BLM looks to add 4,000 acres to Dominguez-Escalante

Questions hunters, fishermen, and public lands users need to ask political candidates. Addressing politicians in desperate times, part 2.

Something similar was mentioned on a companion blog to this one just the other day, that being that it was never the intent to make this a political topic blog.

But these are not ordinary times in Wyoming, or anywhere else.

Most real outdoorsmen, and by that I mean the sort of outdoorsmen who have the world out look that those who post here do, not guys with excess cash who are petty princes like Eric Trump, would rather be hunting or fishing, or reading about hunting and fishing, than thinking about politics.  But just like duck hunter (seriously) Leon Trotsky once stated; “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you,” and that applies to politics as well as war.

Trotsky.  Bad man, but he was a hunter and fisherman.

You might not be interested in politics, but politics is very interested in you.

And frankly, given the assault on everything hunters, fishermen, and the users of public lands hold dear, you don't really have the luxury, and that is what it is, of ignoring politics.

Nor do you have the luxury of ignoring your politicians.

Donald Trump was embarrassing his first term in office, but in his second unrestrained term in office, he and the Republican Party have been a disaster for outdoorsmen, nature, and the environment.  Last year there was a diehard effort by Deseret Mike Lee to basically sell off massive parts of the public domain. That effort was supported by all three of  Wyoming's Congressional delegation in spite of massive public opposition to it.  This year a Freedom Caucus member, Rep. Wasserburger, is trying the same thing in the state with state lands.  None of this should be any surprise as Freedom Caucuser Bob Ide, who campaigned on less government, more freedom, but who is a big landlord depending on the government to protect his property rights, sponsored an effort to grab the public lands the legislative session before that.

When put right to it, the Freedom Caucus hates government ownership of anything, and by extension, just flat out isn't really very concerned about the collective good on anything at all.  They're an alien carpetbagging force in the country, but the sort of dimwitted views they have on nature and land are being expressed all across the country.  Hunters, fishermen, farmers, ranchers, campers, hikers and other users of the land who had reflexively voted for one party or another based on some belief on what those parties held can absolutely no longer afford to do that.

Part of this is because politicians just flat out lie.  People who naively thought that Donald Trump was a supporter of the Second Amendment, and therefore supported "gun rights" are finding out right now that he never believed any of that. Why would he?  He's an old, fat, wealthy, New Yorker.  It's not like you saw him at the range, now is it?

But chances are, you haven't seen California Chuck Gray there either, have you?

So, some questions that you, dear feral reader, really need to ask your politicians.

1.  Do you have a hunting or fishing license right now, and if you do, can you pull it out of your wallet so we can see it?

It used to be standard in Wyoming and Colorado, and I bet other Western states, to see a politician dragged out in front of a camera for an advertising campaign wearing brand new hunting clothing and carrying a shotgun (interestingly, never a rifle).  It was a little fraud that we all participated in. We knew that the politicians would probably wet his pants if he had to fire the gun, but we took that as a symbol of support.

Don't.

Find out if they really share your values. Do they hunt, or fish? What's the proof?

And if they answer yes, find out what that means.  Does it mean the politician goes sage grouse hunting every year or does it mean that he waddles on to a pheasant farm once a year to shoot some POW pheasants?  Worse yet, does it mean that he went on a catered "hunt" in Texas with fat cats.  

How often does he go, where does he go, does he use public land to hunt?

Same thing with fishing.

If he doesn't do either, and regularly, don't vote for him easily.  Chances are he cares as much about hunting as Elon Musk does about marital fidelity.

2.  Do you use public land for anything, and if so, what?

Nearly every feral person worth his salt uses public land.  Does your Pol?  And I mean for anything. Hunting, fishing, camping, running cattle, photography, running nude through the daisies.  Anything.

And ask for proof.

If that proof is a photograph of a cleanly shaved pol with brand new clothing, it's proof he doesn't use it, or that she doesn't use it.

And if the answer is the typical "I love Yellowstone National Park", be very careful  National Parks are great, but a lot of them aren't really very wild until you get off the beaten path.  Going on an auto tour of Yellowstone and seeing all the geysers is great, but that's not proof of much.  And quite a few of the "I support public lands" political class limits that support to parks. Everything is fair game for development in their view.

3.  Do you shoot?

I don't expect every outdoor users to be a shooter, although in the West, if you are a user of wildlands and don't have a gun, you are a complete and utter fool.  Having said that, I'll be frank that I have known fishermen who had one gun, probably a revolver, that they carried in some places.  They probably went years between shooting it.  I don't regard owning a gun as a precursor to all feral uses of land, particularly by people who don't hunt, but who do fish, or camp, or hike (but if you do any of these things, please get a handgun and learn how to use it).  

A lot of people in the West vote for pols based solely on "I support the Second Amendment type statements".  Lots of people allowed themselves to be duped into voting for Donald Trump that way, although we never believed his claims to be a Second Amendment supporter.  We're sorry that we were so right.  Anyhow, ask them if they have a gun and if they shoot.

No matter what they really believe, they're going to say yes.

I'll note I've seen this question asked just once, and when I did the female candidate, a native Wyomingite with a rural background, went on to qualify that she was just familiar with .22s.  Okay, that's an honest answer. 

She was, I'd note, a Democrat.

You do need to follow up on the question.

Right now, if you asked this question of Chuck Gray or John Barrasso, they'd both undoubtedly say yes.  I don't know if either of them owns a firearm, but my guess is that if they do they own it in the way of people who have bought or been given a handgun that's gone in a drawer, and that's where it stays.  Ask for proof.  What do they own, where do they shoot, how often, and are there photos.  And not photos from a gun show, like Reid Rasner posted the other day.

Take them to the range and have them shoot a box of .375 H&H.  If they run to the SUV crying, they're out.

If they can't back this stuff up, I'd assume they really don't care about the Second Amendment. There are people who don't shoot at all who do care about the Second Amendment, but they're are rare as people who are interested in stock cars but don't follow NASCAR (this would describe me).  Not too many.

