The MeatEater Podcast - Ep. 638: If You Hunt or Fish on BLM Land, You Better Listen Up

Episode Date: December 16, 2024

teven Rinella talks with Brad Brooks, Dave Wilms,TKTKTKKTKT Brooklynn Stevens, Ryan Callaghan, Randall Williams, Phil Taylor, and Corinne Schneider.  Topics discussed: The Sicilian coming out of Steve; the Mayor of Flavortown; Brooklynn’s overstuffed garage of skulls; a correction on “over and out”; using waterpiks on nasal cavities; the sage brush rebellion; the state of Utah suing the Federal Government; being a measured guy; acquiring and holding public land; and more.   Connect with Steve and The MeatEater Podcast Network Steve on Instagram and Twitter MeatEater on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and YoutubeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sometimes when it comes to your personal fitness goals, you just need a plan. Peloton can give you the plan. Absolutely. And Steve, you've got a Peloton. I sure do. And Steve benefits from things like a variety of challenging classes. There are four week strength building classes, running, cycling, everything in between. Peloton can adapt to any goal in this season of your life.

And by the way, the holidays are around the corner. Now is when you need to be on the Peloton. Find your push, find your power with Peloton at onepeloton.ca. Mead Eater Radio Live is the newest edition to the Mead Eater podcast feed. Every Thursday at 11 a.m. Mountain Time, we'll be going live from Mead Eater HQ

on the Mead Eater Podcast Network YouTube channel. This one hour variety show will feature call in guests, you to the Meat Eater crew every Thursday at 11 a.m. Mountain Time on the Meat Eater Podcast Network YouTube channel. And remember, it's live, so anything can happen. Well, almost anything. This is the Meat Eater Podcast coming at you shirtless, severely bug-bitten, and in my case, underwear-less. The Meat Eater Podcast.

You can't predict anything. The Meat Eater Podcast is brought to you by First Light. Whether you're checking trail cams, hanging deer stands, or scouting for elk, First Light has performance apparel to support every hunter in every environment. Check it out at firstlight.com. F-I-R L I T E dot com. Oh for months all summer all last summer still now I've been working on a new project that I haven't talked about before because it's kind of a little bit it was secrety but it's no longer secrety I did a new show.

I'm doing a new show with history channel, which premieres Tuesday, January 28th at 10 PM Eastern. Okay. So we filmed eight one hour standalone episodes of a new show called hunting history with Steven Ronella. And we dive into eight, what we call outdoor mysteries. Okay. So the premier episode has to do with details surrounding the

disappearance of the skyjacker, DB Cooper. So the only unsolved skyjacking in American history, we dive into the disappearance of DB Cooper. We're doing an episode on the lost colony of Roanoke. We did an episode on one that was close to home to me, is that kind of blows my mind. The first ship, okay, the first ship ever built to operate on the upper Great Lakes was, if you ever heard of a dude named LaSalle, like LaSalle was the first guy to descend, the first European to descend the Mississippi down to the

Gulf of Mexico. Well, LaSalle built this ship above Niagara Falls, a fur trading vessel, okay, in 1600s. That thing's missing and what's crazy is there's still people trying to look, a competitive search of people still trying to look for and find his missing ship, which is somewhere in the Great Lakes called the Griffin. Did an episode on that. Did an episode around first humans in North America. So check it out! Hunting History premieres on the History Channel at 10 p.m. Eastern on Tuesday January 28. Thank you. Kel, if someone were to ask you what political office Guy Fieri holds, what town, what would you say? Boy, it'd be awesome if it was like health inspector.

No, no, what town? What town? The contentious language was elected official. Elected official. We all know. It's just, I wasn't even there. Is he a mayor? He's the mayor of Flavortown.

Oh, Flavortown, nice. If he says elected official, he has to admit that it was wrong. How many points did you win by? One point. So yeah, it was the game. I said, if we were to ask, what animal is the king of the jungle?

The elected king of the jungle? I mean, it's that's what it's a bad analogy man it's not terrible not the same what if turn the machine on Phil jeans on okay ladies gentlemen now none of this happens where we start a show and there's already a conversation occurring in the media race in the old days we would just start no one even knew when it started Phil wasn't even born yet Now we start it don't we feel yeah, that's right. I think it uh it introduces a lot of fun energy

When I just palm it you're contradicting what I'm saying What does I think people like when you say like turn the machine on, people have sort of an anticipation. They're anticipating they're in the middle of something. I want to hear what's going on. Moments ago in this very studio, I wasn't there for it. There was a trivia tournament in the trivia tournament. The host says, I don't want Randall to say it because he, he's like the other side of the fight. Can you do the question, Phil, just for listeners? So, Meater Trivia, we've got a great show coming up for you today,

ladies and gentlemen. Meater Trivia, and Meater Trivia, it was just happened here a minute ago, this question was read. Yes, the official wording was, Rockstar Chef Guy Fieri is an elected government official of what municipality okay Randall said says flavor tone okay everybody else has a shit fit because of the word choice elected when I think of guy Fieri, it's not Fieri for starters, it's Fieri. Like there's a guy named Eddie, you owe him a fee, Fieri. Really? Yes, that's what he says. This is the Sicilian coming out and Steve right now.

Well, when I think of Guy, the first thing that comes to mind is his trademarked nickname, the Mayor of Flavortown. That's his nickname? Yeah. If you pull up his bio on Instagram, it's the first thing that it says. So I think a better question would have been- This is Brad Brooks.

Yeah, okay. And I was there for this. Brad Brooks came up from Idaho to talk about this. He's something of a guy, he's an expert. A lot of people say that about me, Steve. A better question would have been like, what is his trademark nickname that denotes a sort of governmental position?

But I think that would have been too obvious. I thought this was a fun question. It's not fun for me. What if you said, one different place is a state of mind where fun and food meet in perfect harmony. And he's the... What position does he hold

in this? Like would you say that if you said okay like Jimmy Buffett is the elected official of what municipality I'd be thinking well shit did he get into politics I would be thinking oh Margaritaville I mean if he's known as the mayor of Margaritaville

I think an elected position I like okay the guy fear is downtown It's tongue in cheek. Fieri. Not in Montana. It is in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee and a bunch of other locations. Is there some sort of election that's going on? Mm-hmm. And was it rigged? I think Spencer, I think Spencer- The incumbent? Is that the mayor of Dollywood? He made a clumsy attempt to not use the word mayor in the question Here's where the problem comes up to me and we'll get on with the show eventually We're just punt it Crenna. Let's just punt the episode and we'll stay on this The problem for me winds up being that he used such formal language and if I had been in the room

I would have gotten it wrong cuz I would have been thinking what the hell town is he from? And maybe he was elected. So that's what I said to, that's what I said in the moment. I said, because Spencer used important sounding words, you guys thought it was a real thing. I thought he was like an honorary doctorate. Like some town had given him like an honorary mayoral position, you know, that's what I thought.

That's clever. And that's what I, What'd you write down? Atlantic City. Why that? Atlantic City why that I just Can I be honest pull it out of my ass? I was just like He reached into his button Atlantic City was in there I initially thought flavor town because it's the only word I associate with Guy Fieri and Then I took ten seconds to think about I thought oh, yeah, he's the mayor of flavor town

I would have had you know that there's a sports expression about leaving it all on the Field. Yeah. I'd left it all on this mic If I would have been in that room I think everybody in the room at in the moment recognized that that would have been the case and It's it's good that you weren't there because there was quite a stink in your absence. I'd be worried for Spencer's wellbeing. Had you been in the room and within Yannis reach.

Yannis almost quit. Yeah. He almost walked out. He almost walked out. Wow. Got that. When I said, I would have done that with him, like a little protest like a little protest. I've done that with them. When I set super early alarms for Turkey season, I name them and often it's like Turkey town, USA

Gobblerville, right? And so now I'm going to be like, now who would be the elected official of Gobblerville? I always, you know, when you're doing a protest and you walk out, do you say, hell no, we will go? I think so. I can picture a protest where you're not going to leave, but a protest where you leave what you chant. I don't, it depends on what you're leaving. Like if you're leaving an airplane, that's going to take you somewhere or a bus, you know, if you march off of a vehicle that's about to move you, I think the we won't go still holds. Yeah.

