speaker 4: And that's something that we hear over and over again.
Speaker 1: In terms of laying out everybody's like biases and what
Speaker 1: they're after. And you've done a good job of making
Speaker 1: of presenting an argument, you know, even though you're not
Speaker 1: necessarily here to represent Utah's position.
Speaker 6: Necessarily, yeah, you're not.
Speaker 1: But you're not here to represent their position that you're
Speaker 1: explaining that trying to explain. And I feel that and
Speaker 1: I'll do the same on my position, okay, because this
Speaker 1: is one of those things where I think that everybody
Speaker 1: is driving at what they find to be beneficial. There's
Speaker 1: there's some art, there's some things that happen and it transcends.
Speaker 1: There's some things that happen in the political sphere and
Speaker 1: the social sphere where you get into these issues where
Speaker 1: there's a higher you know, you're arguing a higher morality.
Speaker 1: It could be it could be like a higher Christian morality.
Speaker 1: It could be a humanitarian morality whatever. Where you step
Speaker 1: outside of personal you step outside of what's good for
Speaker 1: an individual right, and you go to like, like what's
Speaker 1: good for sort of America? You know, the capital a
Speaker 1: this like I don't want to present like over there's
Speaker 1: a moral components, but there's also a big part of
Speaker 1: like there's a bunch of people pushing a certain thing
Speaker 1: they would like to see happen. I find that I'm
Speaker 1: totally open to the idea that federal land management and
Speaker 1: having a vast public estate and a bunch of public
Speaker 1: ground for people to recreate on. I'm open, Like I
Speaker 1: understand it. It slows economic activity. Lots of stuff slows
Speaker 1: economic activity, right, Like having Gettysburg you could build condos
Speaker 1: and sell them for a ton of money. Having the
Speaker 1: Gettysburg monument slows economic activity. There's things you could do
Speaker 1: with that that would be more money than what they're
Speaker 1: getting out of them. Right if you divide it up,
Speaker 1: sold it as condos, it'd be more income than you
Speaker 1: get from charging people to go to Gettysburg. So we
Speaker 1: don't make all of our decisions based on what makes
Speaker 1: the most fiscal sense in the moment. By having public lands,
Speaker 1: you have places for like people to go out and
Speaker 1: be free. One of the things I like about BLM
Speaker 1: Land is you're kind of there's no place to be
Speaker 1: more free then you're on BLM Land. You can generally
Speaker 1: do more stuff more often, you sell them get where.
Speaker 1: Like you know, in Southeast Alaska, deer season opens on
Speaker 1: August one, but on the Tungus National Forest Land it
Speaker 1: opens August fifteenth. Stuff like that doesn't usually happen on
Speaker 1: BLM Land. Like BLM Land is kind of like it's
Speaker 1: it's come one, come on, man. Like, if you're worried
Speaker 1: about can I sleep here? BLM Land probably can sleep
Speaker 1: there tonight.
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's a libertarian paradise.
Speaker 1: It's a libertarian paradise. And I know that there's things
Speaker 1: you could do with it, like you could sell it
Speaker 1: and make condos and mine it and whatever to hell.
Speaker 1: And someone's going to make some money right now. But
Speaker 1: all in all, considering that the country's going to keep
Speaker 1: existing for you know, hopefully thousands of more years, it'll
Speaker 1: stay like that. It'll be a place where Americans can
Speaker 1: go be Americans. And and that is the thing that
Speaker 1: like I believe in protecting. If you came and told me,
Speaker 1: if if somehow, like I had the word of God
Speaker 1: that Utah would rest control of BLM Lands and not
Speaker 1: change a thing, they'd be like, no, no, no, we just
Speaker 1: want it to be that. When you look at a map.
Speaker 3: It says it's a different color.
Speaker 1: It says Utah Bureau of Land Management. But we're still
Speaker 1: going to have it be that. Everybody can hunt and
Speaker 1: fish and camp and do what they want. It's just
Speaker 1: we just it really means a lot to us that
Speaker 1: it says Utah on it. I think most people will
Speaker 1: be like, oh, it's cool, not my fight, but that's
Speaker 1: not what we're talking about. No. Now, no one wants it.
Speaker 1: The state doesn't want it because they wanted to have
Speaker 1: it be a libertarian paradise. Even we're libertarians a little
Speaker 1: off because libertarians would argue that you shouldn't be able
Speaker 1: to have it. So a it's America's you know, like
Speaker 1: America's playground, America.
Speaker 3: It's like the same box. You just go out there and.
Speaker 1: It's a place to American. It's the most American place
Speaker 1: to be American. They don't want it because that's what
Speaker 1: they want to keep happening. They want it because they
Speaker 1: want to develop it, right correct. I mean, I mean
Speaker 1: like that therein lies the issue. It's not who owns,
Speaker 1: it's like what are you gonna do with it?
Speaker 5: Yeah?
Speaker 8: Like all I mean it's hard for me not to
Speaker 8: get really like pissed off when I talk about this
Speaker 8: shit because so unlike my friend they were here, I
Speaker 8: don't have to pretend to like be friendly to the
Speaker 8: state of Utah, which I appreciate your.
Speaker 1: Uh he's doing the lord's he is he is when
Speaker 1: I hear a story, When I hear a story about
Speaker 1: like someone's like, oh, you know, his wife is terrible,
Speaker 1: She's the worst. I'd be like I'd have to talk
Speaker 1: to his wife. I don't know, you gotta be objected.
Speaker 8: But like the thing is is like when you look
Speaker 8: at well, a couple of things I want to say,
Speaker 8: like what's different between this time and last time? They
Speaker 8: realize people that don't.
Speaker 1: Care about public land, they don't use public lands.
Speaker 8: So the guys that it's most of the guys right
Speaker 8: that want that are trying to do this, they don't
Speaker 8: do the things that we do, So they don't there
Speaker 8: isn't a value to them for public access, for hunting, fishing, ATVing,
Speaker 8: motorcycle riding, they do not care about those things. It's
Speaker 8: not a part of their lifestyle, so they don't care.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 8: But what they astutely recognized last time, So last time around,
Speaker 8: they really tried to frame this issue is like a
Speaker 8: states rights issue. Who do you hate more the state
Speaker 8: government of the federal government? And I think if you
Speaker 8: ask that question, most people are like, or who do
Speaker 8: you trust more? State government or federal government? Most people
Speaker 8: would say, well, I trust whoever my state government more
Speaker 8: because they're closer. Federal government means to me Washington, DC.
Speaker 8: Now I could quibble with that and say, well, most
Speaker 8: of your land managers that actually work on this public land,
Speaker 8: they live in your state, in your communities, right, But
Speaker 8: that is a I think just a common refrain from people.
Speaker 8: It's like, well, I trust the people around me. They
Speaker 8: tried to frame this issue this is about a state's
Speaker 8: rights issues versus a federal rights issue. It didn't take hold.
Speaker 8: And so the astude thing they're doing this time is
Speaker 8: they realized, we not only need to win a lawsuit,
Speaker 8: we need to win the court of public opinion here.
Speaker 8: So let's take a bunch of tax payer money and
Speaker 8: spend it on a which I think is a smart
Speaker 8: move on a PR campaign to explain to people why
Speaker 8: they should hate public land too, and really try and
Speaker 8: reframe this as an issue that's not about access, which
Speaker 8: is what it's about.
Speaker 1: Ye, that's what it's about.
Speaker 8: And let's frame it as an issue that's really about
Speaker 8: federal government overreach, because that is a winning argument in
Speaker 8: a lot of Western states. And I understand that that's
Speaker 8: not the issue.
Speaker 1: No, it's definitely not the issue. It's like many other
Speaker 1: things we're talking with Crday, we're sending here talking about
Speaker 1: buffalo management, bison management, mannagement, and bison an engine where
Speaker 1: you're like, oh, by some we don't want them coming
Speaker 1: into the state because they carry brucellosis. They're like, well
Speaker 1: carry brucellosis, but yeah, but we like those. So are
Speaker 1: we talking about No, we're not talking about brucellosis. We're
Speaker 1: talking about grazing lands. We're talking about fence integrity and
Speaker 1: grazing lands. But instead we're going to pretend to talk
Speaker 1: about brucellosis. I think here we're pretending to talk about
Speaker 1: like a rights issue. Yeah, what we're talking about is
Speaker 1: developing land.
Speaker 8: When I want to get my five year old eat
Speaker 8: her vegetables, I'll tell her it's like, you know, I
Speaker 8: put some sugar on that, or we you know, we
Speaker 8: put some jelly on that, and she'd be like, oh really,
Speaker 8: and I'll be you know, like yeah, I'm straight.
Speaker 1: Up lying to my kid.
Speaker 8: But it's that's what's going on here, right, Like they're
Speaker 8: telling you, it's they're trying to reframe this whole issue
Speaker 8: away from the thing that they know everybody cares about.
Speaker 1: Which is access. So smart move on their part to
Speaker 1: be like to say, oh no, no, no, no, it'll
Speaker 1: all still be availed, it will all still be public.
Speaker 8: It also, but when you start this is something that
Speaker 8: you know, you know, I talked about years ago, but
Speaker 8: when you start really if you really understand constitutional mandates
Speaker 8: in Western states, you know that almost every Western state
Speaker 8: has a constitutional mandate to manage state lands. So if
Speaker 8: they do go to the states, right, there are constitutional
Speaker 8: mandates that require states to manage for the maximum economic
Speaker 8: return on state lands for the beneficiaries, which are the
Speaker 8: residents of the state. Okay, constitutional mandate. Can't get out
Speaker 8: of it even if you want to. So what's going
Speaker 8: to happen if states to get a hold of the land.
