Sitka Gear Turkey Tool Belt

Sportsmen’s Heritage And Recreational Enhancement

"AK-47-wielding poachers slaughtering elephants and sawing off their faces, destroying the economies of Africa in the process, and financing terrorists who are a threat to African and western nations."

Radical eco terrorists are always there at the right time, when I need a laugh.
 
SHARE Act passed House today, with wolf language

The SHARE Act (HR 2406) was passed by the US House today on a 242-161 vote. It was amended to reinstate the USFWS decision to delist the gray wolf in the Western Great Lakes states and Wyoming from the Endangered Species Act.

The bill also requires BLM and USFS lands be open to hunting, fishing, shooting unless specifically closed; extends state authority under Pittman-Robertson Act for expanding shooting ranges; makes exemption from lead shot ban permanent; requires USFWS to include hunting and fishing as priority public uses for new refuge system lands; and much more.
 
Chuckle said:
The SHARE Act (HR 2406) was passed by the US House today on a 242-161 vote. It was amended to reinstate the USFWS decision to delist the gray wolf in the Western Great Lakes states and Wyoming from the Endangered Species Act.

The bill also requires BLM and USFS lands be open to hunting, fishing, shooting unless specifically closed; extends state authority under Pittman-Robertson Act for expanding shooting ranges; makes exemption from lead shot ban permanent; requires USFWS to include hunting and fishing as priority public uses for new refuge system lands; and much more.
Click to expand...

Sorry Wayne
 
SHARE Act vs. Bipartisan Sportsmen's Act

I wrote my Senators in support of HR 2406 SHARE act which just passed the House and my Senator replied with his support of the S 405 Bipartisan Sportmans Act. What's the difference between these two bills?
 
I don't have a problem with it, but what is the deal with allowing polar bears shot 20 years ago to be brought in? I can't imagine very many people got screwed out of their trophy by the law change...

Airlock - there seems to be some real lunacy sky-is-falling stuff being floated about this bill, but there are some real concerns II've found while browsing it. I'm trying to put together a summary.
 
This seems to be of concern to the backcountry hunting type folks. Does anyone know why Congress has to intervene in this particular issue?

[FONT=&quot]SEC. 1701. Utility terrain vehicles in Kisatchie National Forest [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](a) In general.—The Forest Administrator shall amend the applicable travel plan to allow utility terrain vehicles access on all roads nominated by the Secretary of Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries in the Kisatchie National Forest, except when such designation would pose an unacceptable safety risk, in which case the Forest Administrator shall publish a notice in the Federal Register with a justification for the closure.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](b) Utility terrain vehicles defined.—For purposes of this section, the term “utility terrain vehicle”— [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](1) means any recreational motor vehicle designed for and capable of travel over designated roads, traveling on four or more tires with a maximum tire width of 27 inches, a maximum wheel cleat or lug of [/FONT][FONT=&quot]3[/FONT][FONT=&quot]⁄[/FONT][FONT=&quot]4 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]of an inch, a minimum width of 50 inches but not exceeding 74 inches, a minimum weight of at least 700 pounds but not exceeding 2,000 pounds, and a minimum wheelbase of 61 inches but not exceeding 110 inches;[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](2) includes vehicles not equipped with a certification label as required by part 567.4 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations; and[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](3) does not include golf carts, vehicles specially designed to carry a disabled person, or vehicles otherwise registered under section 32.299 of the Louisiana State statutes.[/FONT]
Click to expand...
 
Sportsmen's heritage and recreational enhancement act h.r. 3668 2017

SPORTSMEN'S HERITAGE AND RECREATIONAL ENHANCEMENT ACT H.R. 3668
This bill is back in Congress this session. I've read it and most of it looks really good. I am seeing lots of commentary about a provision that would allow motorized vehicles and temporary roads in Wilderness areas. I am not a lawyer and evidently not sophisticated enough to read that provision that way. Does anyone else see it that way? What are your thoughts? Randy should be happy with the film crew provision!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Congress Passes Outdoor Recreation's Economic Contributions Act of 2016
Replies
9
Views
2K
hank4elk
H
M
Where hunters and anglers (still) stand on public lands
Replies
1
Views
599
Oneye
O
?
Buzz Hettick- Walking the Walk
2 3
Replies
54
Views
9K
MTGomer
MTGomer
RobG
Resilient Federal Forest Act of 2015
Replies
4
Views
2K
RobG
RobG
Big Fin
Making Public Lands Public
Replies
16
Views
3K
Pierre
P
Yeti GOBOX Collection

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,004
Messages
1,943,301
Members
34,956
Latest member
mfrosty6

Share this page

Back
Top