That's true. Cause it's leaving Brooklyn house business, Ben, man. We're getting, I'm starting the actual show now. Phillip, you didn't like any of that. You can start the machine now. It's all standing. Okay. Uh, Brooklyn's here. The second time you you can start the machine now. It's all staying in. Okay. Brooklyn's here, the second time you've been on the show,

introduce yourself, Brooklyn. What do you want me to say? Do you like Brooklyn or Brooke better? Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. Where's your new job at though? You got a part-time job you're working down at? The Meat Eater Flagship store.

Do you like working down there? Oh yeah. You do? Mm-hmm. Do you field a lot of dumb questions when you're down there or how do you rate the clientele? What's the hot gossip down there? I'm not really sure, to be honest.

She stays out of the go. A lot of people think it's a restaurant. Is that right? Yeah. Like, they'll walk in. They'll be like, I have a five o'clock reservation. Well, they'll like walk in. They just kind of like stand at the front and just like stare and then they'll just walk out. Next time go are you ready to be seated? And then just walk them back to the TV and back. You don't try to sell them? When that happens you don't try to sell them

something real quick? No because you just kind of like it happens in like a span of 10 seconds if that. So you can tell like that person didn't know what they were coming to. Yeah. When you're really funny. So when you're down there, do you engage with the customers? Oh yeah, yeah. Someone was across the street and overheard a passerby saying, I bet that place has good steaks. Pence, they do.

So how many hours you working down there? Just a couple of days a week, I'm not sure, hour-wise. Okay, and then you're still running your school cleaning business. Yep. And then you've been on the show before about your school cleaning business. Yeah. Here you have my daughter's buck from this year. Yeah. Impeccably clean. Can I take a look? Yeah. In fact, Brooklyn was set to come on the show a week ago and didn't do it. Because she's a perfectionist because she was is too much, perhaps too much of a perfectionist and didn't want to come down because it

wasn't ready yet. Hmm. It's not overboiled. I can tell you that. No obvious residue sticking to it. No smell. Oh, he had a, he had a funky tooth. I saw that. Um, it's not like all crumbly from getting over boiled beautifully bleached You didn't bleach way the hell up the antler no no I hate doing that yeah You didn't make it that this is all crumbly and nasty It looks perfect. Thank you. Are you getting much business for your school cleaning business? Yeah, I am really busy. You're real busy This is a busy time of year. Yeah, my garage is

Way overstuffed You got a lot of work. Yeah, is it bad that you're here because you don't want more work Are you always looking for more work? I'm always looking for more. Okay, so tell people how they come and find you to bring you a skull You should talk about your pricing a little bit too, just so people know. Or don't you want to get into that? For just as deer, just standard year, 125 elk, 165, that's just basic. Anelope is same as deer, 125. Okay. I'm on Instagram at 406boneworks, Instagram at 406 bone works or I think the if you go to the meat eater store I have a a few flyer down there. I saw that flyer in the window I was dropping off some ammo there today and saw the flyer. That was a good idea. Yeah. Yeah. And then

people can send it to you? Yeah you can just message me and I'll tell you where to drop it off. Yep. We're gonna pass pass this around and we're going to do a thing. You know Nate that we work with that pointed out to me that 10-4 isn't a thing? Oh, no, no. Yeah. Full time A. Over and out. Over and out.

Have you been all your whole life heard people say over and out? Oh, yeah. You can't say over and out. Wait, why not? Because you're contradicting yourself. Over means it's your turn to talk. Out means we're done. So he's sort of like saying,

what do you think, Bob? I'm out. You can talk to yourself. It's like the old like, Now, he's out of the military. Okay. He said, if you can make this correction and broadcast it to the world,

ham radio operators and Bradley fighting vehicle people will forever thank you. You do not say over and out. You just say over over or out. What about him protest? If you, yeah, cause he called me saying over now he's like, Oh, like you're saying, like I say, um, what's your phone number? What's the name of your company?

Brooke over. No, you say, yeah, say something. What's your phone number? What's the name of your company? Brooke? Over. You say something. No, you say something. I can't see you because we're on the radio. 406 Boneworks. Over. Out. Click. Hey Brooke, can I say, I think you should charge more for your work right here. This is like good work. Well, it's not your turn to comment yet.

Oh, okay. He didn not your turn to comment yet. Oh, okay. He didn't say over to you yet. Anyways, Nate came to me and said, he also came to me today to say this. You know, I like to do one to 10, rate things on a one to 10. He says, it's a lot better to go negative five to five.

Cause you go, a one sort of leaves us like, right? How was the restaurant? A one. Picture that it's a negative five. Yeah, that's good. So he's like, don't do one to 10, negative five to five. So we're gonna pass this around. You're gonna assess the work.

Negative five to five. Yeah, Brad, I'd also hold that comment. I have a few skulls that I plan on. I, he thinks after a respectable, after a respectable period of time for, for Randall to submit his specimens, he thinks that a price increase might be in order. Yeah.

I've got a question for you, Brooke, about, so I was texting with you a little bit when I was like, trying to boil this coyote skull. And anyway, I definitely overboiled it and the teeth fell out and so I've got a second one to do. I tried doing it like a couple of times yeah it just I don't know there's so I've got a second one I can work with but with the first one when I was trying to clean out the nostrils I like jammed a chopstick in

there and I probably probably shouldn't have done that because there's like that really cool I don't know what do call it, like filament type stuff that's delicate? Nasal, like what do you call them? I just call it nose curls or a nasal cavity. Yeah, like what would you do for like a coyote? Would you like poke those out because they're so delicate or? No, so I was actually after my my last podcast a guy had emailed me and He did like a bobcat or something

And he told me to for those smaller skulls to use a water pick because it's like a mini pressure washer And so that's what I do on Bear to And so that's what I do on bear to For Spencer actually I just finished a muskrat so that's Muskrat's the smallest I've done, but it works from bear to muskrat. What do you charge him for a muskrat? I can't remember because I've never done it. 30 bucks? I think it was like 40 maybe. Hmm good. Okay, so we're going to go around the room for a score. I give you a four out of, same scale right?

Negative five to five. Yeah, I give you a four, mostly. Same as a nine. Yeah. Yeah. And then part of that, I'll just say that like, I haven't done enough taxidermy to know what a five would look like,

but I think that's really good and really clean. The teeth aren't loose. The nasal cavity looks really in good shape. Like it's really good. But you gotta have something to work for. So can't be perfect. Yeah, how old are you? I would just turn 18.

Yeah, so if you have a five, you got nothing else. Meaning a 10. Yeah. Yeah. What the hell would you wake up for tomorrow? True, true. Now you know what it's like to be one of my kids. I'm just going to totally disagree.

I think it's a five. I think we should tell everybody it's a five and agree with Brad. You should be charging more. Listen, I'm into her for 120. I guess it's not going to change. You're not going to proactively. You're not going to proactively, you're not going to like retroactively. I'm saying I paid like 150 bucks or 160 bucks for an elk in 2019 and inflation's been rampant. That's all we've heard about an entire, right?

This is toppling administrations. It's toppling. So you should be raising your prices by 30, 40%. And you turned that around in a week. There should be an your prices by 30, 40 percent. And you turned that around in a week. There should be an expedited rate. The normal thing is they're like, you know, my dad used to have a joke, you know, I don't know what the hell it went. Like you call the guy that's fixing your shoes and it's been like three years. Oh, I'm just finishing them up right now. Yeah. You know, but the turnaround time is amazing. Yeah. I try to keep it. I mean, like I'm a hunter myself. And so I know like you want

your stuff back. You want your head back. Um, that, and I don't like all of the heads stinking in my garage. So I'm going to try and get them done as fast as I can. So they don't stink up my garage. This is your parents' garage too, right? How do they think about this little business? Eh.