Speaker 8: It isn't that hard to connect the dots. So I
Speaker 8: think Utah understands that they need to try and reframe
Speaker 8: this debate and not they don't want people to understand that, right,
Speaker 8: They don't want people to know that. They don't want
Speaker 8: people to think about it. So let's just talk about
Speaker 8: this in a different way. Let's talk about it as
Speaker 8: like federal government overreach. To talk about it, Let's say
Speaker 8: they're trying to create this constitutional question that doesn't exist really, right,
Speaker 8: So let's like reframe this issue. And I think the
Speaker 8: other thing is like, even if they lose the lawsuit,
Speaker 8: which is very you know, they're very likely going to
Speaker 8: lose the lawsuit or not not get granted original jurisdiction.
Speaker 1: Is that what it's called?
Speaker 6: Or yeah, well, like I said, they're very they're asking
Speaker 6: for the court to accept jurisdiction to hear the case.
Speaker 1: Okay, So if they lose that, what's going to happen though.
Speaker 6: Then they'll file in federal court And this is a
Speaker 6: long time climb the.
Speaker 1: Last but this is a long term play. This isn't
Speaker 1: going away. Like there what it's been going on since
Speaker 1: what was the that's been going on since nineteen seventy six?
Speaker 1: It's going on.
Speaker 8: But I think this, like what I'm saying is like
Speaker 8: over the next several years, I think this is just
Speaker 8: tip of the icebergs.
Speaker 6: I agree.
Speaker 8: I think this is a part of a longer term
Speaker 8: strategy here where they're like, you know, they've got folks,
Speaker 8: you know, they're trying to reframe this debate to make
Speaker 8: this a friendlier political issue for the people in office,
Speaker 8: so that Congress can also try and take some action.
Speaker 8: I don't know what that's going to look like, but
Speaker 8: if I were their political advisor, I'd be like, hey, guys,
Speaker 8: here's what we're going to do. We're going to have
Speaker 8: there are three powers of government here. Let's try and
Speaker 8: go after all.
Speaker 1: Of them and see what sticks.
Speaker 8: Okay, let's talk about Congress, to talk about the courts.
Speaker 8: Let's go after the uh, you know, the presidential obviously
Speaker 8: what we can do there. Let's have a three pronged
Speaker 8: approach and let's see what we can do to really
Speaker 8: stir the pot and rake, you know, and see what happened. So, like,
Speaker 8: I think the pr strategy is a part of a
Speaker 8: much like more involved strategy.
Speaker 1: So if I was bet.
Speaker 8: Money right now, I'd say, even if they lose a lawsuit, like,
Speaker 8: we're gonna keep seeing different things happening. They're gonna they're
Speaker 8: gonna be poking around the edges of the public lands
Speaker 8: system in different ways to see what's gonna see what
Speaker 8: they can get away with.
Speaker 6: Well, and what I'm saying is the lawsuit's gonna be
Speaker 6: out there for years, yes, absolutely, Like it creates. The
Speaker 6: lawsuit is what creates the space for all of that
Speaker 6: other stuff, Like what I said before, creates that uncertainty,
Speaker 6: so makes people maybe willing to agree to things that
Speaker 6: they maybe wouldn't have otherwise agreed to because you have
Speaker 6: somebody like Justice Gorsic for example, whose mother was the
Speaker 6: EPA administrator under the Reagan administration, was a huge part
Speaker 6: of the Sagebrush rebellion. Right, And they're looking at the
Speaker 6: makeup of the Supreme Court and saying, we have a
Speaker 6: puncher's chance.
Speaker 2: If it gets there, right, That's what I was going to.
Speaker 6: That's where the politicos say they have a puncher's may
Speaker 6: have a puncher's chance if it gets there. And so
Speaker 6: that's where the pr comes in as well, to try
Speaker 6: and squeeze out some even if even if the end
Speaker 6: result isn't a transfer or wholesale transfer or sale of
Speaker 6: public lands. It might be overhauling how we manage public lands.
Speaker 2: Sure, And that's like I mean, when I look at
Speaker 2: the lawsuit, I think there's two things that are striking
Speaker 2: to me.
Speaker 3: One is what we talked about earlier, how.
Speaker 2: It's sort of the most explosive approach that they've tried.
Speaker 2: Because if they win, there the you know, the barn
Speaker 2: doors are open, right, Like, it means the federal government
Speaker 2: can't legitimately own land if the court finds in its favor.
Speaker 2: I mean the other thing about it that's striking is
Speaker 2: it's a very narrow question has to do with textualism.
Speaker 2: And if the current composition of the Supreme Court looks
Speaker 2: at the clause about military installations in Washington, DC, Like,
Speaker 2: to me, it's not an open and shut case that
Speaker 2: they're going to toss it out. Admittedly just an amateur
Speaker 2: legal scholar here.
Speaker 10: But.
Speaker 2: You know, like, like what they're they're asking them to
Speaker 2: do is say, hey, look look at the Constitution. It
Speaker 2: doesn't say anything about federal public lands. In fact, the
Speaker 2: Constitution says the federal government can only own these types
Speaker 2: of lands. Ergo, all this stuff needs to go away,
Speaker 2: and I when I think about it, I'm like, I
Speaker 2: don't know, is that so far fetched to think that
Speaker 2: if they do, if the Supreme Court grant certain that
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court is going to throw it out, that
Speaker 2: to me seems like wishful thinking.
Speaker 6: I I think, I don't know, have to like, I
Speaker 6: think it's a legal stretch, right, but it's not.
Speaker 1: Do you mind getting into the plausibility of it?
Speaker 4: Well, okay, I don't think we've introduced the fact that
Speaker 4: that Utah started the lawsuit, and now a bunch of
Speaker 4: other states have jumped onto this, so everybody needs to
Speaker 4: be aware of That's again why we're talking about this. Right,
Speaker 4: there's a bunch of Eastern states and.
Speaker 1: To hell they got what do they have they need
Speaker 1: to do with them?
Speaker 4: I don't understand what what the deal is. But but
Speaker 4: out here in the West, Idaho and Wyoming. Wyoming's kind
Speaker 4: of hilarious to me in a lot of ways because
Speaker 4: you can't even camp on Wyoming state lands and they're like,
Speaker 4: we want our chunky Yellowstone National Park, we want tee Tons,
Speaker 4: we want wilderness areas as state lands.
Speaker 1: Yeah, stuff in there's restrictions on state lands about camping.
Speaker 1: If you want to trap on state lands, you got
Speaker 1: to go try to get some special permit to do it.
Speaker 1: You got to put signs up telling everybody that's what
Speaker 1: you're doing. You imagine, dude.
Speaker 4: And in this state, we have a current plan paid
Speaker 4: for by the taxpayers of Montana that has already analyzed
Speaker 4: state lands for sale that just came out a couple
Speaker 4: months ago.
Speaker 8: So well, the the thing too, that is so again
Speaker 8: back to the constitutional mandates in western states. The other
Speaker 8: thing that's interesting about most state governments is you're not
Speaker 8: allowed to deficit spend, right, So you're not allowed to
Speaker 8: so you have to run. So federal government can deficit
Speaker 8: spend if they want to, states can't. We had a
Speaker 8: real bad fire this year. There's something gets brought up
Speaker 8: a lot, right, So three I think it was like
Speaker 8: three billion dollars were spent of federal dollars fighting wildfires
Speaker 8: this year.
Speaker 4: Oh yeah, fifty million dollar fire is very common.
Speaker 8: Very common, right, So, like if you're a state and
Speaker 8: you have a catastrope wildfire here which you can't forecast
Speaker 8: or foresee, you just have to deal with it when
Speaker 8: it's happening. I'm forecasting right now, I'm gonna write that down,
Speaker 8: Steve take I'll.
Speaker 1: Take that bet. No.
Speaker 8: But like you, you're gonna what are you gonna do.
Speaker 8: You're gonna tax your citizens, raise property taxes, raise sales tax.
Speaker 8: You got to raise revenue. And uh, last time I checked,
Speaker 8: like people weren't wild about their property taxes going up,
Speaker 8: or sales tax or any other tax. So you're gonna
Speaker 8: look around at your assets you can liquidate. First thing
Speaker 8: you're gonna look to is like, what the hell can
Speaker 8: we sell around here? You know, if my house, if
Speaker 8: I was like going broke, I'd start looking around my house.
Speaker 8: I wouldn't sell my kids, but I started looking at
Speaker 8: the furniture, whatever else I had. I would pets pets absolutely,
Speaker 8: but my guns and bosa go last. But like you know,
Speaker 8: you start looking at what you got to sell. And
Speaker 8: if what you have is a bunch of value to
Speaker 8: real estate, like for sure, you're gonna sell it. And
Speaker 8: that's the I mean. And there is a long history
Speaker 8: of every state in this country selling lots of public land.
Speaker 8: You talk has sold more than fifty four percent of
Speaker 8: its state lands, more than half of what it was
Speaker 8: given a statehood.
Speaker 1: So I could really make this strike home. If you're
Speaker 1: one of our many listeners in Texas, I want you
Speaker 1: to ask yourself how much public land access do you
Speaker 1: enjoy in Texas? If you go like geez, that's a
Speaker 1: great question. I don't think I've ever been on much
Speaker 1: public land in Texas. It's because it was sold sold.
Speaker 4: So the Utah deal just because they are pretty tidy numbers,
Speaker 4: they got it right around two billion dollars for the
Speaker 4: state lands that they sold. They did some trading with
Speaker 4: the Feds and got some coal claims and got a
Speaker 4: fifty million dollar check, but it all comes down to
Speaker 4: a little over two billion dollars for their little over
Speaker 4: four million acres of state land that they've already sold,
Speaker 4: which is about five hundred dollars an acre. Now, the
Speaker 4: recreation economy in Utah is about a little somewhere between
Speaker 4: like eight nine billion dollars a year, which is recreating
Speaker 4: on federally managed public ground by and large.