4.  Do they believe in man made climate change?

This gets to the land ethic. Educated people, and most politicians, are educated who say no really don't give a rats ass about the planet or they're engaging in diehard self delusion. They're comfortable with everything being destroyed as long as they're dead before it happens or they just can't face the hard task of addressing, correcting, and reversing it.  They're not worth voting for.

Aldo Leopold.

5. Do they have a land ethic?

I've known a lot of people who have a very strong land ethic. Absolutely none of them didn't make use of wilderness in some ways.

That's a big clue.

Anyhow, more than anything else, do they have a land ethic?  That is;

A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.

Aldo Leopold.

Do they support that?

A huge pile of Western politicians really don't.  Some, however, who would surprise you do.  This is a hard question to really explore, because an existential question isn't necessarily easy to question on.  In a collegiate debate, you'd just state the proposition and ask if they agreed, or didn't and follow up with examples.  That may be the best way to do it.

Nobody should vote for a politician who doesn't support the Land Ethic.

Last edition:

Addressing politicians in desperate times. A series.

Labels: 2026 Election, 2028 Election, Commentary, Democratic Party, Politics, Questions for politicians, Republican Party, Trailing thread

Wyoming public land housing project spurs debate over land use

Wyoming public land housing project spurs debate over land use: As Jackson annexes a small parcel of national forest, the novel public-private partnership raises questions about building employee housing on public lands.

With one Laramie race, deep snow and strong winds are the point

With one Laramie race, deep snow and strong winds are the point: Small, free, mountain race draws masochists looking for community in mutual suffering, says outdoor writer Christine Peterson.

Long-Lost Horse Found And Rescued After Seven Months in Wind River Mountains

 

Long-Lost Horse Found And Rescued After Seven Months in Wind River Mountains

An excellent post:

Tragedy of the Common

How a Secret Greenland Military Base Hastened the Collapse of an Arctic World

How a Secret Greenland Military Base Hastened the Collapse of an Arctic World: In 1951, Jean Malaurie was dogsledding along northwestern Greenland when he saw a city under construction. It had not been there three months earlier.

Tracking Shot Bears With Dogs Would Be Legal Under Hunting Bill

 

Tracking Shot Bears With Dogs Would Be Legal Under Hunting Bill

Nuclear waste, state land use top Wyoming Legislature’s energy agenda

Nuclear waste, state land use top Wyoming Legislature’s energy agenda: Recent controversies over sprawling energy development have triggered a slate of bills to empower voters and communities in state-level energy ambitions.

Lex Anteinternet: The Trump Administration decides the Second Amendment ain't that much.

Lex Anteinternet: The Trump Administration decides the Second Amendm...: One of my predictions is that we're going to see a violent couple of years. The other is that within a year and a half the editorial pag...

The Trump Administration decides the Second Amendment ain't that much.

One of my predictions is that we're going to see a violent couple of years.

The other is that within a year and a half the editorial pages of the American Rifleman, who fawned over Trump, will be decrying a GOP embrace of gun control.  Fans of radicals who proclaim themselves to be for democracy and freedom while ranting about others as enemies should here to study history.  

Gun control came in to the USSR with the Communists, after they'd secured power at the barrel of a gun.  It was the Irish Republicans who brought gun control into Ireland, after the republic had been won with guns.  People like to claim the Nazis brought gun control to Germany (they didn't), but those who like to yell that should recall that Hitler was elected into office as part of a populist movement that promised to fix the economy and which hated "others", so to speak.

As soon as Trump sees the populace as the enemy to his safety, he'll act to preserve himself.  It's not, after all, as if he's been competing at Camp Perry and he doesn't need anyone's vote in four years.  If he acts, what are those who supported him on this issue going to do, join the Democrats?

Yeoman, January 6, 2025.

Alex Pretti, who was shot down by the Border Patrol, with Border Patrol shooting ten rounds.¹

I'm seeing one of my predictions about the Second Trump Administration coming true.

Everyone should have seen it.

Of the many people I know who voted for Donald Trump, there were three groups of what I'd call "single issue" voters who voted for him on the solid belief that he shared their views on one single issue, and that overrode everything else. There are: 1) opponents of abortion² , 2) opponents of gun control, 3) opponents of wars overseas ("forever wars").³

Trumps betrayed you, if you are in one of these categories, on all three.

The betrayal on gun control is simply epic.

A few days ago the Border Patrol gunned down Alex Pretti.  They actually shot ten shots.  People will defend the Border Patrol on this, but it's indefensible.  He was carrying a handgun legally, and it had been removed from him before he was killed.⁴

For decades the NRA insisted that Americans, and indeed everyone everywhere, had an absolute right to carry a firearm anywhere and campaigned for the right to carry, concealed and unconcealed, everywhere.⁵   Pretti had availed himself of that right.  He was going absolutely nothing illegal at the time he was gunned down.

The Administration's reaction has been to make every left wing gun control argument you've ever heard.

I don't know of any peaceful protester that shows up with a gun and ammunition rather than a sign.

Kash Patel.  Well, Kash, don't come to Wyoming then.  There aren't any, and I mean any, largescale demonstrations were people aren't carrying, concealed and unconcealed. Shoot, I saw a guy with a M1 Garand and fixed bayonet a couple of years ago.

Patel tried to claim that Pretti was breaking the law by carrying a sidearm at a protest, apparently ignoring that this guy became a hero for something like that:

Minneapolis police officials, at any rate, quickly disabused that notion, noting in the press and on Face the Nation that this simply isn't true.  Pretti wasn't breaking the law.

That same comment was made House Majority Leader Steve Scalise who was flat out confronted by Margaret Brennan on the same topic on Face the Nation.  Scalise stumpbed all over himself and said he was for the Second Amendment had had sponsored a concealed carry law down in Louisiana, but that if you are carrying a gun while breaking the law it's a felony, and Pretti was breaking the law.