They just. They give it a negative? Probably, they don't mind it. They kind of think it's funny. I don't know, I recently started getting into more tanning and so I have a lot of hides and I had freezer, all my hides stuffed in the freezer so I recently had to buy my own freezer

because he didn't like it in the freezer. So your overheads are going up. It's me. Within the cupping years they will. Yeah everyone tells me to. And expedited pricing. Turn around a week. Yeah. Have you thought about that? Charging for the promptness? That's smart Dave. Yeah. If you said to me, let's say you suck with current pricing and you had said to me like, it's 125 bucks expedited as 135. You're just like making up. Like it could have been more. I'd be like, yeah, I'll do that.

Mm-hmm. Yeah. And you don't even have to tell them that you would have done it just as fast no matter what. True. Then the guy that doesn't pay for it, he's going to think, my God, imagine if I had paid for it. How fast it would have been.

Yeah. Randall? Yeah, I mean, I'm of mixed opinion here. My initial reaction was a four because I have a hard time giving a perfect score. I think of these things similar to Brad. You gotta always have room for improvement. but I don't know what I would do what I would want differently if that were my deer skull I think it looks

fantastic he'd be like I would I would have like the antlers to get bigger yeah how much does that cost yeah no I mean it looks great it doesn't stink it's You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that.

You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that.

You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that.

You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. You can't do that. Oh, yeah, what's the business called again for six boneworks? I'd call it straight fives And then parentheses And zero and six and be like 11 I'd rather send it to a place that gets all tens, but well hold on it started at negative five I got a upcharge for you. Yeah. Okay. And I think this would revolutionize

the world of European mounts. Is if you, yeah, for a couple bucks extra, I will apply something, you'll have to figure this part out, to the nose area that your dog will not chew on it. mmm mmm many many good hero miles. Are you looking at me? You get the sour apple spray. You get like the sour apple spray. Many good animal has had its face chewed off before it can be a real pretty hero mile. And I told you I'm sorry many times about my puppy last

year Ryan. That's a good point. This pulls you into chemistry. You can try using vinegar. That's up to you. Like you said, you got to figure it out. I always call that the unintentional skull plate conversion. Rolls off the bookshelf, you know, or a dog gets a hold of it. Eh, it's a skull plate now. Yeah.

Yeah. I had one, I had a nice white tail hanging in an area where like in a breezeway. And now and then you get just this insane wind. If someone opened, if the garage door is open on one end and someone opens the door on the other end and that thing has more times, boom, falling down.

And it now is basically like, it's gotten a lot smaller. Yeah. And there's pieces of bone. I come home you know and I might ask for little chunks of bone. And there's no point in an antelope Euro mount if the nose is chewed off. Yeah. Like it's just not. Yeah there's nothing. This is what happened to yours. I mean this has had to have happened to your animals I thought you had sounds like you guys have some I had was last Are you still bitter about this? No, I'm not

It's still because you sound like you're upset about so what happened just to clear the air is Ryan shot a very nice buck. I took it home I had a new puppy and she got into both our deer, but she chewed more of Ryan's nose than mine. Mm. Yeah, the crazy thing is, she opened the door where the skulls were, got into the secured area where they were, because obviously you wouldn't put them

someplace where a puppy could get to them. Mm-hmm, yeah, of course. So a very special dog. I've always said she's smart, man. Oh, I remember this happening now. This is all coming back to me. I remember this happening. I've never heard about this before. I feel like it's a very common thing. Anyway it would be a great way for you to be like yeah your mounts done for a couple extra bucks. For 40 bucks you'll dip it in like whatever the hell dogs have. That's what happened to that's what happened to Chili's first antelope. Yeah, exactly. His roommate's dog chewed his

own. You know what you might put on there? They make this thing for little kids, I didn't know about this, you know if a kid winds up chewing his fingernails too much? Oh yeah. They make this shit you put on his fingernails and they about vomit. Really? Yeah. It's bad. So you tell them, I need 40 bucks to dog proof it. Put that shit all over it. Unless something tastes it, they don't know. And that dog gets his tongue on that.

You got a dog? I do. Get a bottle of this stuff and swab his tongue with it and see what he does. The only thing is my dogs like throwing up Just based on the frequency with which they do it. I'm not sure that would be a huge deterrent Try that I've never heard of the dog. I'll put it on my own dog and I'll report back to you Okay, but she just had surgery so I'm gonna wait till she feels better. She's very depressed

She's got her own with that humiliating cone on all the things she normally does she can't do she thinks she's in trouble constantly Mmm, cuz like she can't do any of the fun stuff. She knows she's totally depressed. She's probably kill herself Later, I'll hit her with that stuff right now Right now it'd be like it'd be like too much. Yeah, be too much. She'd jump off a dog cliff. Yeah Thanks for coming in remind people how to find you you can stay and hang out but remind people how to find you through Instagram 406 boneworks or just word of mouth really people on my phone number and just I Don't want to put my phone number out there. No, no, don't put it out there like this go like put it out there Like here's how to find me by God. What is it through Instagram. Okay and they do what? Just message me. Okay so

message Brooke at Instagram find her on Instagram at 406 boneworks. Yeah support young business American entrepreneurship. Yep. How do you say that word? Prenuership. Prenuership. American Elbow Grease. Real entrepreneur. Street fives. Yep. And keep, I hope your business keeps blooming. Yeah, for sure. Sometimes when it comes to your personal fitness goals, you just need a plan. Peloton can give you the plan, absolutely. And Steve, you've got a Peloton.

I sure do. And Steve benefits from things like a variety of challenging classes. There are four week strength building classes, running, cycling, everything in between. Peloton can adapt to any goal in this season of your life. And by the way, the holidays are around the corner. Now is when you need to be on the Peloton.

Find your push, find your power with Peloton at OnePeloton.ca. MeatEater Radio Live is the newest addition to the MeatEater Podcast feed. in will be available in audio form on the meat eater podcast feed. So come hang with me, Steve, Yanni, Cal, and the rest of the meat eater crew every Thursday at 11 a.m. Mountain time on the meat eater podcast network, YouTube channel. And remember it's live so anything can happen. Well, almost anything. There was a thing we were going to talk about, but I kind of want to get to the main subject. Brody the other day, we were doing the live show and we were doing our thing about where you indefensible law.

Like if you could just make a law that's totally indefensible, but it would satisfy some pet peeve. Brody was saying why he's floating. Maybe it should, maybe it would be illegal to catch and release fish. And we had a laugh about that. And then someone wrote in and says in Germany in most parts of Germany, it is a, it is illegal to catch and release a fish. They don't want you doing it for that reason. If you catch it, eat it. I don't know if this is true.

A guy named Lucas says it is. With a K? I got it. Yes it is with a K. So you know you can trust it. Oh I trust him. Yeah. That's German. All right, I want the main show.

Brad, do you mind introducing yourself for real? Then Dave, can you introduce yourself? Yeah, Brad Brooks Founder CEO of a company called our golly. We're back at your hunting gear and equipment company For this I for this gig I also worked stint in public lands too. So mm-hmm And Dave you've been on the show probably four or five times. Yeah, not as many as folks like Heffelfinger No, I don't know. He gives me a hard time. Oh, it's like you know, you're right

You're neck-and-neck with how we might be he's but he writes in a lot, but he right so his presence Yeah Yeah, David Wilms. I'm Based in Wyoming a work for the National Wildlife Federation now. I'm our Associate Vice President of Public Lands and also oversee our hunting angling advocacy work as well. And prior to that, worked for Governor of Wyoming, worked for the Attorney General's office, did work with our State Game and Fish Department, and been an attorney for, I won't say how long, long enough now. Long long time since you were a child feels like it yeah I mean look at my pictures and it looks like it and of course dr. Randall's here and also

joined by Ryan Callahan and we're here to discuss the subject of great importance that has been brewing in the background like I've been hearing about it and hearing about it and you're hearing about it we keep saying we want to do something about it I kind of thought it would go away. By now you're probably dying to what we're talking about. Who wants to know what we're talking about? Who wants to take this and run with it? The high level what we're talking about. I'll do the quick overview.