Speaker 5: I don't think.
Speaker 4: Every time I've had this argument in the past with
Speaker 4: folks that really want to make this happen, it is
Speaker 4: akin to having an argument with like an animal rights activist,
Speaker 4: where it comes down to what we because it's ours,
Speaker 4: we should have it real and you're like, you want
Speaker 4: to go down the economic path, let's talk about the
Speaker 4: economic path. You want to go down the management path,
Speaker 4: Let's talk about the management path. There's not a good argument,
Speaker 4: and it always comes down to, well, it's ours because
Speaker 4: we want it, and it's ridiculous, and like we've said before,
Speaker 4: it often you're having that argument with people who think
Speaker 4: they have all these silver bullets about how poorly the
Speaker 4: forests are managed and all the things, but they cannot
Speaker 4: say it properly because they don't go out and use them.
Speaker 4: They're not on the landscape. They are the super removed
Speaker 4: entity making these big decisions, which is oddly enough the
Speaker 4: argument that they use to try to steal all the
Speaker 4: public land, and it's it's happening again and people need
Speaker 4: to plug in. I think a huge issue that we
Speaker 4: have is people don't know how to contextualize six hundred
Speaker 4: and forty million acres. You can't hunt and fish on
Speaker 4: all six hundred and forty million acres of federally managed
Speaker 4: lands because of national parks, parts of refuges. There's infrastructure there,
Speaker 4: there's buildings and bathrooms and all the things. So it's
Speaker 4: not six hundred and forty million acres. We have what
Speaker 4: is at three hundred and fifty nine national parks I
Speaker 4: think of which you can hunt on at least a
Speaker 4: portion of fifty nine of those national parks. But there's
Speaker 4: more privately owned acres in the United States set aside
Speaker 4: for private wildlife enjoyment than in the entire national park system.
Speaker 4: So when we talk about, oh, six hundred and forty
Speaker 4: million acres, that's a lot. Think about the national parks
Speaker 4: right now, think about western national parks where there's reservation
Speaker 4: systems and overcrowding, and then think about just removing a
Speaker 4: handful of those.
Speaker 1: Well yeah, but I mean it's not to contradict that,
Speaker 1: but you could be like, well, how many kids. There's
Speaker 1: one hundred million kids in the US. Who cares about
Speaker 1: twenty of them? Like, well, the parents of those twenty
Speaker 1: So it's like it doesn't need to be you know,
Speaker 1: when people start losing access to the place that where
Speaker 1: they hunt and fish and their grandpa hunting fish and
Speaker 1: they're you know, generation hunting fish, that part matters to them,
Speaker 1: and that part is going to inevitably get rolled up
Speaker 1: into this stuff.
Speaker 4: And it and it is inevitably going to be worth
Speaker 4: more and more and more and more. And you know,
Speaker 4: Teddy Roosevelt knew that he saw all the things that
Speaker 4: we see today just at an earlier time, and he
Speaker 4: said over and over again, we are not managing these
Speaker 4: lands for us. We're managing these lands for the generations
Speaker 4: to come, and we need to make sure that the
Speaker 4: things that we enjoy today are here for those generations.
Speaker 4: And in large part it was because if people don't
Speaker 4: get to see them, get some understanding, then they will
Speaker 4: be sold off. And I think all of us need
Speaker 4: to figure out. And you know, when Trump was running
Speaker 4: for office the first time, we have them on record
Speaker 4: twice with different hunting publications because just like this election.
Speaker 1: I sat in the room listen to him say it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so I'm not he said, quote, I'm not going to
Speaker 1: sell off your public lands.
Speaker 5: Yes, yep.
Speaker 1: Twenty fifteen, Las Vegas, Nevada. Yeah, man, nope, January twenty
Speaker 1: sixteen and January twenty sixteen is Las Vegas.
Speaker 4: It's because the sportsman's vote was important then, it's important
Speaker 4: right now. But man, these groups are funded really well
Speaker 4: and they can take this public lands message that was
Speaker 4: very very effective back then and twist it right now
Speaker 4: to where people say the thing. But in Utah they're like, yes,
Speaker 4: we got them, because what we're talking about is state
Speaker 4: management of those lands and sell the sale of a
Speaker 4: lot of those lands. And again five hundred dollars an
Speaker 4: acre for the millions of acres that they've already sold. Like,
Speaker 4: if you can get five hundred dollars an acre for anything,
Speaker 4: you buy it right now.
Speaker 1: I was gonna say it, Can I buy a bunch of.
Speaker 6: You might be able to actually just hold on, Well.
Speaker 1: There's there's something I need to do here, because when
Speaker 1: I hear about the loss of public access, however it happens, Okay,
Speaker 1: I have like like an emotional, visceral reaction where I
Speaker 1: do not want to see my my, my hunting and
Speaker 1: fishing brethren lose access to the places they like to
Speaker 1: hunt fish. Guy. But I also don't want to be
Speaker 1: hyperbolic here, so I want to like nail narrow in
Speaker 1: on focus on a point we've been raising as a
Speaker 1: sort of hypothetical and why And I'm trying to ask
Speaker 1: you this to you, Dave. I'm trying to ask you like,
Speaker 1: is this is this question about BLM land somehow being
Speaker 1: different if if I was sitting here talking to the
Speaker 1: architect of this suit. Would would that individual and we're
Speaker 1: not so, I'm just holding you to the fire here.
Speaker 1: Would that individual say, no, this would not extend to
Speaker 1: national forest This would not extend to Indian reservations, This
Speaker 1: would not extend to refuges, this would not extend to
Speaker 1: national parks. Because there's something distinct about BLM, right, would
Speaker 1: they tell me that? Or is it really that if
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court says the BLM can't exist, like they
Speaker 1: can't hold land, is it really logical that someone would
Speaker 1: then say, Okay, I'll see you next Monday because we're
Speaker 1: going to talk about national forest land.
Speaker 6: Yeah, let me unpack that just a little bit. I
Speaker 6: don't believe it's hyperbolic. Okay, I'm not a guy that
Speaker 6: does a lot of hyperbole.
Speaker 1: No, that's my problem with you.
Speaker 6: I know you need more of it from me. I
Speaker 6: tend to be a practicate.
Speaker 1: Let's get the who's the one guy, the real measured
Speaker 1: guy who tries to be real fair all the time,
Speaker 1: really solid information, but hot takes of David It depends.
Speaker 6: But this is why I say this. I'm not a
Speaker 6: guy that's usually very hyperbolic. I'm mentally flipping you off
Speaker 6: right now, but I'm not very hyperbolic. But I look
Speaker 6: at this and say, one, yes, they would absolutely come
Speaker 6: in here and say this only applies to the eighteen
Speaker 6: and a half million acres they apply to in their
Speaker 6: own complaint. They say it only applies to these because
Speaker 6: they're these unappropriated lands. And they say these other lands
Speaker 6: have been appropriated through acts of Congress, so we're not
Speaker 6: asking for those. So they'd tell you that. I'm telling
Speaker 6: you when I read that, if it's unconstitutional to own
Speaker 6: lands in perpetuity that aren't specifically enumerated in the Constitution,
Speaker 6: then that would mean it's that Congress can't come in
Speaker 6: and pass a law that says we're going to create
Speaker 6: a national park and all of a sudden, it's constitutional
Speaker 6: to own that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the same way they couldn't tomorrow without doing a
Speaker 1: constitutional amendment. They couldn't vote to ban certain constitutional rights,
Speaker 1: right like if the Democrats took control of the House
Speaker 1: and Senate presidency, they couldn't say it's illegal to own
Speaker 1: a gun. Right. It's a the hold of the battle right, right.
Speaker 6: So I'm looking at and saying public lands, all of
Speaker 6: them are at risk with this lawsuit, regardless of what
Speaker 6: UTAH tells you, what their lawyers might tell you, and
Speaker 6: regardless of what they wrote in their complaint, regardless what
Speaker 6: their PR campaign says. And I come out at this
Speaker 6: and I say, and this is to build off with
Speaker 6: something Brad said earlier as well. They're running this PR
Speaker 6: campaign that's saying your land's not going anywhere, We're just
Speaker 6: going to manage it, and you're going to have all
Speaker 6: this access. But if you actually read the complaint that
Speaker 6: they filed with the Supreme Court, you and you look
Speaker 6: into what they alleged, the harm is, what's the harm
Speaker 6: they're suffering?
Speaker 1: White economic?
Speaker 6: Yeah, but what is the economic harm that The things
Speaker 6: they raise are we can't tax that land and we
Speaker 6: can't use eminent domain on that land to move transmission
Speaker 6: lines or roads or other infrastructure because it's federally owned.
Speaker 6: And my retort to that is, well, if it were
Speaker 6: transferred to you, you wouldn't be able to tax. You're
Speaker 6: not going to tax yourself, and you wouldn't need to
Speaker 6: use eminent domain. You wouldn't need to use eminent domain
Speaker 6: to run transmission lines across state land. You'd just do it.
Speaker 6: The only reason you'd need those authorities if you're as
Speaker 6: if you're intent in the end is to sell it.
Speaker 6: And just because you have an administration right now and
Speaker 6: a law in place in Utah right now that says
Speaker 6: we're not going to sell it and here's how we're
Speaker 6: going to manage it, doesn't mean that this transfer happens
Speaker 6: and a new administration comes in or the politics in
Speaker 6: Utah change and they just change the law, the state
Speaker 6: statute and then say it's it's the priority of us
Speaker 6: to make as much money off of this land as possible,
Speaker 6: and we're going to turn around sell it.
