This thread discusses the Content article: GUEST OPINION: Sportsmen's groups blast


agency's oversight of land

Well, from everything I've seen over the years, it always seems to me that when development happens, it opens up more areas to hunt and fish instead of less.

And I've never seen it where it actually reduced the numbers of game or fish. It seems that there are a lot of other areas that could be addressed with much greater results than just shutting down the development of oil and gas on our public lands.

And just maybe, we could put some of the funds we will get in royalties towards the preservation and management of game so that our fees don't continue to escalate.

What do you think?