What is happening? Okay, so this would all fall under sagebrush rebellion we could call it. This bubbles up about every 10 years it seems like, but it's a movement from certain players. In this occasion the state of Utah kicked it off with In this occasion, the state of Utah kicked it off with this idea that really falls back to like the federal government can't own land. The arguments kind of, they're all variations of that. And the motivation is the fact that the states want more land because they're of great economic value. So the state of Utah currently is suing the federal government over unincorporated lands that belong to the

Bureau of Land Management or fall under the management of the Bureau of Land Management, about 18 and a half million acres in that fall in the state of Utah's borders. 18 and a half million acres. Yes. Yep. Um, and they are suing the federal government, um, saying that, uh, that land, it's illegal for the BLM to control that land and

the state of Utah wants that land to Basically do it as they please and there's some versions of what that is But they do use in their lawsuit the the word divest Which means sell so there's Yeah, basically they're gonna hold the acres that are of the greatest economic importance and divest The rest which would be sell off the rest of those

public acres and Then kind of the the ball of wax grows from there as far as what the implications of this lawsuit could be. But if the federal government can't maintain and own Bureau of Land Management land, what does that mean for US forest service land, uh, Bureau of Reclamation, uh, and on down the line. So the lawsuit that Idaho's or that Utah's fought the state of Utah was filing a lawsuit saying BLM land is somehow that they don't have the authority to own it. Therefore it should belong to the

States. They're focused particularly on BLM. Is this true? For now. That's true. Why do they feel that BLM land is fundamentally different than any other land management agency? That's a great question. You want me to take the first... You're the lawyer here. Why are we talking about Bureau of Land Management land? That's a great question. It's because that's what they've told us to talk about. Oh, okay. Right? So here's the way I describe the case to people.

First of all, the lawsuits have been filed in front of the United States Supreme Court, right? But, and they've asked, the State of Utah has asked the United States Supreme Court to accept what they call original jurisdiction, which means in an original jurisdiction case, you bypass federal district court, federal appeals court, you go right to the US Supreme Court and the Supreme Court serves as the trial court. How often is that successful? Well, I can tell you-

To have them not defer it down court. So I can tell you, I've been involved in a couple. The last one I was involved in was actually a case the state of Montana sued the state of Wyoming and it was original action number 137 in the history of the country. The 137th original jurisdiction case in the history of the country. That was about ten years ago. There have been a handful since then. It doesn't happen often. There's a high bar to accept jurisdiction. It's typically state v state or state versus federal government and it tends to fall on in these

instances on issues of constitutional questions where there's immediate massive economic harm if we don't resolve it right away or some other really high bar. Got to like who won the presidency? That's a pretty high bar. Might be like a thing like we're just gonna have to take this on now. That's exactly right. So that's the ask, right? And in it, they ask for the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction to hear this case. And the argument is these 18 and a half million acres of BLM lands,

of these unappropriated lands, that it is unconstitutional. They're making a constitutional argument. They're saying it's unconstitutional for the United States to hold land in perpetuity. And this is why it's interesting to me that they focus on 18 and a half million acres. Because what they fundamentally arguing is saying, look, the United States is only able to own the land that is that it's expressly authorized to own under the Constitution They cite hmm, and it's sorry to get super wonky But they'll please I get as wonky as you want cuz I was just gonna ask why can't Maryland sue and take the White House There you go You're asking the right question

right, so Under article 10 which is what states often reference, Article 10 of the Constitution is all of the powers that are not expressly articulated in the Constitution are reserved to the state. And what Utah says is, look, the express authority to own land, for the federal government to own land is only found in one place, in the Enclave Clause. This is their argument. And in the Enclave Clause, the only property that the federal government can own are, and I'll just be very general because there's a series of words, but it boils down to military installations and Washington, D.C.

And so outside of those two things, the argument from Utah is the federal government cannot own any other land but those lands. Military bases in DC. Yeah, effectively, right? And so then to then argue that they're limiting their lawsuit to 18 and a half million acres of just BLM is something that I'm, it's like mental gymnastics for me because as the lawyer in me says, you know, I'm looking at facts and law, right? And I'm saying's like mental gymnastics for me because as the lawyer in me says you know I'm looking at facts and law right and I'm saying if it if their argument is true and it is and it is unconstitutional to own any lands besides military installations in Washington DC then why in the world

would they only be entitled to the 18 and a half million acres? Yeah, why wouldn't Wyoming make a play for Yellowstone National Park? What a windfall. Right? I mean, that'd be like one chunk of public land that if they took, the state would actually make money off it. Probably. Yeah, you'd think so, at least tourism alone, dollars alone, right? But so so that's the thing. I like to start off with I'm I'm a pretty you know, I'm a pretty measured Guy too much. So yeah That's why you keep coming back

Go with a five. I did go with a five that was but it was a measured five It's like there's qualified. Yes, it's like there's room for improvement. You could charge more sure services But your work is so good. It's a five. Yeah but I some very measured but then I look at this and say It's not hyperbolic to say that all six hundred and forty million acres Are at stake in this of public lands in the United States are at stake in this litigation because if it is unconstitutional to own lands in the United States are at stake in this litigation because if it is unconstitutional to own lands in perpetuity then it's unconstitutional on all lands except those expressly authorized by the Constitution according

to Utah. Yeah like Gettysburg. Wouldn't Gettysburg be not listed? Yeah I think so. It's a monument a national monument or national historic park. Do they give you constitutional authority to own a monument? Probably not. No. According to that lawsuit. Yeah according to the lawsuit. I mean I would argue yes. Well no I'm saying if you if someone was literally like I'm not a constitutional scholar so I don't know if that surprises you, but if you were to look at this thing they're pointing to that says what kind of land they could own, I'm just trying to capture the extent of like sort of the bombshell you're

dropping to be that not just BLM, but you could say the same thing about national parks, you could say the same thing about national monuments, you could say the same thing about whatever. National forests. National forests. US Fish and Wildlife Service lands, Bureau of Reclamation lands. So is there in this suit, and there's a lot we got to get into here, like other states joining all that, but in this suit is there any articulation about why we're talking about BLM? Like what is it about the Bureau of Land Management that to them seems, that to them seems like riper for exploitation than if they were going after Zion National Park. I think it's the unincorporated line, like how the

BLM came to be is it was kind of like all the the undesignated land that was leftover so there's like a low-hanging fruit type of deal but also Utah on BLM ground has a real history back and forth of like a lot of Bears Ears Grand Staircase Escalante that is BLM land that then went into a monument status and then was went back to non-monument status and that's where you hear like a lot of that oh yeah that is public but you can't access it. Got it. Type of talk. Yeah I mean the the National Forest System as we know it was set aside as Forest Reserves right? Like we've always had, the federal

government has always acquired new land through purchase or military conquest basically, right? But most of the public land system as we know it, those chunks of public land were set aside for a certain purpose. And BLM is essentially what was left over that wasn't, you know, either reserved or disposed of. So it's sort of like the accidental... Historically speaking, it's sort of like accidentally the federal government's, because in theory it should have all been disposed of. Yeah, I mean if you were gonna take the argument, like why are we here? What is our... right? It's exactly that. It's, we had a system where, as states were originally admitted into the union, they were required to disavow

any claims to lands that were within their borders that were unappropriated lands. And at the time, we're talking in the 1700s here, we're talking at the time, unappropriated meaning, lands that weren't already in private ownership. The state had to disavow claims to them and it would go to the federal estate. And then the federal government set up a whole series of laws for how they were going to dispose of these lands. It's the way I describe it. We had things like there were laws that gave land to veterans of wars, early wars. There were, you know, we all know about

Homestead Act. There were a series of, well, bequeaths to the railroad as they, you know, to connect the east to the west. So they're actually... Yeah, the railroads were compensated... With land instead of money. Yeah, like you get the land your tracks on and then checkerboard everything within 20 miles You get half of it or whatever to help. Yeah, so we had this system that ran for You know until 1976 really and starting in really I was gonna say 1891 It's really starting in more like 1876, which I think is when Yellowstone

was first created. That was sort of the first time that the government said, okay, not this. We're going to try and sell a bunch of stuff, but not this. And then 1891 comes the Forest Reserve Act. And Congress again says, there's a lot of economic value to this timber. We're seeing in some places unsustainable timber harvest. We need it for expansion for home building, rail building. We're going to reserve all these timber lands.