Speaker 1: This gets to the thing about when you're talking about
Speaker 1: something that you're not actually talking about, and it's got
Speaker 1: I think that like anyone, it's being intellectually honest. And
Speaker 1: if we had someone in who's the architect of this lawsuit,
Speaker 1: if they were being intellectually honest, they would have to
Speaker 1: admit that this is about divestiture and sale and development.
Speaker 6: Even one of the other. So there were amicus briefs
Speaker 6: filed right Thirteen additional states, through either their attorney general, governor,
Speaker 6: or legislature, filed amicus in support of Utah, saying take
Speaker 6: the case. In one of them, there was a footnote
Speaker 6: in one of the briefs, did it. I'll just paraphrase, paraphrase.
Speaker 6: We think we want national parks too, right right, Yeah,
Speaker 6: that's right. The legislature, legislature what.
Speaker 1: A gold mine?
Speaker 12: Man?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, to hit yellow if wildly picked up Yellowstone, dude,
Speaker 1: because think about you could do, like if you did
Speaker 1: condo stuff and you did one hundred year leases even
Speaker 1: on condos, I mean you could develop gold. You could
Speaker 1: develop Yellstone National Park and just make gold literally because
Speaker 1: you could mine a lot of minerals do big developments
Speaker 1: put in ski hills. But the side imagine if you
Speaker 1: could buy your own hot spring and ship the other
Speaker 1: a gold mine.
Speaker 2: The crazy thing too, is i'd want it to want
Speaker 2: if the state of Wyoming had to manage Yellowstone tomorrow,
Speaker 2: like body for body, dollar for dollar.
Speaker 3: What the federal government does. I mean it's a double
Speaker 3: state government.
Speaker 13: If you went and.
Speaker 1: Found whatever Hosers ran Big Sky, okay, whatever people originally
Speaker 1: put Big Sky together and like did a bunch of
Speaker 1: land swaps, got this hill, Yellowstone Club, all this bullshit, right,
Speaker 1: golf courses all over the place. If you wouldn't got
Speaker 1: that crew and you said, listen, man, we just got
Speaker 1: possession of Yellowstone National Park. What do you boys have
Speaker 1: in mind? They're gonna come up with a plant. They're
Speaker 1: gonna come up with a plant everywhere hotwater as you
Speaker 1: imagine the water slide to get on the water slide
Speaker 1: with their kid. They're not the whole line as they
Speaker 1: climb that ladder. They're not being like, oh, it's gonna
Speaker 1: be so cold. I know that feeling you get up
Speaker 1: there and it's hot water, come down to slide, you know.
Speaker 6: On the plus side, I might My dream trip has
Speaker 6: always been to backpack into or horsepack into the Thoroughfare
Speaker 6: and then pack craft Thoroughfare Creek down into Yellowstone Lake.
Speaker 6: But that's illegal because you can't be on have a
Speaker 6: floatated floatating floatation device sorry, a raft or anything like
Speaker 6: that on rivers or streams in Yellowstone. So maybe if
Speaker 6: the state took it over, I could actually fulfill my dream.
Speaker 2: Yeah, first supporting this argument.
Speaker 1: But it's a gold mine. It's a gold mine. Yeah yeah,
Speaker 1: what are you gonna be able to haunt it for
Speaker 1: a minute?
Speaker 4: Well, I mean that's one of the things that kills
Speaker 4: me right now, man, I feel like it's uh, somebody's
Speaker 4: like trying to sell you a car and you're like, well,
Speaker 4: what about the warranty?
Speaker 5: Oh, don't worry about that, there will be one.
Speaker 7: Yeah yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: You're like, okay, well the manager's drawing it up in
Speaker 2: the back right now.
Speaker 4: How are the the are the tires in good shape?
Speaker 9: Oh?
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's got tires. Okay, Well what kind of gas mileage?
Speaker 4: Oh we'll get to that.
Speaker 5: Yeah, you know, and you're like, so you sure is good?
Speaker 6: Right?
Speaker 9: Yeah?
Speaker 5: Should I be buying this car?
Speaker 4: And because it's not a who manages it best argument,
Speaker 4: it's not a I mean, all it is again is
Speaker 4: just coming down to we want it because we want it,
Speaker 4: and we're gonna make a bunch of money off of it.
Speaker 4: I mean that's all there is to it. And you know,
Speaker 4: it was hard to talk about this stuff during the
Speaker 4: election cycle because people were so charged up and they're like,
Speaker 4: oh god, if you're voting for public lands, you can't
Speaker 4: have your Second Amendment rights, or you're voting for transvestites,
Speaker 4: or you're voting for this, and you know, and it's
Speaker 4: like no, no, no, no no. If you stop and think
Speaker 4: about it, right now, you have your guns and you
Speaker 4: have public lands and access to them.
Speaker 5: All good.
Speaker 1: How did that happen?
Speaker 5: How did that happen?
Speaker 4: It's because we demanded to have it right, and that's
Speaker 4: exactly what we need to keep doing. And unfortunately, like
Speaker 4: I swear to God, every ten years, we need to
Speaker 4: re educate everybody and say no, no, no, no, you have
Speaker 4: got to stand up and make a big stink of
Speaker 4: about this. It is absolutely not a real thing that
Speaker 4: you have to give up rights over here in order
Speaker 4: to have access to public ground. I mean, if you
Speaker 4: guys remember the Monuments rescinding fight and all the jack
Speaker 4: wagons coming out. I think it was like Sean Hannity, right,
Speaker 4: was like monuments in Utah you can't physically touch them.
Speaker 5: Right, And people were like, you can't even walk on
Speaker 5: them there. It is Sean Hannity, where the hell he lives?
Speaker 5: And people in Utah and god knows what. Right they're like,
Speaker 5: You're like, what are you talking about?
Speaker 1: Get his loafers, get his loafers all dirty?
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, I mean, it's just it's so bizarre. It's
Speaker 4: like we just had this great talk with Field and
Speaker 4: Stream Australia just like kind of akin to like a
Speaker 4: Delta Water Fowler Ducks Unlimited Group and talking with those guys,
Speaker 4: it's like a dystopian future of what the US could
Speaker 4: be where there's there's protesters out in the marsh stealing
Speaker 4: your ducks before they hit the water, trying to flare birds,
Speaker 4: and you know, really aggressive gun laws and and they
Speaker 4: have this whole experience that we could learn a lot from.
Speaker 4: And for years they've been telling folks and they were very,
Speaker 4: very interested in the Banning Mountain lion fight, and they're
Speaker 4: interested in this public lands argument that's coming up again
Speaker 4: because they're like, well, boy, once the hunters went away,
Speaker 4: there was nobody telling people that marsh was of value.
Speaker 4: And now that marsh is egg land. And so now
Speaker 4: that we've actually gotten better regulations for duck hunters, and
Speaker 4: now it's not a future in question for at least
Speaker 4: the next couple of years. There's no duck hunters coming
Speaker 4: back because the marsh is gone in this part of Victoria.
Speaker 4: And you know, it's like firearm possession has gone way
Speaker 4: way down because people are like, well, why do I
Speaker 4: need firearms when people were out there harassing me when
Speaker 4: I tried to go hunt. Like the it's all out
Speaker 4: there and it's a it's an amazing, horrifying tale. But
Speaker 4: it's like when you see this stuff, you see the
Speaker 4: Mountain lion bands, you see this argument that like people
Speaker 4: will literally email me and be like, you just don't
Speaker 4: even have a clue of how many public acres there are.
Speaker 4: That's the issue. I'm like, no, I do, I do?
Speaker 4: And it's not that much like do the math in
Speaker 4: the United States, Like we're hanging on to a very
Speaker 4: small amount.
Speaker 8: What do you think would happen? Something I've been thinking
Speaker 8: about this is like if one of the one of
Speaker 8: the things we all hear a lot about is like
Speaker 8: just hunter crowding, right, too many people in the field
Speaker 8: or you know, people get frustrated by it everywhere you go,
Speaker 8: and I'm talking about West in the West in particular.
Speaker 8: But the reason, part of the reason that there are
Speaker 8: so many people hunting is because well a people want
Speaker 8: to do it, and there's a lot of tags available
Speaker 8: in a lot of Western states. What do you think
Speaker 8: would happen with just out of tags available, like opportunity
Speaker 8: to hunt? Let's talk like forget access, right, what do
Speaker 8: you think would happen with like tag availability?
Speaker 1: I'm asking an honest question, because I don't know what
Speaker 1: the implications would be.
Speaker 4: Well, like if if the tags become unlimited and good
Speaker 4: luck finding access, that's what I'm saying.
Speaker 6: Wanting to get more fragmentation and development and animal numbers
Speaker 6: drop and tags drop.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 8: I just think about what is the potential opportunity laws
Speaker 8: for hunting in an already like finite environment where people
Speaker 8: are frustrated, Like, what.
Speaker 1: Is that going to look like under this scenario?
Speaker 6: Can I also point out one legal piece that we
Speaker 6: haven't talked about. We've made some assumptions here. We're talking
Speaker 6: as if the result of this would be that land
Speaker 6: would be transferred to Utah and then they would sell it,
Speaker 6: because that's what they've asked for, and we presume that
Speaker 6: the court would give them what they ask for. That
Speaker 6: in their complaint they say dispose of lands in accordance
Speaker 6: with state law. And I frequently have to remind people
Speaker 6: that the federal courts are applying federal law and the
Speaker 6: United States Constitution, and that if they side with Utah,
Speaker 6: they actually would have to dispose of the lands in
Speaker 6: accordance with federal law, not state law, and that could
Speaker 6: mean it's the federal government selling the lands, and Utah
Speaker 6: may not be the high bidder. Like right now, the
Speaker 6: process that's laid out in flipma is for for sell
Speaker 6: of lands is you have a bidding process and you
Speaker 6: have to you have to sell them for the fair
Speaker 6: market value of the land. But there's a bidding process.