Pretti wasn't breaking the law, but it does give you a pretty good idea of what the former Republican Party, now the Fascist Party, thinks of the 1st Amendment as well as the 2nd.

The ever nervous Scott Bessent had to appear on Meet the Press.

KARL: He was an ICU use who worked for the VA and there's no evidence he brandished the gun whatsoever

BESSENT: But he brought a gun

KARL: I mean, we do have a Second Amendment

BESSENT: I've been to a protest -- guess what? I didn't bring a gun. I brought a billboard

The always nervous Scott Bessent.⁶   

Bessent has been to a protest?  Was it a super megabucks soybean protest? 

Same thing here.  Now bringing a gun to a protest marks you for death.

Kristi Noem, whose thugs committed the killing, really went after Pretti, calling him a domestic terrorist.  That is now the official line for any of these protestors, they're terrorists.  Neom sated:

I don't know of any peaceful protester that shows up with a gun and ammunition rather than a sign.

Noem falsely accused Pretti of brandishing the weapon.

Stephen Miller called Pretti "an assassin" and accused him of trying to murder Federal agents.  

J. D. Vance repeated that lie, and Gregory Bovino more or less did.  Only Trump, who was initially claimed to have said something falsely, apparently hasn't.

Ironically, it was the press and the police that were defending Second Amendment rights to carry the past couple of days. You shouldn't bring a gun to a protest.  Pretti's handgun, which is a fairly typical 9mm SIG, was a "military weapon" (it is, but just about any semi automatic handgun could be), he had "multiple magazines".

And finally, we have the Dear Leader himself:

I don’t like any shooting. I don’t like it. But I don’t like it when somebody goes into a protest and he’s got a very powerful, fully loaded gun with two magazines loaded up with bullets also. That doesn’t play good either.

Donald Trump.⁷ 

Basically, the Administration's position is that if you are carrying a handgun, the Federal Government can gun you down.

All things right out of the left wing gun control handbook.

The very thing, I"d note, that the NRA warned us about, in regard to the Federal Government, with the irony being it comes right from the man they backed.

Not that any of this should be a surprise.  I've never felt for a moment that Trump had any actually affinity for firearms or was a member of "gun culture".⁸    He's a salesman, and he sold gun owners a line of bull.

Now they know better.  But it will be too late.

The things is, however, the accomplishments on the Second Amendment have been made. They can be taken away.  Therefore, a real "fool me once" thing is at play here.  A lot of gun owners are going to keep backing Trump as they'll refuse to think on this.  

And that's why support for Trump will prove to be too late.  W.E.B. Dubois declared that "only a fool never changes his mind".  How many gun owners will choose to be fools?

Footnotes:

1. The large number of shots suggest that the Border Patrol falls into the keep shooting category of policing, which many large city police do as well.  

I'm not a fan of magazine capacity laws, but I"m at the point where I don't think most policemen of any type should carry a firearm at all, and that when they do, it's time to go back to .38 revolvers.  They're simply less likely to kill people if they are med in that fashion

2.  A lot of people who find this to be a deep moral issue, and I do see it that way, voted for Trump on the false belief that they had no other choice.  There were other choices.

Now Trump is urging his supporters to soften their opposition to abortion. Mitch McConnel gets credit for the conservative judiciary that Trump put in place, which issued the Dodds decision, but there would be no real strong reason to feel that Trump cares much about the issue himself.

Trump's own sexual history is immoral, and usually multiple partners indicates a casual attitude towards abortion.  There's nothing to indicate that any of Trump's tarts had one, but he has shifted his position, and its still shifting, over the years.  

3.  Trump really likes to brand himself as a peace president but there are no wars that the US was involved in when he took office that we are now out of, the only real lingering one being the war in Syria.  He's started a new conflict in Venezuela, conducted a largescale mixed result raid in Iran, and appears to about to hit Iran again.

4.  Pretti's parents said that they knew he had a permit, but didn't know him to actually carry.  I'm in the same category.

My reaction is probably a lot like a lot of people in Pretty's category.  I'm going to start carrying.  

5. A spokesman from the NRA initially defended the shooting, slightly, and then the organization, waking up to the fact that it's about to be dumped by its members (it's already in financial trouble) backtracked and came out supporting carrying, but in a very muted fashion.

6.  Bessent is another figure who doesn't square with what MAGA claims its view of the world is.  He's an open homosexual in a homosexual union, something that MAGAs declare as abhorrent and which they repeatedly sneered at Biden's Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and his Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre for.  It's been interesting that Buttigieg and Jean-Pierre were condemned for the very same thing that Bessent does at home, the point being that like a lot of members of fascist movements, MAGA adherents will suspend all of their supposedly deeply held beliefs to follow the leader.

7. The two magazine thing is a real left wing talking point.  

Use of the terms "very powerful" and "bullets" in place of cartridges almost always demonstrates firearms ignorance.  9mm pistols are not "very powerful". Quite the contrary. That's why some police forces simply blaze away with them, and why soldiers are taught to shoot an opponent more than once.  The 9mm should be a good police round for that very reason as its unlikely to kill anyone with a single shot.

8.  I'll have to get into gun culture, which I use as a positive expression, not a negative one, elsewhere, but I've never trusted anyone in the Second Amendment movement who wasn't an active member of a shooting sport, if even only a collector.  While Eric Trump is a hunter, Donald Trump's only outside interest seems to be the incredibly boring sport of golf.  If you can shoot, you wouldn't send much time on the golf course.

Wayne LaPierre, the former head of the NRA, struck me that way also, but I don't really know much about him.  Chuck Gray in Wyoming strikes me that way also, although I could of course be wrong.

Lex Anteinternet: CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 114th Edition. The Armed Citizen and ICE.

Lex Anteinternet: CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 114th Edition. The A...: Trump Tweet.  My prediction is that gun control is coming for the very reasons that the NRA always warned us about, and the NRA is going to ...

CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 114th Edition. The Armed Citizen and ICE. He never served but they did. Geographically ignorant. He's demented.