Okay, so now we start establishing the national forests. Then we roll into the early part of the century and we have the Antiquities Act and we start seeing more monuments and parks created. And we're still having homesteading during this time. And we have the Taylor Grazing Act that comes into play to deal with how do we manage grazing on some of these lands. But you can having homesteading during this time and we have the Taylor Grazing Act that comes into place to Into play to deal with how do we manage grazing on some of these lands? But you can still homestead and then 1906 rolls around and we passed the Federal Land Planning Management Act right policy and management act shoot Thank you. I always mess it up and I've been in this space for 20 years

Well, you can't bless your heart for avoiding the acronyms. I try Doing great job. So 1976 happens and and all the land that has not been put into national parks or monuments or wilderness areas or you know list the whole list of the things, national wildlife refuges. The federal government says they're looking at it and they're seeing there's a lot of value to these lands too. Like nobody was homesteading them, It looked like for the longest time it was viewed as sort of trash land But they're starting to realize there's a lot of value here. There's oil and gas resources that are you know, pretty incredible There's recreation resources that we're starting to see there's value to and so they passed this law This uranium stuff that was pretty scary it turns out

This uranium stuff that was pretty scary, turns out pretty valuable. Yeah, and so they passed this law that says once and for all it's the policy of the federal government to keep this land in the federal estate, and it effectively ends the homesteading. That's when the Homestead Act really formally ended. It was 1976, not that long ago. And you can look at that law and it matches pretty perfectly to when the sagebrush rebellion starts to kick off. Because this argument is, no, no, you were always supposed to get rid of that land. You're always supposed to get rid of that land. And now you're saying it's the policy of the federal government to only get

rid of it in very limited circumstances and in very small amounts if it goes through this long process and that's not what we signed up for you need to be getting rid of it and so these iterations of this you know as Cal was saying these iterations of the sagebrush rebellion started coming around really in political cycles you know like every like a sine wave you know every 10 years or so so the logic a little bit is it was like it's last in first out. Yeah. Okay. Can I just say though, like I want to make, think it's really important though, to

point out, like there isn't in most people's mind, and maybe I'm speaking for myself here, like an open legal question about whether or not public lands are constitutional. I think there is like this assumption that some people have that like, hey, this has like been an open question and we just want to push for, you know, some clarity on this, right? Like, like I don't want there to be, I don't think it's appropriate or not. I don't want to put words in your mouth here, Dave, but like, I want to make sure people understand though, because that what you're not saying, and tell me if I'm wrong wrong here is that there isn't an open legal question since Fletma passed in 1976 about the

constitutionality of Beeline lands With one exception and it's the exception that Utah is putting out there So there have been a series of cases that have said There have been a series of cases that have said under the property clause of the constitution, the federal government can own land, can manage it, can exclude people, can regulate, you know, take, for example, can save this forest. We're not going to have hunting on it right now. It's the stuff that's used today when there's a fire and they administratively close it. And you're like, well, can't hunt there this year, right? Yep, like the Supreme Court has weighed in there's a mountain of case law on that

What Utah is arguing is this very narrow piece? They're saying we agree with that. We're not contesting those cases but what we're saying is that the court hasn't actually addressed the question of whether they can do that in perpetuity. The argument there, and I'm just putting, I'm just saying what their claim is. Sure, I'm asking you for your opinion though. I'll get to that. But I want to make sure people understand what you're saying. Okay, I really appreciate this because I like to hear you know people should understand the argument yeah right exactly so so the argument is yes the federal government has the authority to manage lands as long as it takes to dispose of them and if it takes 30 years to dispose of them they can manage them like any other landowner for

that 30 years this is the argument Utah effectively makes. They're just saying the Supreme Court hasn't weighed in on this very narrow issue of can they hold those lands in perpetuity. And that's what the claim is. And I think they they wrote the their complaint that way because it gives them the highest likelihood that a court accepts that the court accepts jurisdiction or if they don't because if the court doesn't accept it Utah probably turn around and file this case in federal district court in Utah and just go through the normal process and they're setting it up to hopefully have the Supreme Court accept what's called cert a petition for cert

which would be when it goes through a normal appeals process would they accept the appeal and hear the case then so So they're setting up a, what we would call a case of first impression is what they're trying to set up to, to increase their chances that the Supreme court will take the case on a, on a narrow, on a very narrow issue that the court has never weighed in on. And to be clear, Utah is trying to set, they're trying to go to the US Constitution, or sorry, they're trying to go to the US Supreme Court. So they're not argued, this is not necessarily about what is going on in Utah, because if the court finds in their favor, it finds in everybody's favor. That's my argument. Other states,

every other state that has BLM land would be able to be like, well that applies to me as well. Why would it somehow be specific to Utah? But I say not just BLM land. This is where I keep having to dive in and say, not just BLM land, all public land. Yeah. So how, how, if you look at it, like, like how many acres of BLM land of, of like, how many acres of public BLM land are in Utah?

How many acres of BLM public land are in the U S in general? Like what's, what's, if this was to be found Utah, how many acres of BLM public land are in the US in general? Like what's, what's, if this was to be found true, how many acres of hunting and fishing ground are at risk? Well, so if you're just doing on BLM, I don't have the exact numbers on me. Maybe somebody else knows them up to their head. It's, I think it's over 200 million acres. If you're talking, does it apply to all lands, federally owned lands that are that are not military installations or the capital? We're talking 640 million acres. We're talking about one-third of the landmass of the country.

My daughter's buck here. BLM? BLM. Yeah, I mean, I think it's like the it'd be like if you sold some land to your neighbor, right? And then you went, you know, you wanted to like build a driveway or something and you said, oh, I can do this because the original transaction is void, right? And like it's, if you have to accept the argument. For this part, it applies to the whole thing, because what they're arguing is that the federal government cannot possess land. With these few exceptions. So it's like there's there's no I mean, is my understanding of it

is that if the court were to find that argument compelling there's no like safeguard the floodgates are open right like all of a sudden that would void the forest reserve system there's you know like yeah there's nothing in the Constitution there's nothing yeah there's nothing constitutionally different about every other type of federal public land that we know of right sometimes when it comes to your personal fitness goals, you just need a plan. Peloton can give you the plan. Absolutely. And Steve, you've got a Peloton. I sure do. And Steve benefits from things like a variety of challenging classes. There are four week strength building classes,

running, cycling, everything in between. Peloton can adapt to any goal in this season of your life. And by the way, the holidays are around the corner. Now is when you need to be between. Peloton can adapt to any goal in this season of your life. And by the way, the holidays are around the corner. That was when you need to be on the Peloton. Find your push, find your power with Peloton at one Peloton.ca. One of the things about this, this, this current legal push is it winds up it's, it's you're shooting for the same thing as you've always shot for this is just the latest way you're trying to do it I know what okay so so if we let's go back to 2014 2015 you're some of the 10-year cycle let's go back 10 years the

conversation was around it was coming from Utah as well the conversation was around like divestiture or there was just like excess. How did they put it? The excess public lands? Yeah, unincorporated. Yeah, unappropriated is the land that they use. There was a push where they carved off a chunk of land

that they felt was like some level of excess public lands, correct? Yeah, the lands that hadn't been in their eyes set aside for some other public purpose, like a national park or a wilderness area or a national conservation area, national forest, right? The ones that didn't have that specific articulated congressional designation for specific purpose they're saying well that's what we're that's what we're after it's what's left that was the 2014 argument that's the same one today okay so that that was the but

no there was a bill oh yeah that's right like like it was what it was like sponsored by Jason Chaffetz right yeah and it was a how does no one remember the hell this was it was like the yeah yeah I think it was a, how does no one remember what the hell this was? It was like the... Yeah, yeah, it was, I think it was like the divesting public lands act or something like that. But they had a word like excess or... Yeah, they were trying to identify... A surplus. ...chunks of ground that weren't

all that important to the public and sell those. Yeah, and it was putting it forward as a bill that these would be sold. When I say that this is the same, you're driving toward the same goal, you're just taking different attitudes about it. Like, let's say I really wish, I definitely don't, let's say I really wanted to get rid of my neighbor. And one year I try where I go back into, you know, I go back into when he initially did his permitting. Did he make any mistakes? I'm like, okay, he didn't make any mistakes, I still want to get rid of my neighbor. I'm gonna go back into his criminal record, maybe there's something there. No, okay, I'm gonna, is he up on his taxes, right?