Speaker 6: Maybe they're not the high bidder. Maybe we wind up
Speaker 6: having to go to the Elon musk Arches Park. I mean,
Speaker 6: it's like there's that's a piece that we're the architects like.
Speaker 2: Dad, Yeah, I mean, because the state of Utah is
Speaker 2: not entitled to those lands legally.
Speaker 6: They they're trying to make the argument that they are,
Speaker 6: but they in their own constitution as a condition of statehood,
Speaker 6: which every Western state and like I have a spreadsheet
Speaker 6: of all the states with this, almost every state as
Speaker 6: a condition of statehood, had to give up all claims
Speaker 6: to and it actually they used the term unappropriated lands
Speaker 6: in these constitutional provisions, but unappropriated lands at the time
Speaker 6: meant non privately held lands. So they had to give
Speaker 6: up claims to those as a condition of admission to
Speaker 6: the Union. So they know they don't have a legal
Speaker 6: claim that they forever gave up their legal claim to
Speaker 6: those lands. They're trying to say, there's this constitutional loophole.
Speaker 6: I guess, like you know, we've always interpreted this constitution
Speaker 6: wrong in it and and so the lands the federal
Speaker 6: government can't own them, and so by default they should
Speaker 6: come to us.
Speaker 4: And that's why they give up from Australia owns southern Utah.
Speaker 6: And that's the risk I've had. I had somebody right
Speaker 6: to me recently and said, you know, one of the
Speaker 6: big risks with this case is just that you have
Speaker 6: a lot of people that are concerned about foreign governments
Speaker 6: buying up land in the United States. And what's going
Speaker 6: to happen if Utah wins this and they and the
Speaker 6: result isn't the transfer of the land to the state.
Speaker 6: The result is the federal government has to sell those lands.
Speaker 6: Who's going to buy them and it could be foreign governments.
Speaker 6: We don't know who's going to buy them. Maybe Utah
Speaker 6: buys it, maybe California buys all this land.
Speaker 1: And I want to I just want to undo all
Speaker 1: of the stuff I just did.
Speaker 11: There's a hot take for you, right, yeah, right, they
Speaker 11: just buy I don't think that the if I can
Speaker 11: speculate about what success looks like for these guys.
Speaker 1: I don't think they care.
Speaker 8: If I mean, it would be great if you're a
Speaker 8: state of you're the guys in the state of Utah,
Speaker 8: You're like ideal scenario, best case scenario.
Speaker 1: We get the land, get to sell it and make
Speaker 1: some money. Right, We're happy. But if they I don't
Speaker 1: think they really care. I think they would enter it. It
Speaker 1: would enter into general it would generate the kind of
Speaker 1: economic activity they're looking for philosophical right now. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: that they agree.
Speaker 8: With philosophically, which is like there's a philosophical problem they
Speaker 8: seem to have with the idea of public land when
Speaker 8: you come down to the intentiment.
Speaker 1: So like like if a bunch of big sky guys
Speaker 1: had it, they'd.
Speaker 6: Be glad, they be happy to tax it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, if the Chinese government bought it, like, I don't
Speaker 1: know if they'd be happy or Cal bring up a
Speaker 1: really good point. I'm going to verge into ground. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna verge very briefly into territory that I don't like
Speaker 1: to on this podcast. But but Cal made a point
Speaker 1: about talking about this after the election, like I'm speaking
Speaker 1: very I'm not speaking for anybody in the room with me,
Speaker 1: but I'm speaking very personally. After the election, there was
Speaker 1: so many areas I was happy about, Like, uh, I
Speaker 1: was very happy about border security. I was very happy
Speaker 1: about crime. I was very happy about free speech issues.
Speaker 1: I could go on and on and on of stuff
Speaker 1: I was elated about. But part of my head was like,
Speaker 1: you know what, though, this ain't gonna be good for
Speaker 1: public land. And I think that voters and like Americans
Speaker 1: voters whoever, have to realize no political party is ever
Speaker 1: gonna do everything you wish it did. You will always
Speaker 1: make a compromise. And if anyone thinks deep, when a
Speaker 1: political party gets together and to have a convention and
Speaker 1: they lay out there like the planks in their platform,
Speaker 1: you will never find representation of all of your ideals
Speaker 1: and all of your dreams within two political parties in
Speaker 1: this country that they decide the agenda. It's never gonna
Speaker 1: be that they all line up. And you do not
Speaker 1: need to sit and think that I have to support
Speaker 1: everything that party says.
Speaker 2: Apparently you haven't read the eighteen thirty six Wig party platform.
Speaker 1: You like gives me warm fuzzies, you joke, Jo, let's
Speaker 1: trying to do an impassioned speech ruined it. Great joke
Speaker 1: though you like you have to like you just look
Speaker 1: and admit no party will represent all represent all of
Speaker 1: your interests. So if you get the party you want,
Speaker 1: there's still work after the fact to go like, Okay,
Speaker 1: now I need to make micro adjustments, like I got
Speaker 1: who I want, Like you know, I have who I
Speaker 1: want in the White House, I have who I want
Speaker 1: and Senate whatever. But these people that I support, I'm
Speaker 1: talking about whoever's out there, these people I support, have
Speaker 1: to ease off this issue because this is not representing me,
Speaker 1: it's not representing other constituent members. And remember we went
Speaker 1: through this, We went through this ten years ago. I
Speaker 1: remember all these surveys of what percent of hunters in
Speaker 1: Utah hunt on public land? What percent of Montana's on
Speaker 1: public land? What percent of people in Wyoming hunt on
Speaker 1: public land? Well it being like like sixty eight percent
Speaker 1: of hunters or something like that. Like in this day,
Speaker 1: I think it was like sixty eight or seventy percent
Speaker 1: of hunters hunt on public land. And hunters, like you know,
Speaker 1: this is not a this is not like a rule,
Speaker 1: but it's generally true. Hunters have generally Hunters generally vote Republican. Uh,
Speaker 1: we need to convince them to not go down this path.
Speaker 6: I don't think the Hunters need convincing.
Speaker 1: No, no, no, right, yeah, hunters need to say, like, listen, man,
Speaker 1: I got you, border security, I'm with you, the whole
Speaker 1: list of things. I'm with you, But listen to this
Speaker 1: public lands thing. This is not for us.
Speaker 6: It shouldn't be a political issue at all, and everything political. Well,
Speaker 6: but the polling data suggests it's really not for public lands.
Speaker 6: Like support of public lands is. It's like nonpartisans. That's
Speaker 6: why everybody supports it.
Speaker 1: That's why it's become a word. It's it's a little
Speaker 1: bit years ago, we went to Rob Bishop's office in Utah,
Speaker 1: had a conversation on this podcast with Rob Bishop and
Speaker 1: and uh, very respectful he was. He was great. Okay,
Speaker 1: it was very respectful conversation about some things we don't
Speaker 1: agree on. I would do it again with his with
Speaker 1: his current counterpart.
Speaker 13: Uh.
Speaker 1: And it was funny because everyone likes the word access, right,
Speaker 1: we sort of agreed like we like we like just
Speaker 1: just like conservation, Like what hell does that mean?
Speaker 6: You know?
Speaker 1: Everybody's like, are you for a conservation?
Speaker 6: No?
Speaker 1: No politician in Americas to say no, I hate conservation.
Speaker 1: Everybody's like, yeah, because I know what I mean when
Speaker 1: I say it, And then it's not what you mean
Speaker 1: when you say it, But when I say it, I
Speaker 1: know what I mean. And Rob Bishop kept on about access, access, access,
Speaker 1: and you think he means like increasing like that there'd
Speaker 1: be more land for the public to use. What he
Speaker 1: means is basically, yeah, access for semi trucks, yeah, or
Speaker 1: whatever I put words about. But you know, like when
Speaker 1: he says like, everyone's like, I'm pro access, Oh me too,
Speaker 1: me too? What kind of access in particular? Here's what
Speaker 1: I'm about. What are you talking about? I mean like
Speaker 1: that you can drive your truck more places. Everyone likes access, right.
Speaker 4: I think I think he used recreational vehicles, like like
Speaker 4: if you can't drive that up there and hook it up, yep,
Speaker 4: that's not access to me.
Speaker 1: So you get these words that get squishy, and I
Speaker 1: think it's like after that big public land shootout from
Speaker 1: ten years ago, most politicians are like, man, okay, there's
Speaker 1: one lesson I learned here. Do not get labeled an
Speaker 1: anti public lands person. So it hasn't changed what you're after.
Speaker 1: But you're like, Okay, so from now on rhetorically, I
Speaker 1: have to be more careful. Yeah, and I have to
Speaker 1: say this is for public lands, meaning for me, I'm
Speaker 1: pro public lands for me, right, And people were like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: he's pro public plans, he said, So it's like he
Speaker 1: wants some too.
Speaker 2: I think to your earlier point about like the election
Speaker 2: is not it doesn't end there, right, Like this is
Speaker 2: where conservation groups especially are very effective because like they're
Speaker 2: they're getting ready to work with the new administration, and
Speaker 2: like there's there's multiple ways that you can apply pressure
Speaker 2: to decision makers, and there's one way like in the
Speaker 2: last big cycle, I mean there's this huge public outcry, right,
Speaker 2: and like you saw rallies and you saw people taking
Speaker 2: their shots at Jason Chafitz. But I think too, like
Speaker 2: this is where the rubber meets the road in terms
Speaker 2: of like having policy groups lean in and have conversations
Speaker 2: with with decision makers and try to get them to
Speaker 2: see all the different sides of the issue.