Trump Tweet.  My prediction is that gun control is coming for the very reasons that the NRA always warned us about, and the NRA is going to roll over like a pet dog.

Killed while carrying, you don't need that gun after all.

For years and years the National Rifle Association warned us about "jack booted thugs" working for the Federal government.

It also told us that part of the reason we needed a Second Amendment was to protect ourselves against a  repressive government.  It runs a column on its site every couple of days extolling the virtues of being an "armed citizen".

The Armed Citizen® Jan. 19, 2026

Yesterday a Border Patrol Agent in Minneapolis took offense, apparently, along with another officer to Alex Jeffrey Pretti filming their activities.  They started pushing people around and pepper spraying, actions which with municipal police forces would get the department and the officers sued.  They wrestled Pretti to the ground.

He was a permitted concealed carry holder, and he was carrying a concealed handgun.  According to one news source, the officers had secured his handgun before shooting him, which they did.

Apparently, once again, more than one shot was fired.  Apparently, ten shots were fired.

Ten.

I know what the defenses are going to be and what is going to be claimed.  Videos are always a bit difficult to discern and so we really don't know what the officers saw.  Here's what a witnesses affidavit states:

I am a resident of the Whittier neighborhood of Minneapolis, Minnesota. I am over 18 years of age. I am a children's entertainer who specializes in face painting.

On Saturday, January 24, 2026, at about 8:50 am, I was getting ready to go to work when I heard whistles outside. I knew the whistles meant that ICE agents were in the area, so I decided to check it out on my way to work. I've been involved in observing in my community because it is so important to document what ICE is doing to my neighbors. Connecting to your local community and knowing who your neighbors are is something I profoundly value.

I drove to Nicollet Ave. and 26th where I could hear the whistles coming from. I turned south onto Nicollet. There were already several ICE agents there and they'd set up a sort of vehicle convoy on Nicollet and 28th. There were also about 15 observers there, recording and observing ICE.

I saw ICE agents surrounding cars and punching car windows. I also saw them stopping vehicles further down Nicollet, so I backed up because I didn't feel safe continuing on.

I noticed a man sort of acting to help traffic move more smoothly. He helped me find a place to park. I got out with my whistle and my camera. I went over to him and said something like, "I'm going to film and use my whistle."

It seemed like most ICE activity was happening a little farther down the street from us, near 27th. Someone was being thrown to the ground.

I started recording. There was an agent by a car across the street. Two observers were a few feet away from the agent, blowing their whistles. One was wearing a backpack.

I and the man who was observing and helping direct traffic were standing in the street. There was a phone in the man's hand recording a video.

An agent approached and asked us to back up, so I moved slowly back onto the sidewalk.

The man stayed in the street, filming as the other observers I mentioned earlier were being forced backward by another ICE agent threatening them with pepper spray. The man went closer to support them as they got threatened, just with his camera out. I didn't see him reach for or hold a gun.

Then the ICE agent shoved one of the other observers to the ground. Then he started pepper spraying all three of them directly in the face and all over. The man with the phone put his hands above his head and the agent sprayed him again and pushed him.

Then the man tried to help up the woman the ICE agent had shoved to the ground. The ICE agents just kept spraying. More agents came over and grabbed the man who was still trying to help the woman get up. All three of the observers looked to have been badly affected by the pepper spray. I could feel the pepper spray in my eyes.

The agents pulled the man on the ground. I didn't see him touch any of them-he wasn't even turned toward them. It didn't look like he was trying to resist, just trying to help the woman up. I didn't see him with a gun. They threw him to the ground. Four or five agents had him on the ground and they just started shooting him. They shot him so many times.

14.1 don't know why they shot him. He was only helping. I was five feet from him and they just shot him.

15. The video I recorded of what happened accurately depicts the events leading up to the agents shooting him and several minutes afterwards. The video is attached as Exhibit 1.

16. I have read the statement from DHS about what happened and it is wrong. The man did not approach the agents with a gun. He approached them with a camera. He was just trying to help a woman get up and they took him to the ground.

17. I feel afraid. Only hours have passed since they shot a man right in front me and I don't feel like I can go home because I heard agents were looking for me. I don't know what the agents will do when they find me. I do know that they're not telling the truth about what happened. I've heard that other witnesses might have been arrested and taken to the Whipple Building.

18. I am disgusted and gutted at how they are treating my neighbors and my state. I keep alternating between crying and feeling determined it is important to remember the value of documenting injustice. We show up for the people who need us to bear witness, because it can't just be one group of people bearing the brunt of their tyranny. This is a struggle to protect our freedom and democracy, those things are on the line. He lost his life for those values.

What we do know is what the NRA told its members, like me, is now revealed to be complete crap.  Where are the outcries from firearms permit holders (and I am one).  I don't blame Pretti for being armed when this group of Brownshirts is around.

The lesson is clear.  Interfere with ICE at the risk of being beat up or killed.

And the message from the defenders of freedom on the right wing are clear.  They never meant what they said, or they'd be outraged by the gunning down of a man who was legally carrying.

For years I've been warning that the result of the NRA's slavish support for Trump would be an irony, the Trump Administration will come after legal gun owners.  It's starting:

Peaceful protesters do not have 9-millimeter weapons with two extra magazines.

Rep Van Drew, New Jersey.  There you have it. What used to be a position of the left.  You don't really need that gun.

It's only one step to, you don't need that gun, give it to me.

And the NRA is just going to stand there and do nothing whatsoever.  They've simply become a fundraising branch of MAGA.

I'm not, I'll note, the only one who holds this view.  After I first posted this I came across this:

Exercising Your 2nd Amendment Rights Is Not A Death Sentence

ICE just executed an American in Minneapolis for legally exercising his Constitutional rights

In that article, Siler states:

The shooting is troublingly reminiscent of the 2016 murder of Philando Castile—a black man—who was murdered by police in Minnesota for exercising his Second Amendment rights. During a routine traffic stop Castile, who also possessed a valid Permit to Carry, informed the police officer that he was in possession of a firearm. The officer instructed Castile not to reach for that firearm, to which he responded, “I’m not.” The officer then fired seven shots at point blank range, hitting Castile five times.