Meaning my goal is to get rid of the neighbor. Definitely don't want to do this. My goal is to get rid of the neighbor. Definitely don't want to do this. My goal is to get rid of the neighbor. I'm just gonna keep trying things. Utah's been pursuing this for a long time, right? That's right. Is this a fun, like do you feel that this approach is somehow more sound, is gonna have a different result than the other ways in which they've attempted to take the federal public land and make it something that they can sell and privatize. Here's why it's different. They've invested, I can't remember, Brad, you know the number. It's like 20, the, yeah, I know what you're going to say. It's about $20 million has been

approved with taxpayer dollars, Utah taxpayer dollars, $20 million for a PR campaign to support the lawsuit. So Utah's tax money is paying their own way toward not having their public lands? Correct. Absolutely. 100%, although it's a campaign that the ads are. Talk about losing control of your tax money.

Be like, I got a good idea. I'll pay my taxes. Then you take my tax money and make it that I don't have any public lands. Yeah. Although they're using kind of a rebranded keep it public campaign. Actually, you're talking Washington Post ads, podcast ads. Like there's, I mean, they're going, it's a pretty serious PR campaign. Yeah.

So there, that's one thing that's different, is they're investing in this. But I argue they're not investing in a PR campaign for the litigation. You don't need a PR campaign, the law is what the law is. You're gonna run through the judicial process. Maybe you run a small PR campaign in state to convince your constituents

that this is the right legal move to make. Yeah. But like Brad said, they're running a PR campaign nationally. They're doing, like, I don't know if this is 100% true, but I got texts from friends of mine in DC during the presidential debate that said, I'm seeing ads on my phone and during the debate in my neighborhood about this. Like it's- How do you sell the idea to a guy in DC?

What are you telling him that he's going to care about? Well, I think you're trying, I think you're trying to do a couple of things. It's who's in DC. No, I'm saying what do you, let's say, let's say you're in, in, you're in Utah. Right. And you, um, get campaign money and your cronies and things are in development and other issues and you guys are looking at all of the land that will never be generating money for you, generating business for you, generating

profits for you, generating profits for the state and it's sitting there. How would, if you were ever going to take a message and bring it to a guy in Illinois, what would you ever tell the guy in Illinois that would make him think, yes, I wish there wasn't a bunch of federal public land in Utah? So I think it's, it's this, it's the overall political message of the 10th amendment should matter. And so who are you appealing to in DC? It's the center of power in the country It's where it's where your your Senate your house all of the thousands of staffers that work for them live Yeah, like John Roberts washing his dishes and in the background this adds like subliminally

Yeah, but not just later their court argues in him and he's like, you know by God not just the justices though Remember you're gonna have a Senator from Utah that is gonna have an extreme amount of power over natural resource issues in this country starting in January. You know Senator Mike Lee I don't you know when we're having this conversation I don't know what it how it's gonna pan out But he's in line if he wants it to be the chair of the Senate Natural Resources Committee environment Natural Resources Committee Okay

So having he'll he'll have an incredible amount of power on controlling what type of legislation is heard in the Senate by the committee and what gets passed through for votes. He can hold up packages, public lands packages, he can do all sorts of things. So there's an opportunity to, through this campaign. And for folks who don't know, Senator Lee has been like very prominent in what would be considered like an anti public lands

group. Like he has been pro federally managed public lands. Yes. Yeah. So it's, I've, I've viewed this lawsuit as they want to, they want to win the lawsuit. Obviously they're going down this route. If they, if it doesn't go to the Supreme Court, they'll likely file in federal district court. Lawsuit buys you time too. Lawsuit creates uncertainty because you don't know what's going to happen in the legal process. And it locks things up and creates time to address whatever your concerns might be. So there's actually, you know, sure they want to win the lawsuit, but they also view this as an opportunity to get political outcomes that they want. And they know that they have people from their state that are going to be in positions of

power. And now, you know, we don't know yet how what the administration is going to look like, you know, but, but there might be opportunities to move legislation that could be very favorable to Utah in a new Congress. And so yeah, you're gonna run a PR campaign there to try and influence all those folks to, and if you have a somebody from Illinois that likes the idea of local control, that's the message is we don't want a big bloated federal government, you know, this is about local control, the power of the people is we don't want a big bloated federal government. You know, this is about local control. The power, the power of the people is best at the most local level. We can be, you know, better managers at the most local level.

And it's an opportunity to say, this is a way to deal with big government, and shrink the government a little bit. And that's the other piece, I think, of this, of this, of this play. There's the legal play. there's the political play. You don't spend $20 million on a legal campaign. You spend $20 million on a long play that includes changing hearts and minds in a political campaign to get items as well.

Management, right, is the other one, which kind of ties in to both, but it's, well, who manages land better? Right? And that's something that you've heard over and over and over again is, well, the feds don't manage that as well as the state does. Or everybody knows public land is not managed anywhere near as good as private land. Right? And that's something that we hear over and over again. Right. And that's something that we hear over and over again. In terms of laying out everybody's like biases and what they're after, and you've done a good job of making, of presenting an argument, you know, even though you're not necessarily here to represent Utah's position. Not necessarily.

Yeah. You're not here. Period. You're not here to represent their position, but you're explaining their position. I'm trying to explain it. And I'll do the same on my position, okay? Because this is one of those things where I think that everybody is driving at what they find to be beneficial. There's some things that happen and it transcends.

There's some things that happen in the political sphere and the social sphere where you get into these issues where there's a higher You know, you're arguing a higher morality it could be it could be like a higher Christian morality it could be a Humanitarian morality whatever where you step outside of personal You step outside of what's good for an individual, right? And you go to like, like what's good for sort of America, you know, the capital A. This, like, I don't want to present like overwhelmingly, like there's a moral components, but there's also a big part of like, there's a bunch of people pushing a certain thing they would like to see happen. I find that, I'm totally

open to the idea that federal land management and having a vast public estate and a bunch of public ground for people to recreate on, I'm open, like I understand. It slows economic activity. Lots of stuff slows economic activity, right? Like having Gettysburg, you could build condos and sell them for a ton of money. Having the Gettysburg monument slows economic activity. There's things you could do with that that would be more money than what they're getting out of them, right? If you divide it up and sold it as condos, it'd be more income than you get from charging people to go to Gettysburg.

So we don't make all of our decisions based on what makes the most fiscal sense in the moment. By having public lands, you have places for like people to go out and be free. One of the things I like about BLM land is you're kind of there's no place to be more free than you're on BLM land. kind of, there's no place to be more free than you're on BLM land. You can generally do more stuff more often. You seldom get where like, you know, uh, in Southeast Alaska deer season opens on August one, but on Tongass national forest land, it opens August 15th. Stuff like that doesn't usually happen on BLM land. Like BLM land is kind of like, it's your land. It's come one, come all, man. Like if you're worried about, can I sleep here?

BLM land, probably can sleep there tonight. Yeah. It's a libertarian paradise. It's a libertarian paradise. And I know that there's things you could do with it. Like you could sell it and make condos and mine it and whatever the hell. And someone's going to make some money right now.

But all in all, considering that the country is going to keep existing for, you know, hopefully thousands of more years, it'll stay like that. It'll be a place where Americans can go be Americans. And that is the thing that, like, I believe in protecting. If you came and told me, if, if somehow, like I had the word of God, that Utah would wrest control of BLM lands and not change a thing, they'd be like, no, no, no, we just want it to be that when you look at a map, it says, it says Utah Bureau of Land Management, but we're still going to have it be that everybody can hunt and fish and camp and do what they want. It's just, we just, it really means a lot to us that it says Utah on it. I think most people will be like, ah, that's cool.

Not my fight, but that's not what we're talking about. No, no, no one wants it. The state doesn't want it because they want to have it be a libertarian paradise. Even libertarians a little off because libertarians would argue that you shouldn't be able to have it. So a, a, uh, it's America's, you know, America, like America's playground. Right. It's like the sandbox. You just go out there and it's, it's a place to go be American.