Speaker 3: So yeah, it's like you can't ever.
Speaker 2: Sort of step back from the policy making process for
Speaker 2: four years as a as an engaged hunter or angler, right,
Speaker 2: you got to support the groups that are working on
Speaker 2: your behalf. You got to talk to your lawmakers when
Speaker 2: you have a chance, because like we're all sort of
Speaker 2: enjoying the uh no more marketing calls from campaign offices.
Speaker 3: My mailbox hasn't seen a flyer in days. It's fantastic.
Speaker 2: Just bills and and uh, you know, bills. Yeah yeah,
Speaker 2: but like like it, we're just now getting started on
Speaker 2: this stuff, you know, like in terms of as a country,
Speaker 2: like this is the road is way far ahead of us.
Speaker 3: Even though we feel like we can kind of.
Speaker 2: Get a break from politics as we've been seeing it
Speaker 2: on our TVs for the past year.
Speaker 1: I read all through the campaign, like I read voraciously, Like, uh,
Speaker 1: I follow it as an American, I follow someone's just
Speaker 1: like I'm just interested in politics. Maybe I missed it.
Speaker 1: I don't think that this issue came up.
Speaker 6: It came up in a way tell me housing, yeah.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and that's how the Montana deal ends.
Speaker 6: Yeah, So it came up in the context of we
Speaker 6: need more housing in this country, and it actually came
Speaker 6: up in one of the I think it was in
Speaker 6: the presidential debate even of uh, there are all these
Speaker 6: public lands out there that and I can't remember the
Speaker 6: exact way it was phrased it, but it was like
Speaker 6: they're not being used for anything right now. We we
Speaker 6: should be using them to address the nation's housing crisis.
Speaker 6: And you can see in Utah places maybe like the
Speaker 6: Wahsatche Front where there's a lot of overcrowding starting to occur.
Speaker 6: You could in the Las Vegas area is another great
Speaker 6: example where you're going to see pushes for using public
Speaker 6: lands and it could be bipartisan for housing. Yeah, and
Speaker 6: we have to have a serious conversation about places.
Speaker 1: Democrats thousands of tiny homes. If the Republicans win, it
Speaker 1: will be eight really big homes.
Speaker 4: But you know, the FEDS worked with the state of
Speaker 4: Nevada and they they did give up some BLM land
Speaker 4: there in Vegas.
Speaker 6: So it's not like there's a process.
Speaker 2: There is.
Speaker 5: There is a process, right.
Speaker 8: It does happen occasionally, and you know that's something that frankly,
Speaker 8: this is what Congress exists for. I mean, there have
Speaker 8: been plenty of to your point Nevada bills that protected
Speaker 8: public land and gave land specifically to be sold for
Speaker 8: development around Vegas.
Speaker 1: I don't think many.
Speaker 8: I don't know if you guys remember Harry Reid Yeah,
Speaker 8: Harry Reid back when he was in charge of Center,
Speaker 8: like he was the he was the unofficial king of
Speaker 8: doing these these big land deals.
Speaker 1: So point is like there's a process.
Speaker 8: If there are legitimate issues like housing crisis or whatever, like,
Speaker 8: there are ways you can go about addressing those issues
Speaker 8: in a reasonable way. I just want to say one
Speaker 8: thing you said, see, which I think is really important.
Speaker 8: I think too often people assume that whoever they support
Speaker 8: politically is like they're going to represent my one hundred
Speaker 8: percent of what I believe one hundred percent of the time,
Speaker 8: and I can just check out after I voted. And
Speaker 8: I think people, especially on this issue, like if you
Speaker 8: hunt and fish, if you like to ride dirt bikes,
Speaker 8: whatever you like to do in public land, park, your
Speaker 8: a TV or your RV or whatever, like, you really
Speaker 8: do need to pay attention to this issue because it's
Speaker 8: not going away. And like I said, I think one
Speaker 8: of the really annoying things to me is when I
Speaker 8: look at the people that are behind this, I've never
Speaker 8: seen one of them holding the gun out on public land.
Speaker 1: Maybe they do, Like remember that photo Jason Chase looking
Speaker 1: with a Wiener dog.
Speaker 8: You know what I mean, it's like, I don't think
Speaker 8: they don't do the things that we do. They don't understand,
Speaker 8: and so like help them understand. It's an opportunity. They
Speaker 8: may not want to understand, but make them understand.
Speaker 1: That's our job. That's your job. They work for us.
Speaker 1: When you're when you're if you're sitting at home thinking like,
Speaker 1: how could I ever, you know, go again, or how
Speaker 1: could I ever like go against some aspect of the
Speaker 1: political party I involved in. Ask yourself this when you
Speaker 1: read about when the campaign's going on, and you read
Speaker 1: about those million dollar a plate dinners, every one of
Speaker 1: those people going to those dinners is saying when they
Speaker 1: get their chance, they're saying, we could really use some help,
Speaker 1: every one of them. It's a caveat, it's conditional. One thing,
Speaker 1: I could really use some help. I remember I went
Speaker 1: to a dinner one time and I'll sit next. I
Speaker 1: had dinner and I'll sit with a senator from Wyoming,
Speaker 1: and he was being he was being awarded a prize
Speaker 1: for having really done this kind of like very like
Speaker 1: esoteric sort of legal maneuver which helped the bison meat industry, Okay,
Speaker 1: And they were honoring him at the dinner because he had.
Speaker 1: They had this like economic annoying. They had this annoyance,
Speaker 1: this sort of like regulatory annoyance, and they were thanking
Speaker 1: him for the help on this regulatory annoyance. He didn't
Speaker 1: campaign on that you might not even be aware of.
Speaker 1: But people come and say, I love you, man, I
Speaker 1: love you. Here's some money. I could really use some
Speaker 1: help on whatever. There's nothing wrong with going to your
Speaker 1: party that you voted for. It represents you voted for us,
Speaker 1: says ma'am. Most of everything you're talking about is great.
Speaker 6: Man.
Speaker 1: We could really use some help on this public lands
Speaker 1: issue because we hunt that ship.
Speaker 4: Oh absolutely, you can go to the vote party that
Speaker 4: you didn't vote for too. You know, hey, I gotta
Speaker 4: be honest. I didn't vote for you on this. Here's
Speaker 4: part of what you do that that I do agree with.
Speaker 4: Get on board with this, and you know, you might
Speaker 4: have my vote in four years or whenever that turns up. Like,
Speaker 4: there's nothing that says you have to vote for the
Speaker 4: person to go visit their office. There's no prerection.
Speaker 6: Money doesn't. You don't have to donate either. Now I
Speaker 6: want to make sure like money.
Speaker 1: Maybe I'm just trying to help people understand that that's
Speaker 1: what those conversations are. Those conversations aren't do everything you're doing.
Speaker 1: It's like they're all that, but also this, hey.
Speaker 3: Tell me about where you grew up.
Speaker 6: But I wanted to say, like I I worked for
Speaker 6: a governor, former governor, right, and hearing from people, particularly
Speaker 6: in state. I mean, we took calls from people out
Speaker 6: of state, but it really mattered when people called from
Speaker 6: in state and had an issue that they really cared about.
Speaker 6: It mattered to the governor, it mattered to us as
Speaker 6: his staff. It could have been one person calling in
Speaker 6: and they might raise an issue that we hadn't even
Speaker 6: thought about. That's a great point where we'll get on that. Right.
Speaker 6: It's but when you start hearing from a lot of people,
Speaker 6: when it's this tidle wave coming at you of people
Speaker 6: like it, particularly in these Western states, where it's a
Speaker 6: tidal wave of hunters coming at you saying you know, here,
Speaker 6: here's what we want to see. They take it really,
Speaker 6: really seriously. You don't have to be a big donor.
Speaker 6: You don't have heck, you don't have to safe you
Speaker 6: voted or not.
Speaker 1: I think it helps to be a big donor.
Speaker 5: You keep saying that.
Speaker 6: I'm telling you from my position is I maybe it
Speaker 6: maybe it did behind it and I didn't know about it,
Speaker 6: but it mattered. Anybody that called it mattered. And I
Speaker 6: guess my point is, you know people out listening and whatnot,
Speaker 6: right like picking up the phone and calling your governor's
Speaker 6: office or calling your congressional delegation.
Speaker 3: That matters.
Speaker 6: You can build relationships there, you can get information there,
Speaker 6: and it can make it really can make a difference.
Speaker 4: When it's it's an easy thing to do Cal.
Speaker 1: That's first thing Cal does every morning when he wakes up.
Speaker 1: Let's you know, it's very good about letting Hell representatives know.
Speaker 1: It's great.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: When I brought up like it was like how much
Speaker 1: it was or was not a big campaign issue the
Speaker 1: presidential election, I was kind of getting at this idea
Speaker 1: that this might still be regarded as with the incoming administration,
Speaker 1: new new Senate House, this still might be you know,
Speaker 1: this could be regarded as a fringe issue, right, Like
Speaker 1: it could be that the jury still out on this.
Speaker 1: Like if you went to the Trump administration said love
Speaker 1: everything you're doing, but chill out about the border. You're
Speaker 1: not gonna get anywhere, right, like that's that's that stone
Speaker 1: is that's been cast, right? That was a run on
Speaker 1: the issue of of like, hey, you came out against
Speaker 1: this in twenty fifteen, you like verbalized opposition to divestiture
Speaker 1: of public lands in twenty fifteen. How much ever, you know,
Speaker 1: like you knew enough to bring it up. You guys
Speaker 1: didn't do a bunch around that, and like, we would
Speaker 1: really appreciate not having to go down this path again
Speaker 1: of talking about fewer acres of hunting and fish on.