In the wake of Castile’s murder, so-called “gun rights” organizations like the National Rifle Association failed to issue any substantial statement, or to call for any changes to police training, procedures, or similar. As of the time of writing, the NRA has yet to issue any statement about this execution.

I’ve been making the point for years that the real purpose of so called, “gun rights” organizations like the NRA has nothing to do with gun rights, but is instead to radicalize low-information Americans into voting for tax cuts for billionaires using guns as a nexus of radicalization and disinformation. The NRA’s language has nothing to do with its actions.

Take, for instance, this commercial which sets out to recruit members for the NRA. It expressly argues that immigrants need to own guns in order to defend against torture, assassination, and, “hanging the people in the streets.”

Well, NRA, masked government thugs are executing law-abiding Americans in the streets, in broad daylight, in front of cameras. And they say they’re doing that because we’re exercising our Constitutional right to self-defense. Where are you?

FWIW, if I went anywhere near one of these protests, I'd be carrying.

And make no mistake. We're about to get massive gun control. The Dear Leader has decreed that only criminals carry guns in the street.

Lawmaker Unveils Bill To Sell Between 30,000 And 200,000 Acres Of State Lands

Another moronic idea by a Wyoming Republican, a party which seems to draw from the endless well of bad ideas.

Wasserburger is going right on the naughty list.

Lawmaker Unveils Bill To Sell Between 30,000 And 200,000 Acres Of State Lands

'Nuclear Bomb' Of Invasive Rats That Exploded In Boise Can Threaten Wyoming

 

'Nuclear Bomb' Of Invasive Rats That Exploded In Boise Can Threaten Wyoming

Judges halt 3,500-well ‘NPL’ gas field in Wyoming’s Green River Basin

Judges halt 3,500-well ‘NPL’ gas field in Wyoming’s Green River Basin: Administrative court rules eight years after an appeal was filed that the BLM violated the Clean Air Act, undoing approval of Jonah Energy’s 141,000-acre development.

The Agrarian's Lament: Rejecting Avarice. Some radical rethinking.

The Agrarian's Lament: Rejecting Avarice. Some radical rethinking.: Cease being intimidated by the argument that a right action is impossible because it does not yield maximum profits, or that a wrong action ...

Rejecting Avarice. Some radical rethinking.

Cease being intimidated by the argument that a right action is impossible because it does not yield maximum profits, or that a wrong action is to be condoned because it pays.

Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac

We just published this item here on Donald Trump's insatiable lust for the destruction of land, lands even beyond our borders.

The Agrarian's Lament: Lex Anteinternet: Manifest Destiny and the Second ...: Lex Anteinternet: Manifest Destiny and the Second Trump Administrati... : Westward the Course of Empire Takes Its Way, dramatizing Manifest ...

In the movie The Patriot, which is okay but not great, commences with these lines:

I have long feared, that my sins would return to visit me, and the cost is more than I can bare.

In a lot of ways, that opening scene is the best one in the movie.

No nation has a singular linear history, even though people tend to hear things that way. "This happened, and then that happened, resulting in this. . . ".  In reality, things are mixed quite often, and things are quite fluid with juxtapositions.  

Shakespeare claimed:

“There is a tide in the affairs of men

Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;

Omitted, all the voyage of their life

Is bound in shallows and in miseries.

On such a full sea are we now afloat;

And we must take the current when it serves,

Or lose our ventures.”

Perhaps.  But in reality the tide in the affairs of men drags everyone along with it. But it's a rip tide.  People's individual goals, desires and aspirations often are quite contrary to the tide on the surface.

That's certainly been the case with the United States.

If you have a Trumpian view of the world, the history of the United States looks like this, sort of:

This again.  It never occurs to many that the mines and cities aren't really everyone's dream.  It particularly doesn't occur to a rich real estate developer who isn't smart and whose values are shallow.

Lots of people have that view.  We came, we saw, we exploited, and everyone got happy working for Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk.

Trouble is, that's not true for a lot of reasons, a core one being it doesn't comport with who we really are.  The entire worship of wealth and what it brings, and the wealthy and who they are, is deeply contrary to our natures, and frankly men like Jeff Bezos, Donald Trump, and Elon Musk are deeply perverted.  Not because of their relationship with women, or because their names appear in the Epstein files in some context, although in the case of Trump, we really still don't know what context, but because of their shallow avaricious acquisition for and desire for wealth.

Timothy warns us:

Those who want to be rich are falling into temptation and into a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires, which plunge them into ruin and destruction.  For the love of money is the root of all evils, and some people in their desire for it have strayed from the faith and have pierced themselves with many pains.

And not only have their pierced themselves, but they pierce others, and entire societies with them.

So let's look at a few concrete things that we feel should be done.

Among the rich you will never find a really generous man even by accident. They may give their money away, but they will never give themselves away; they are egotistic, secretive, dry as old bones. To be smart enough to get all that money you must be dull enough to want it.

G.K. Chesterton, A Miscellany of Men

Revisit the Homestead Act.

Right from the onset of English colonization of North America, there was a pull between business exploitation and the simple desire for an agrarian place of one's own.

The truth of the matter is that when the nation started off, most people weren't "Pilgrims" seeking shelter from religious oppression.  Nor did they wish to be servants of big mercantile enterprises.  Most of the early English colonists were from agriculture or the trades and wanted to just work for themselves.  That's about it. 

The American Revolution was as much about that as anything else.  When American Colonials dumped tea in harbors, they were protesting taxes, but what they were also doing is dumping mercantile controlled property into waste.  It was grown somewhere else and it belong to rich remote classes.

The struggle was always there. The American South in particular had the planter class which depended upon enslaved labor to raise a market crop.  That was about generating wealth.  Most Southerners, in contrast, were Yeoman who had small places of their own.  When the Civil War came the wealthy had the South fight the war.