So it's the most American place to be American. Um, they don't want it cause that's what they want to keep happening. They want's what they want to keep happening. They want it because they want to develop it, right? Correct. I mean like therein lies the issue. It's not who owns it. It's like what are you gonna do with it? Yeah like I mean it's hard for me not to get really like pissed off when I talk about this shit because so unlike my friend they were here I don't have to pretend to like be friendly to the state of Utah which I appreciate your oh he's doing

the Lord's work I know he is he is appreciate what I hear a story when I hear a story about someone's like oh you know his wife is terrible she's the worst I'd be like I'd have to talk to his wife I don, she's the worst. I'd be like, I'd have to talk to his wife, I don't know. You gotta be objective. But the thing is, is like, when you look at,

well, a couple things I wanna say, like what's different between this time and last time? They realize people that don't care about public land, they don't use public land. So the guys that, it's mostly guys, right? That are trying to do this, they don't do the things that we do. So there isn't a value to them for public access,

for hunting, fishing, ATVing, motorcycle riding. They do not care about those things. It's not a part of their lifestyle, so they don't care. But what they astutely recognized last time, so last time around, they really tried to frame this issue as like a state's rights issue. Who do you hate more, the state government or the federal government?

And I think if you ask that question, most people are like, or who do you trust more, state government or federal government? Most people would say, well, I trust whoever my state government more, because they're closer. Federal government means to me, Washington, DC. Now I could quibble with that and say, well most of your land managers that actually work on this public land, they live in your state, in

your communities, right? But that is a, I think just a common refrain from people. It's like, well I trust the people around me more. They tried to frame this issue, this is about a state's rights issues versus a federal rights issue. It didn't take hold. And so the astute thing they're doing this time is they realize, we not only need to win a lawsuit, we need to win the court of public opinion here. So let's take a bunch of taxpayer money and spend it on a, which I think is a smart move, on a PR campaign to explain to people why they should hate public land too.

And really try and reframe this as an issue that's not about access which is what it's about. That's what it's about and let's frame it as an issue that's really about federal government overreach because that is a winning argument in a lot of western states and I understand that but that's not the issue. No it's definitely not the issue. It's like many other things. Um, we're talking with CRD, we're sitting here talking about, uh, uh, Buffalo management, bison management, elk management, bison management. We're like, Oh bison. We don't want them coming into the state because they carry brucellosis. And like, well, I, carry brucellosis, but yeah, but we like those.

So are we talking about brucellosis or are we not? No, we're not talking about brucellosis. We're talking about grazing lands. We're talking about fence integrity and grazing lands, but instead we're going to pretend to talk about brucellosis. I think here we're pretending to talk about like a rights issue.

What we're talking about is developing land. When I want to get my five-year-old to eat her vegetables, I'll tell her it's like, you know, Oh, I put some sugar on that or we, you know, we put some jelly on that and she'd be like, Oh really? And I'll be like, you know, like, yeah, I'm straight up lying to my kid, but it's, that's what's going on here. Right? Like they're telling you it's, they're trying to reframe this whole issue away from the thing that they know everybody

cares about, which is access. So smart move on their part to be like, to say, Oh no, no, no, no, no. It'll all still be available. It'll all still be public. It'll also be, but when you start, this is something that, you know, you and I talked about years ago, but when you start really, if you really understand constitutional mandates in Western states you know that almost every Western state has a constitutional mandate to manage state land so if they do go to the states right there are constitutional mandates that require states to manage for the maximum economic return on state lands for the beneficiaries which are the residents of the state. Okay? Constitutional mandate.

Can't get out of it, even if you want to. So what's gonna happen if states get a hold of the land? It isn't that hard to connect the dots. So I think Utah understands that they need to try and reframe this debate and not, they don't want people to understand that, right? They don't want people to know that, they don't want people to think about it. So let's just talk about this in a different way. Let's talk about it as like federal government overreach, just talk about it. Let's say there's, try and create this constitutional question that doesn't exist really, right? So let's

like reframe this issue. And I think the other thing is like even if they lose a lawsuit, which is very, you know, they're very likely going to lose the lawsuit or not not get granted original jurisdiction right is that what it's called or yeah well like I said they're very they're asking for the court to accept jurisdiction to hear the case okay so if they lose that what's gonna happen though they're gonna then they'll file in federal court and this is a long climb the ladder but this is a long-term play this isn't going away like there has been going on since what was the in federal court and climb the ladder. But this is a long-term play. This isn't going away.

No, it's been going on since, what was the, it's been going on since? 1976. It's going on, but I think this, like what I'm saying is like over the next several years, I think this is just tip of the iceberg. I agree. I think this is a part of a longer-term strategy here where they're like, you know, they've got folks, you know, they're trying to reframe this debate to make this a friendlier political issue for the people in office so that Congress can also try and take some action.

I don't know what that's going to look like. But if I were their political advisor, I'd be like, hey guys, here's what we're going to do. We're going to have a look. There are three powers of government here. Let's try and go after all of them and see what sticks. Okay, let's talk about Congress. Let's talk about the courts.

Let's go after the presidential office, see what we can do there. Let's have a three-pronged approach and let's see what we can do to really stir the pot and see what happens. So I think the PR strategy is a part of a much more involved strategy. So if I was betting money right now, I'd say even if they lose the lawsuit, we're gonna keep seeing different things happening that are gonna be poking around the edges of the public land system in different ways to see what they can get away with. Well, and what I'm saying is the lawsuit's gonna be out there for years.

Yes, absolutely. The lawsuit is what creates the space for all of that other stuff. The, like what I said before, creates that uncertainty so it makes people maybe willing to agree to things that they maybe wouldn't have otherwise agreed to because you have somebody like Justice Gorsuch for example whose mother was the EPA administrator under the Reagan administration was a huge part of the sagebrush rebellion right and they're looking at the makeup of the Supreme Court and saying we have a puncher's chance if it gets there. That's what I was gonna... That's where the

politicos say they have a punchers may have a puncher's chance if it gets there. Right? Yeah, that's what I was going to... That's where the politicos say they have a puncher's, may have a puncher's chance if it gets there. And so that's where the PR comes in as well to try and squeeze out some, even if, even if the end result isn't to transfer or wholesale transfers or sale of public lands, it might be overhauling how we manage public lands. Sure. And that's like, I mean when I look at the lawsuit I think there's two things that are striking to me. One is what we talked

about earlier how it's sort of the most explosive approach that they've tried because if they win there, the barn doors are open, right? Like it means the federal government can't legitimately own land if the court finds in its favor. I mean, the other thing about it that's striking is it's a very narrow question that has to do with textualism. And if the current composition of the Supreme Court looks at the clause about

you know military installations in Washington DC, like to me it's not an open and shut case that they're gonna toss it out. I'm admittedly just an amateur legal scholar here, but you know like what they're asking them to do is say hey look look at the Constitution, it doesn't say anything about federal public lands. In fact, the constitution says the federal government can only own these types of lands. Ergo all this stuff needs to go away. And I, when I think about it, I'm like, I don't know. Is that so far fetched to think that if they do, if the Supreme Court grants cert that the Supreme Court's gonna throw it out,

that to me seems like wishful thinking. I don't know how to phrase it. I think it's a legal stretch. Yeah. Right? But it's not... Do you mind getting into the plausibility of it? Well, okay, I don't think we've introduced the fact that Utah started the lawsuit, and now a bunch of other states have jumped onto this, so everybody needs to be aware of, that's again why we're talking about this, right? There's a bunch of Eastern states, and... To hell with they got,

what do they have anything to do with them? I don't understand what the deal is, but... They hell with they got. What do they have anything to do with them? I, I, I don't understand what, what the deal is, but, um... They want Gettysburg. Yeah, exactly. But, uh, out here in the West, Idaho and Wyoming, uh, Wyoming's kind of hilarious to me in a lot of ways because, um, you can't even camp on Wyoming state lands. And they're like, we want our chunky Yellowstone National Park. We want Tetons. We want wilderness areas as state lands.