Speaker 6: Do you remember the Return Act? Yeah, that you know,
Speaker 6: the act that was introduced what a couple of years
Speaker 6: ago now that would have gutted Pittman Robertson and all
Speaker 6: the money that goes into state wildlife agencies, and how
Speaker 6: hunters went apoplectic over that and because of that, and
Speaker 6: they flooded offices of sponsors of that and co sponsors
Speaker 6: of that bill dropped off before the phone was hung up.
Speaker 6: They're like, oh, man, I did not realize what I
Speaker 6: signed up for. Get me off of this thing. I
Speaker 6: think this has to turn into that. Like I view
Speaker 6: this as one of those you know, the hunting community
Speaker 6: view the Pittman Robertson Act is one of the like
Speaker 6: it's the most one of the most fundamental tenants to
Speaker 6: support the North American model is having the resources to
Speaker 6: do it right and not having money diverted to other purposes.
Speaker 6: It has to be the same thing in my mind
Speaker 6: for public lands. Like the hunters and anglers have to
Speaker 6: go apoplectic over this. So it's something that politicians just
Speaker 6: don't want to touch. Right now, you have thirteen, well
Speaker 6: fourteen states counting Utah, you have fourteen states that have
Speaker 6: said we think the court should take a look at this.
Speaker 6: That's making it more mainstream than I want to see
Speaker 6: it absolutely right, And so I kind of analysis make
Speaker 6: the analogy of like this should be like that return act,
Speaker 6: like this, this is so fundamental to who we are
Speaker 6: as a country and what we do and and you know,
Speaker 6: our livelihoods and and personal endeavors and so forth. Yeah,
Speaker 6: like it's that important that it should be taken that seriously.
Speaker 6: It shouldn't be allowed to get legs. It should it
Speaker 6: needs to stay on the fringe, and it shouldn't be
Speaker 6: allowed to get legs. So there's me making an opinion
Speaker 6: like I came off the f.
Speaker 1: From the top rope. There's there's a there's a there's
Speaker 1: an opinion. I want to clarify her too, because I
Speaker 1: just want to make sure that, like I'm clear of
Speaker 1: what I'm getting at. Uh if if the state, if
Speaker 1: a state was suing, because because here's a state and
Speaker 1: they said, you know what we want to do. We
Speaker 1: want to we want to give a sort of toned
Speaker 1: down Wilderness Act protection to all BLM land. We don't
Speaker 1: think that you're protecting it enough for future generations. And
Speaker 1: we have this whole system by which we're going to
Speaker 1: take this land from you to be and we're going
Speaker 1: to create wilderness areas all over the place. I would
Speaker 1: be like, that's a great idea. I hope they win
Speaker 1: that lawsuit. To me, it's not, it's not I should
Speaker 1: just be clear, Like to me, it's not who has it,
Speaker 1: it's what is allowed to happen there and what is
Speaker 1: not allowed to happen there. It's like, it's not whose
Speaker 1: name is on it, it's what is the way, what
Speaker 1: is the most likely path that would be that me,
Speaker 1: my kids, future generations, wildlife and perpetuity has a place
Speaker 1: to exist, right And it's like I'm going to go
Speaker 1: with whatever I think is the greatest chance to create
Speaker 1: continued habitat, continue to access for people to pursue outdoor activities.
Speaker 1: And I just feel like, and when I see kind
Speaker 1: of the arguments and the players, I I questioned that
Speaker 1: I feel that this is not moving in that this
Speaker 1: is not going to move in that direction. I feel
Speaker 1: that this is going to move to fewer acres of
Speaker 1: wildlife habitat, fewer acres of public land for people to
Speaker 1: recreate on. It ain't gonna be good.
Speaker 2: Yeah, agreed, Well, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 5: We used to talk about this just all the time.
Speaker 6: Right.
Speaker 4: We'd go out and lobby in DC and talk to people.
Speaker 4: And it's interesting because we have somebody who represents the
Speaker 4: nonprofit space and then we have a business owner entrepreneur. Right,
Speaker 4: And this is something that I used to get tapped
Speaker 4: with all the time. Right, It's like, hey, can you
Speaker 4: come join this fly into d C because all it
Speaker 4: is is individuals and nonprofits. We need some we need
Speaker 4: the business aspect, right. And I would go in on
Speaker 4: behalf of First Light and say, hey, we're this Idaho business.
Speaker 4: This is how many people we employed, this is you know,
Speaker 4: roughly how much buying and selling that we're doing. Our
Speaker 4: economic impact I'd try to frame up and then I
Speaker 4: would tell them about our origin story on public lands,
Speaker 4: Like our whole thing is selling to people who have
Speaker 4: these big places to go out and push themselves. Like
Speaker 4: we love the people that sit in box Lindes. I've
Speaker 4: had a lot of fun sitting in a box line.
Speaker 4: But the reality is you don't need this stuff. We
Speaker 4: want you to get it, but you really don't need
Speaker 4: it in a heated room on stilts, right.
Speaker 5: Yeah, this is how the stuff was developed.
Speaker 4: It's part of our experience by going out and trying
Speaker 4: to go deeper or push harder, get to the top
Speaker 4: of the mountain faster on public lands. That's why we
Speaker 4: developed this clothing line. This is why we keep developing
Speaker 4: this clothing line. This is how our brand is growing
Speaker 4: by talking to people about public lands and engaging them
Speaker 4: where they want to be. And don't jeopardize this because
Speaker 4: you're going to kill this business and you're going to
Speaker 4: kill our economic impact.
Speaker 1: Talking your own language.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and that is It's pretty funny. You can see
Speaker 4: the more rooms you go into, it's like they're checking
Speaker 4: the box. Right, It's like, okay, heard from the nonprofits.
Speaker 5: What else you got? Oh, what's your deal.
Speaker 4: It's like, can they kind of glaze over if it's
Speaker 4: another nonprofit person and they're like.
Speaker 5: Oh, oh, okay, that's different. What's that? And it's like, okay,
Speaker 5: got the carpenters, great, then move on.
Speaker 6: Move on, you know.
Speaker 8: So I think that's why maybe I'd take it so
Speaker 8: personally this issue is I hunt private land.
Speaker 1: I've got at least in Oklahoma.
Speaker 8: I like hunting private land too, So it's not like
Speaker 8: I don't hunt private land. But my you know, the ideas,
Speaker 8: I mean, I have been on public The ideas for
Speaker 8: my products, the ideas for my business have all been
Speaker 8: forced on public land. All my best ideas have happened
Speaker 8: on hunting trips in public, on public plant. It's the
Speaker 8: only place I have to think get away from crazy world, right.
Speaker 8: I think that's like a common thing, and so just
Speaker 8: you know, yes, would it affect like businesses like ours,
Speaker 8: like and First Light and others like, Absolutely, there's undeniable.
Speaker 8: But it's more than that.
Speaker 1: For me. This is personal.
Speaker 8: You're talking about coming after like my sanctuary, and that's
Speaker 8: what like is so visceral for me with this issue
Speaker 8: because it's yes, those are all true, but I think
Speaker 8: people tend to even like tune out the business argument.
Speaker 8: They're like, how many billions of dollars are recreation blah
Speaker 8: blah blah.
Speaker 1: It's like I don't care.
Speaker 8: I care about that, but ultimately, what I really care
Speaker 8: about is like, you're coming after my home and that
Speaker 8: pisses me off, right, So you're coming after the thing
Speaker 8: that I really care about. I can deal with losing money.
Speaker 8: I can't deal with losing my home, and neither can
Speaker 8: my kids, to like, just keep your damn hands off
Speaker 8: of it.
Speaker 1: That's the thing when when people when defenders of when
Speaker 1: public land defenders, when wildlife habitat defenders go down the
Speaker 1: pa of talking about money. Yeah, I always am like like,
Speaker 1: I'll let them do it if they win. If they win,
Speaker 1: I let them do it. But I'm always like a
Speaker 1: little bit like, man, I would be careful you're treading
Speaker 1: some dangerous territory, because are you telling me that if
Speaker 1: wildlife didn't make financial sense, you wouldn't wind it around anymore?
Speaker 1: Like watch the language, man, because uh, you could tell
Speaker 1: me that wildlife costs money and I'd be like, okay, whatever, Yeah,
Speaker 1: it doesn't change my mind about it. So I'm always
Speaker 1: like a little bit like, hey, you know the tread
Speaker 1: a little lightly about this whole financial thing. It's emotional.
Speaker 1: It should be emotional because if someone said to me,
Speaker 1: it wouldn't take very long for them to convince me
Speaker 1: to be like, you know, those kids years have cost
Speaker 1: you a lot of money. I would be like, oh shit,
Speaker 1: all right, take them away.
Speaker 5: They looked at it like that.
Speaker 8: I mean, I think you said it, like what everything
Speaker 8: doesn't have to justify itself economically to exist in this world?
Speaker 1: Right? And yeah, that's why I still got your convertible,
Speaker 1: I mean, not yours, but.
Speaker 8: I love that one, right, chryst Or Sea bring Could
Speaker 8: you imagine that, honey would be amazing?
Speaker 1: That would be sweet, guys, I got I'm gonna bring
Speaker 1: something full circle on to give you a chance. But
Speaker 1: we started out this show talking about the podcast trivia,
Speaker 1: uh and then and then we got a bunch of
Speaker 1: kids coming in here in a minute to record our
Speaker 1: kids trivia tournament for our kids podcast. So we're gonna
Speaker 1: wrap it up in a minute. But I want to
Speaker 1: give you guys a chance to have any We used
Speaker 1: to do a thing in the old days where you
Speaker 1: get a closing thought.