The analogies to the present day are simply to thick to ignore.

The Homestead Act came about during that war, and in real ways, it expressed a Jeffersonian dream. People willing to invest their own labor could acquire a place of their own.

The drafters of the Act never envisioned the wealthy controlling the land.  In some very real ways it was wealthy landowners that the North was fighting at the time.

Over the last few days residents of Wyoming have read about Chris Robinson, CEO of Salt Lake City-based Ensign Group, L.C., buying the Pathfinder Ranch.  I have nothing about him personally, but the listed price for the ranch was $79.5M due to its giant size.

I can personally recall when it was owned by locals  At that price, rather obviously, Robinson isn't planning on making money from cattle.  And to make matters a bit worse, residents of Natrona County got to read about another local outfit going up for sale, which is much smaller, for $9M.

Even into my adult years, by which time it was already impossible for somebody not born into ranching or farming to buy a place such that it could be their vocation, most ranches were owned by locally born ranchers.  This trend of playground pricing is making the status of the land the same as that which English colonists were seeking to escape from.

This could be fixed by amending the Homestead Act. The homesteading portion of that is fixed, but it would still be possible to go back and amend it such that land deeded to individuals under it, had to remain in agricultural use, and had to be held by families that made their money that way. exclusively.

I know it won't be, anytime soon, but it should be.

Revisit "Ad coelum ad damnum"

One of the absolute absurdities of the original Homestead Act is that it gave away not only the surface of the land, but the mineral rights as well.  This made the system sort of like buying lottery tickets. Some people got rich just of because of where they'd chosen to homestead.

I really struggle with the concept of private ownership of minerals, including oil and gas, in the first place.  I understand private enterprise exploiting it, but owning it?  Why?  It's not like private enterprise put the minerals in the ground.

Addressing this creates real constitutional problems, but ideally the mineral wealth of the nation should belong to everyone in it, not private parties.  And it should be exploited, or not, in the national interest, not in the primary economic interest of those who claim to own it.

I know that this brings up the cry of "that's Socialism".  It probably really is, but an unequal accidental distribution of mineral wealth on lands taken from the native inhabitants isn't just.  At a bare minimum, something needs to be looked into.  Indeed, as there was no intent to transfer that mineral title in the first place, perhaps it could collectively be restored and held in truth for the descendants of those original inhabitants.

Tax the wealthy

Every since Ronald Reagan there's been a ludicrous idea that taxing the wealthy hurts the economy. We know that this is completely false.  We also know that a certain percentage of the wealthy will allow themselves to become obscenely wealthy if allowed to, and that they'll harm everyone else as a result.

There's no reason on earth that anyone ought to be a billionaire.  Indeed, if you have more than $50M in assets, you have too much and something is potentially wrong with your character.  High upper income tax rates and wealth taxes can and should address this.  Elon Musk can be nearly just as annoying if his net worth was $50M as whatever it currently is, but he'd be a lot less destructive.

An alternative to this, if this is simply too radical, is to prevent corporations from owning most things, and to provide that once they get to be a certain size, at least 50% of their ownership goes to employees of those corporations.  It'd at least distribute the wealth some, and keep avarice from defining our everyday existence.

Final thoughts

What seems to be clear in any event is that we cannot keep going in this directly. Today's "conservatives" serve the very interests that the American Patriots rebelled against, remote wealth.  In spite of their tattoos and car window stickers, they'd form the Loyalist Militia trying to put down an an agrarian revolution in 1776.  The thing is, that those conditions always lead to revolution. They did in 1776 in North America, and then again in more extreme form in France a few years later.  They lead to the uprisings of 1848, the Anglo Irish War in 1916 and the Russian Revolution in 1917.  It's time to address this while we can, as it will be addressed.

Back to the future with the Chemtrail Caucus - WyoFile

Back to the future with the Chemtrail Caucus - WyoFile: The Freedom Caucus' capitalist wet dream for Wyoming will place the Cowboy State at an existential disadvantage, writes columnist Rod Miller.

Mounting dam costs include moving private landing strip

Mounting dam costs include moving private landing strip: Irrigators reject accusation of $1.6M “conflict of interest” payment for reservoir they say will allow profitable crops in Hyattville.

Federal lawmakers call for investigation of Wyoming’s Budd-Falen for possible criminal, ethics violations

Federal lawmakers call for investigation of Wyoming’s Budd-Falen for possible criminal, ethics violations: The call focuses on a $3.5 million water contract with lithium miners and the Budd-Falen’s role approving it as part of President Trump’s Interior Department.

Wyoming ends in-person hunter safety requirement despite instructor concerns

Wyoming ends in-person hunter safety requirement despite instructor concerns: In split vote, Game and Fish commissioners decide to allow hunters over age 18 to earn certificates solely through online coursework — an option already available via out-of-state classes.

Backlogged and DOGE-depleted: Forest Service report raises alarm over trail health

Backlogged and DOGE-depleted: Forest Service report raises alarm over trail health: Federal report stressed concerns over deteriorating USFS recreational amenities. Retired Wyoming staffers who spent last season volunteering on the forest expect it to only get worse.

Lex Anteinternet: Pollice Verso. The 2026 Political Negative Endorsement. The Don't Vote For List.

Carried over from Lex Anteintnernet. 

Lex Anteinternet: Pollice Verso. The 2026 Political Negative Endorse...: I've run items on elections here for a long time, and made my views on various candidates more or less known, but this year is really a ...

On this site, the public lands portion of this entry is particularly important. 

There are plenty of candidates running for office in Wyoming who'd end the public's right to do this, or anything, on public land.

Enemies of Public Lands, Hunters and Fishermen

Wyoming public lands users were shocked in 2025 with Deseret Mike Lee lead a full blown charge at public lands and Wyoming's Lummis, Barrasso, and Hageman joined right in.   Given their histories respectively of 1) being a Cheshire Cat, 2) Being a sycophantic toady and 3) being a member of a family that very distinctly doesn't care much for anyone who isn't an agricultural landowner, we shouldn't have been surprised, and yet we were.

Our guards still need to be up in a major way.  This issue hasn't gone away and if 2025/26s Trump babbling about Greenland, Gaza and Venezuela has shown anything, its that Donald Trump's GOP doesn't give a rats ass about anything that can't be reduced to a sale and the future just doesn't matter.  He's a shallow golf course developer and see the entire world that way, to his everlasting discredit.

And the GOP is right behind him.

People public lands users, and that includes ranchers who will get completely screwed if Deseret Mike Lee and his ilk have his way, follow.¹

These people have no Land Ethic.

Bill Allemand:  Allemand is from a large ranching family in the state but has claimed not to be part of the ranching operations himself.  Nonetheless he showed his hand by sponsoring a really punitive hunting trespass bill that failed last session.

That should preclude him from being reelected.  He's an enemy of sportsmen.

He's also a Dixiecrat.

And he's extremely rude.  His first run for office was characterized by outrageous comments about his opponent and he's shown a real temper since being elected.  Most recently, he stated outrageous things against a Deputy Sheriff who arrested him for drunk driving in Johnson County.²   A cutting editorial by Susan Stubson on his drunk driving escapade is well worth reading.

Harriet Hageman:  Hageman is from a large ranching/farming family in southeast Wyoming.  Her father was the sponsor of an effort to privatize wildlife when he was in the legislature.  Hageman aggressively backed an effort to transfer Wyoming's Federal lands to the state and responded to criticism of those who opposed her by basically calling them dumb.

This past term her family homestead burned to the ground in a year that's been extremely warm and devoid of moisture. There were poignant comments about it, including from her, which tend to demonstrate the agricultural community's absolute refusal to read what is really in front of their face, climate wise.  It's ironic, in that even university educated agriculturalist like Hageman, who depend on animal science daily, refuse to believe that any other science is valid.

Original post:  January 20, 2026.

Wyoming deserves better than this.  We don't need to be voting in enemies of public land, particularly those enemies who base their campaigns on absurd fever dreams, which describes a lot of our legislature right now.

This will be updated as the main thread is updated, but probably only as to topics that are particularly of interest here.

Pollice Verso. The 2026 Political Negative Endorsement. The Don't Vote For List.

I've run items on elections here for a long time, and made my views on various candidates more or less known, but this year is really a critical year.

So, we aren't telling you who to vote for, but for the first time ever, we're publishing something on whom we think you should vote against, although it frankly takes a lot of hubris to even assume anyone at all cares what I think on this topic.

#very election season people say something about the election being the most critical one ever but 2026 really is.  2026 may be the last gasp of American democracy, or the beginning of the restoration of it.  Right now, the American electorate basically stabbed democracy accidentally in the back by electing a mentally declining spoiled rich boy caudillo, and the whole world is paying the price.

The US is being run on a near dictatorial basis by the madman.  The Republican Party, save for a few of its notable members, has become nothing but a collection of worshippers, many of whom are steeped in ignorance.  The childlike ignoramus who is running the country is going to try to steal the 2026 elections.  About this there can be no doubt.

Part of the duty of the voters is to be informed.  It's pretty clear a lot of American voters, no matter what their party affiliation, aren't.  Indeed, I dare say the most informed voters are Independents who have informed themselves on both parties and marched out of the parties absolutely disgusted.

In Wyoming you almost have to be a member of the Republican Party or you have no vote at all.  But in Wyoming a collection of Dixiecrats who think they are Republicans and think they are for "freedom" is now the most powerful voice in the legislature and due to Cynthia Lummis retiring the entire mix of candidates is in flux.

This trailing thread is a list of people to vote against.  That's a terrible way to vote, but given the times and the slate of candidates, its something people need to consider.

This list, we'll note, is limited to current candidates.  Not every Wyoming politician.  If experience is any guide we would note that not getting voted for tends to refocus a politicians attention like nothing else.  If there's a big shift in 2026 and some traction on that in Wyoming, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if Chuck Gray wrote daily proposals of marriage to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

There are plenty of candidates running for office in Wyoming who'd end the public's right to do this, or anything, on public land.

Enemies of Public Lands, Hunters and Fishermen

Wyoming public lands users were shocked in 2025 with Deseret Mike Lee lead a full blown charge at public lands and Wyoming's Lummis, Barrasso, and Hageman joined right in.   Given their histories respectively of 1) being a Cheshire Cat, 2) Being a sycophantic toady and 3) being a member of a family that very distinctly doesn't care much for anyone who isn't an agricultural landowner, we shouldn't have been surprised, and yet we were.

Our guards still need to be up in a major way.  This issue hasn't gone away and if 2025/26s Trump babbling about Greenland, Gaza and Venezuela has shown anything, its that Donald Trump's GOP doesn't give a rats ass about anything that can't be reduced to a sale and the future just doesn't matter.  He's a shallow golf course developer and see the entire world that way, to his everlasting discredit.

And the GOP is right behind him.

People public lands users, and that includes ranchers who will get completely screwed if Deseret Mike Lee and his ilk have his way, follow.¹

These people have no Land Ethic.

Bill Allemand:  Allemand is from a large ranching family in the state but has claimed not to be part of the ranching operations himself.  Nonetheless he showed his hand by sponsoring a really punitive hunting trespass bill that failed last session.

That should preclude him from being reelected.  He's an enemy of sportsmen.

He's also a Dixiecrat.

And he's extremely rude.  His first run for office was characterized by outrageous comments about his opponent and he's shown a real temper since being elected.  Most recently, he stated outrageous things against a Deputy Sheriff who arrested him for drunk driving in Johnson County.²   A cutting editorial by Susan Stubson on his drunk driving escapade is well worth reading.

Harriet Hageman:  Hageman is from a large ranching/farming family in southeast Wyoming.  Her father was the sponsor of an effort to privatize wildlife when he was in the legislature.  Hageman aggressively backed an effort to transfer Wyoming's Federal lands to the state and responded to criticism of those who opposed her by basically calling them dumb.