Speaker 5: The long line I remember remember that.
Speaker 1: And I'd like to extend that courtesy. Do you guys
Speaker 1: in our waning minutes here, if you have a closing
Speaker 1: thought and uh, if you could within that closing thought,
Speaker 1: someone could have the the also do like a little
Speaker 1: bit of here's how to follow a long what's gonna
Speaker 1: happen with this whole thing? You want to want me
Speaker 1: to go first or already did mine? Mine was the
Speaker 1: one I was talking all about how when I was
Speaker 1: talking all about how everybody I could vote for a
Speaker 1: party and then go say, but dude, chill out about
Speaker 1: this public landsdeal.
Speaker 8: I think I've already said mine, this is personal, should
Speaker 8: be personal for you, stay vigilant, and if I may,
Speaker 8: I still I think there's an open question around whether
Speaker 8: or not Guy Fierti is the favor town.
Speaker 5: I was going to go back to Flavortown with my
Speaker 5: closing thought.
Speaker 2: Well, Randa, I think my closing thought, I said, at
Speaker 2: the very outset of this, which is, we know Guy
Speaker 2: Fierti is the mayor of Flavortown.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I think we might have some hanging
Speaker 1: chads in that vote.
Speaker 3: Bush v. Gore another original.
Speaker 6: Assert went right that went right to the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: Well, I made a reference that you didn't catch. I said,
Speaker 1: who's the president? Oh no, I caught that. Why you're
Speaker 1: going back and redoing my line, Well, because you're just
Speaker 1: doing it for all the people that didn't catch it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: try to take credit.
Speaker 3: Well yeah, I mean it's been a while since we
Speaker 3: should we go?
Speaker 1: Okay?
Speaker 2: Plus I wanted to show that I could think of another.
Speaker 1: Can I share it quick? We're going we're going on
Speaker 1: a hunting trip. This is before like you couldn't no
Speaker 1: inreaches and stuff, Okay, whatever the hell you're that was,
Speaker 1: And we're going on a hunting trip. And we're like
Speaker 1: everybody's like, okay, well as soon as the election, everyonet
Speaker 1: to see the election, because we're going sometime around that window.
Speaker 1: So the morning after the election, we're going on a
Speaker 1: long trip in the back country. I'm like, damn, how
Speaker 1: could it be? You don't know who the president is?
Speaker 1: There's nobody to talk to anybody for four or five days,
Speaker 1: and then like the whole time, just dying to go
Speaker 1: find out and come back like they still don't know.
Speaker 1: We didn't miss anything after all.
Speaker 6: All right, So mister hot take, I'm going to have
Speaker 6: another hot take. I feel like, I feel like now
Speaker 6: I'm just.
Speaker 1: Two in one day. Yeah, that should be the thing
Speaker 1: with Dave. We have David and he has a given opinion,
Speaker 1: and take a shot.
Speaker 6: Just see where we are now.
Speaker 1: Just try to get him to pound table to solve
Speaker 1: the problems. Toward the end of the night, he pounds
Speaker 1: the table, will know we wont.
Speaker 6: So I guess my closing thought is a thought and
Speaker 6: then a hot take. And then you said where you can, Yeah,
Speaker 6: how do you find pay attention? Yeah, So the thing
Speaker 6: I'd say is apathy is not an option, you know,
Speaker 6: apathy and thinking this is just going to go away, saying, ah,
Speaker 6: this is just a fringe issue. This lawsuit doesn't really
Speaker 6: have any merit. It's going to go away. When you
Speaker 6: take that position, you wind up in it in a
Speaker 6: spot where bad things happen, right, And so you know,
Speaker 6: I think it's incumbent upon everybody to really be vid
Speaker 6: and diligent. And I go back to this. You have
Speaker 6: to be in touch with your delegation, you have to
Speaker 6: be in touch with your governor's office, you have to
Speaker 6: be in touch with if you're supporting, you know, a
Speaker 6: nonprofit like mine or other nonprofits out there, be in
Speaker 6: touch with them. Let let people know this matters to me,
Speaker 6: and I want you to be engaged in this to
Speaker 6: make sure that our public lands aren't sold or transferred,
Speaker 6: because if you don't, if you just take the position
Speaker 6: of eugh, you know, we've been through this before. This
Speaker 6: might be the last time you have to go through
Speaker 6: it right, and you might not like the outcome. So
Speaker 6: that's sort of my I call that my plea to people.
Speaker 6: You know, you asked me before, what do I think
Speaker 6: the likelihood of success on the merits is? You know,
Speaker 6: I don't know. I think there's a strong argument that
Speaker 6: the property clause, and we never talked about it, but
Speaker 6: the Property Clause of the Constitution gives the federal government
Speaker 6: the authority to manage lands and perpetuity. I think there's
Speaker 6: a very very strong argument to be made there. There's
Speaker 6: some lower case law that supports that interpretation. There's some
Speaker 6: dicta in some US Supreme Court cases that it supports
Speaker 6: that interpretation. So I think there's a path to victory
Speaker 6: to protect public lands in the legal context, but it's
Speaker 6: not a foregone conclusion. But you have to be diligent
Speaker 6: on the political side too. Because there they are going
Speaker 6: to be efforts to strip things away and to transfer
Speaker 6: and you know all those things. So do that. My
Speaker 6: here's my little bit of hyperbole or you know, because
Speaker 6: I'll have one. I analogize this to This is going
Speaker 6: to age me a little bit. Remember that movie Ocean's eleven.
Speaker 1: Oh oh yeah, yeah, I never saw it.
Speaker 6: Yeah, what were they? I'd like to see you never
Speaker 6: saw it? What were they? There are thieves, right, but
Speaker 6: they were super sophisticated, creative thieves, right, professional, charismatic, professional,
Speaker 6: really invested in it. Right. And here's here's where it comes. Like,
Speaker 6: I'm just going to call this like, halt the heist.
Speaker 6: That's kind of what this is. This feels like a
Speaker 6: really sophisticated heist of our public lands. Maybe that's as
Speaker 6: hyperbolic as I can get.
Speaker 2: I see that, and I'll remember Ocean's twelve eighteen. I mean,
Speaker 2: there are some other parallels we could.
Speaker 9: Get.
Speaker 3: I think it's well founded.
Speaker 6: Right, And so I say that to say, yeah, and
Speaker 6: this will be the total selfish plug here, Like if
Speaker 6: you want to follow more and learn more about what
Speaker 6: my organization, National Wildlife Federation is doing, you can just
Speaker 6: go to NWF dot org backslash, halt the heist.
Speaker 1: And you've already made it.
Speaker 6: We've already made it, and all kinds of resources will
Speaker 6: be there for you. That's exactly right.
Speaker 8: I already trademarked that before before you said it though,
Speaker 8: so today.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I looked it up yesterday.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I'm a business guy. Was there another phrase that
Speaker 5: gave you the inspiration.
Speaker 1: For that literation?
Speaker 6: Yeah, there's some parallels you could draw, but sure if
Speaker 6: you wanted to go that way. Yeah, uh yeah, so
Speaker 6: that's my.
Speaker 1: I'll sell it to you, though.
Speaker 6: I'll tell you that I don't know how you did
Speaker 6: your brother say something.
Speaker 1: To disclose my methods, but offering.
Speaker 6: It's not worth anything right now.
Speaker 1: No, it is now. We were joking there, dise. I
Speaker 1: came up with a slogan, but I didn't have an
Speaker 1: organization for it, and it was Today's children Tomorrow's enemies.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: It just came to me at dinner with my wife
Speaker 1: and and I thought, there's that sounds like something, And
Speaker 1: I was like, what organization could use that slogan? And
Speaker 1: then my my friend Savanna said it could be one
Speaker 1: of those book burning one of those book fanned organizations
Speaker 1: can use that slogan. There are kids now, but they'll
Speaker 1: read these books and they'll be the enemies tomorrow. Well, thanks,
Speaker 1: thanks guys for coming on man oh and to follow it,
Speaker 1: to get give the U R elegant.
Speaker 6: Oh yeah, nw F dot O R G backslash, halt
Speaker 6: the heist.
Speaker 1: Thanks Brad Brooks, Dave Wilms, thanks for coming out man men.
Speaker 6: Thanks yeah, thank you for appreciate it a lot.
Speaker 12: He wait on.
Speaker 13: Wester that old trees lead the dust again. He wait
Speaker 13: back to the same.
Speaker 12: That old ten man with only rust again it was
Speaker 12: open to live as the first time he forgot, never forgets.
Speaker 12: He'll always remember time wind rains felling low nerve trim.
Speaker 14: Where all the thunderstorm you still out.
Speaker 13: Come? Where my country study that on t Lad Brewsters
Speaker 13: used to fill fee.
Speaker 14: Yours flushing cubbies at the pros to see.
Speaker 12: You go the control skin Steve fell open mountain out
Speaker 12: of Saint Merphy Ea still mentions eighty ten every year
Speaker 12: before been both white supe you live four days if
Speaker 12: I was hired sole some big cattle off the word wire.
Speaker 14: Where all the.
Speaker 13: Thunder stores used to out the car.
Speaker 14: Where's my country s fundy That on Tim laving me.
Speaker 14: Where all the thunder storm used to elbows sprawling the call?
Speaker 13: Where's that country sad money, that.
Speaker 14: All damn, it's play for me? Where all the thunders
Speaker 14: not use of els all? Where's that country, Samthoy, that
Speaker 14: all dis play for me? Where all the thunders, where
Speaker 14: the countrees and
Speaker 7: Me