This past term her family homestead burned to the ground in a year that's been extremely warm and devoid of moisture. There were poignant comments about it, including from her, which tend to demonstrate the agricultural community's absolute refusal to read what is really in front of their face, climate wise.  It's ironic, in that even university educated agriculturalist like Hageman, who depend on animal science daily, refuse to believe that any other science is valid.

Original post:  January 20, 2026.

Allies of Ignorance.  Trump Fellow Travelers and Dixiecrats.

I suspect that some of these people probably really love Trump, while others are just opportunistic and  pitching to ignorant Wyoming voters, telling them what they know they want to hear.  Either way, they shouldn't be voted for, either because they believe the nonsense they're spouting, or because they're willing to lie to obtain office.

Some of these folks are members of the largely carpetbagging Wyoming Freedom Caucus as well, which definitely should disqualify them.  They're not running for office in 2026 Wyoming but 1966 Alabama.  It's estimated that 42 members of the House, which has only 62 seats, in the Wyoming legislature are occupied by Freedom Caucus members, but it is an estimate as some of them will not openly declare their membership showing that they have some reservations about it.

Megen Degenfelder:  Degenfelder is the current Superintendent of Public Instruction who has announced for Governor.. She's clearly very far right wing, but she doesn't appear to be a full blown MAGA adherent.  Still, she received King Donny's endorsement and wrapped herself in it, and for that reason alone should be rejected.

I do have a question, however, based on her time in office, as to how much of the MAGA nonsense she really believes.  As one of the Board of State Land Commissioners she hasn't been a fellow traveler with Gray, and the evidence suggests that absolutely nobody on that Board can stand Gray. The Governor clearly does not, but it doesn't really look like anyone else does either.  And Degenfelder hasn't come out with any of the really extreme crap that Gray has, or even that Cindy Hill had.  Given that, she might be on the Trump Train in a boxcar ready to jump off when and if things begin to derail.  So I'll cut her a little slack, albeit very, very, little.

In this race, so far, it looks to me that Barlow is the best candidate.

Chuck Gray:  Gray's a carpetbagging opportunist who took advantage of lies to obtain the position of Secretary of State where he's been a general pain in the ass.  He's not from here, he's not of here, and he should be sent packing as a disagreeable asshole.  He literally obtained his office mounted on a steed of lies.

Gray, I'll note, was one of the founders of the Freedom Caucus and perhaps because of that hasn't been asked the questions or subject to sideways glances that some in his situation might have been, which is interesting.

Ken Pendergraft:  A member of the Freedom Caucus who voted to slash U.W.'s budget.

The Freedom Caucus is pretty much the Freakishly Dumb Caucus and basically opposes education.  Educated people, it turns out, tend to be moderate and don't believe that global warming is a fib, or that the Earth is 4,000 years old, or that Christianity somehow started in the US with an Evangelical Free Church.  So education is bad, in their view.

Jeremy Haroldson:  A member of the Freedom Caucus who voted to slash U.W. budget

The Freedom Caucus thinks that they are Republicans, but they are not. They're Jeffersonian Democrats, i.e., Dixiecrats.

Original post:  January

Carpetbaggers

This may seem like an odd thing to post in this category, but this film, which I hate, really frames the Wyoming mindset in some ways, even though the novel from which its taken was set in Appalachia.  Clayboy's father and eight uncles may have fallen in love here, but Clayboy is going to abandon one of the most beautiful spots on earth and the two hot chicks pursuing him so he can go to university, learn to write, and sit in an office smoking cigarettes behind a typewriter because he's convinced that must be superior to what he already has.

Wyoming has always had a transient population and, additionally, a pretty pronounced history of self doubt and even self loathing. For that reason, we're pretty willing as a rule to elect imports who claim to be like us, even though we know that they aren't.  We really think they're better than us.

Right now, for example, we have Dr. John Barrasso who isn't a Wyomingite but sort of pretends to be one, or at least was up until becoming the Senate Majority Whip.  He's a Pennsylvanian.  He's a Boomer so chances are that this is his last hurrah before he retires and gets the heck out of here.  

Chuck Gray:  Gray is a Californian who shares nothing in common with anyone whatsoever in the state.   He should be sent back to California.

Indeed, one of the most pathetic things about Gray campaigns is when they dress the diminutive little guy up and try to film him in Wyoming.  There he is, looking at an oil rig, and looking mighty uncomfortable, and so on.

Bottle Babies and Stahlhelm

In recent years Wyoming has seen people run for office touting their experience as a veteran. They basically fall into two groups.

One group were career servicemen who sucked on the government tit their entire working lives and now have moved into Wyoming or have come back to Wyoming after decades of being gone and, uniformly, declare they hate the government and know how to fix it. Their hatred didn't keep them from competing in the free job economy with the rest of us, however.

They didn't run their military careers like they claim they'll run the state.  I.e, they didn't come in and say "I hate the military with the red hot passion of a thousand burning suns and I'm going to destroy it!".

The other group are men who run simply on having been a veteran.  Eh?  Lee Harvey Oswald was a veteran.   This group has nothing much more to say other than "I'm a veteran".  So what?  Lots of people are veterans.  This is the Stahlhelm group.

Brent Bien is a bottle baby.  He was a career Marin Corps officer and had a really distinguished career.  Now he's back in the state and seeks to apply that experience, which is wholly irrelevant to running the state, to wrecking government.

Footnotes

1.  While I know that it will happen no time soon, it really needs to become the case that lands that went into private hands through a Homestead Act can't go into corporate or absentee hands.

2.  According to news reports Allemand admitted to the sheriff's deputy that he drank and drive, in order to address "stress".  In the papers he came out just like he did in the campaign, which is to say as a boisterous asshole.  That alone should put an end to his political career.

Most of his business career, we'd note, was spent in Kansas.  He ought to just go back to Kansas.