Yeah, there's stuff in this state. There's restrictions on state lands about camping. If you want to trap on state lands, you got to go try to get some special permit to do it. You got to put signs up telling everybody that's what you're doing. Can you imagine dude? And in this state, we have a current plan paid for by the taxpayers of Montana that has already analyzed state lands for sale.

That just came out a couple months ago. Well, the thing too that is, so again, back to the constitutional mandates in western states, the other thing that's interesting about most state governments is you're not allowed to deficit spend. Right? So you're not allowed to. So you have to run, so federal government can deficit spend if they want to, states

can't. We had a real bad fire this year. This is something that gets brought up a lot, right? So three, I think it was like three billion dollars were spent, federal dollars, fighting wildfires this year. This is something that gets brought up a lot, right? So three, I think it was like three billion dollars were spent, federal dollars, fighting wildfires this year. Oh yeah, 50 million dollar fire is very common. Very common, right? So like if you're a state and you have a catastrophic wildfire year, which you can't forecast or foresee, you just have to deal with it when it's happening. I'm forecasting right now. There will be more of those. I'm going to write that down, Steve. I'll take that bet. No. But like you, you're gonna, what are you gonna do?

You're gonna tax your citizens, raise property taxes, raise sales tax, you got to raise revenue. And last time I checked, like people aren't wild about their property taxes going up, or sales tax, or any other tax. So you're gonna look around at your assets you can liquidate. First thing you're gonna look to is like, what the hell can we sell around here? You know, if my house, if I was like going broke, I'd start looking around my house. I wouldn't sell my kids,

but I started looking at the furniture, whatever else I had, I would- Pets. Pets, absolutely. But my guns and bows would go last. But like, you know, you start looking at what you got to sell and if what you have is a bunch of valuable real estate, for sure you're gonna sell it.

And that's the, I mean, and there is a long history of every state in this country selling lots of public land. Utah has sold more than 54% of its state lands. More than half of what it was given to statehood has been sold. You know what can really make this strike home? If you're one of our many listeners in Texas, I want you to ask yourself how much public land access do you enjoy in Texas? If you go like, jeez that's a great question, I don't think I've ever been on much public land in Texas,

it's because it was sold! Sold. Sometimes when it comes to your personal fitness goals, you just need a plan. Peloton can give you the plan. Absolutely, and Steve, you've got a Peloton. I sure do. And Steve benefits from things like a variety of challenging classes.

There are four week strength building classes, running, cycling, everything in between. Peloton can adapt to any goal in this season of your life. And by the way, the holidays are around the corner. Now is when you need to be on the Peloton. Find your push, find your power with Peloton at onepeloton.ca. So the Utah deal, just because they are pretty tidy numbers,

they got right around $2 billion for the state lands that they sold. They did some trading with the feds the state lands that they sold they did some trading with the feds And got some Coal claims and got a 50 million dollar check and but it all comes down to a little over two billion dollars for their Uh a little over four million acres of state land that they've already sold Which is about five hundred dollars an acre now the recreation economy in utah is about a little somewhere between like

eight nine billion dollars a year Which is recreating on federally managed public ground by and large I Don't think Every time I've had this argument in the past with, with folks that really want to make this happen, it is akin to having an argument with like an animal rights activist where it comes down to what we, we, because it's ours, we should have it.

And you're like, you want to go down the economic path? Let's talk about the economic path. You want to go down the management path? Let's talk about the economic path. You want to go down the management path? Let's talk about the management path. There's not a good argument and it always comes down to well it's ours because we want it. And it's ridiculous and like we've said before it often you're having that argument with people who think they have all these silver bullets about how poorly the forests are managed and all the things, but they cannot say it properly because they

don't go out and use them. They're not on the landscape. They are the super removed entity making these big decisions, which is oddly enough the argument that they use to try to steal the public land. And it's, it's happening again. And people need to plug in. I think a huge issue that we have is people don't know how to contextualize 640 million acres. Um, you can't hunt and fish on all 640 million acres of federally managed land because of national parks, parts of refuges.

There's infrastructure there. There's buildings and bathrooms and all the things. So it's not 640 million acres We have what is it? 359 national parks. I think of which you can hunt on at least a portion of 59 of those national parks But there's more privately owned Acres in the United States Set aside for private wildlife enjoyment

than in the entire national park system. So when we talk about, oh, 640 million acres, that's a lot. Think about the national parks right now. Think about Western national parks where there's reservation systems and overcrowding. And then think about just removing a handful of those. Well, yeah, but I mean, not to contradict that, but you could be like, well, how many kids? There's a hundred million kids in the US.

Who cares about 20 of them? Like, well, the parents of those 20. So it's like, it doesn't need to be, you know, when people start losing access to the place that, where they hunt and fish and their grandpa hunted fish and their, you know, generation hunting fish, that part matters to them. And that part is going to inevitably get rolled up into this stuff. And it is inevitably going to be worth more and more and more and more. And, you know, Teddy Roosevelt and more. And, you know, Teddy Roosevelt knew that. He saw all the things that we see today, just at an earlier time. And he said over and over again, we are not managing these lands

for us. We're managing these lands for the generations to come. And we need to make sure that the things that we enjoy today are here for those generations. And in large part, it was because if people don't get to see them, get some understanding, then they will be sold off. And, um, I think all of us need to figure out. And you know, when, when Trump was running for office the first time, we have them on record twice with different hunting publications, because just like this election- I sat in a room and listened to him say it.

Yeah. So he said quote, I'm not gonna sell off your public lands. Yes. Yep. 2015. Las Vegas, Nevada. Yeah, man. No, January 2016.

And... January 2016 is Las Vegas. It's because the sportsman's vote was important then, it's important right now. But, man, these groups are funded really well and they can take this public lands message that was very, very effective back then and twist it right now to where people say the thing. But in Utah, they're like, yes, we got them because what we're talking about is state management of those lands

And sell the sale of a lot of those lands and again five hundred dollars an acre for The millions of acres that they've already sold Like if you can get five hundred dollars an acre for anything you buy it right now. I was gonna say can I buy a bunch of this? You might be able to actually just hold on just a little bit. Yeah, well there's something I need to do here because when I hear about the loss of public access, however it happens, okay, I have like an emotional visceral reaction where I do not want to see my hunting and fishing brethren lose access to the places they like to hunt and fish, okay?

But I also don't want to be hyperbolic here. So I want to like narrow in on, focus on a point we've been raising as a sort of hypothetical and why, and I'm trying to ask you, this is you Dave, I'm trying to ask you like, is this question about BLM land somehow being different? If I was sitting here talking to the architect of this suit, would that individual, and we're not, so I'm just holding you

to the fire here, would that individual say, no, this would not extend to national forest. This would not extend to Indian reservations. This would not extend to refuges. This would not extend to national parks because there's something distinct about BLM, right? Would they tell me that? Or is it really that if the Supreme court says the BLM can't exist, like they can't hold land, is it really logical that someone would then say, okay, I'll see you next Monday

because we're going to talk about national forest land. Yeah. Let me unpack that just a little bit. I don't believe it's hyperbolic. Okay. I'm not a guy that does a lot of hyperbole. No. That's my problem with you. I know, right? You need more of it from me. I tend to be a pragmatist. Let's get the, who's the one guy, the real measured guy who tries to be real fair all the time? Give like really solid information. Hot takes of Dave Wilkes. It depends. But this is why I say this. I'm not a guy that's usually very hyperbolic.

I'm mentally flipping you off right now. But I'm not very hyperbolic. But I look at this and say, one, yes, they would absolutely come in here and say this only applies to the 18 and a half million acres They apply to in their own complaint. They say it only applies to these because they're these Unappropriated lands and they say these other lands have been appropriated through acts of Congress So we're not asking for those so they'd tell you that I'm telling you when I read that, if it's unconstitutional to own lands in perpetuity that aren't specifically enumerated in the Constitution, then that would mean it's unconstitutional, that Congress

can't come in and pass a law that says, we're going to create a national park and all of a sudden it's constitutional to own that. Yeah, the same way they couldn't tomorrow without doing a constitutional amendment they couldn't vote to ban certain constitutional rights. Right. Like if the Democrats took control of the House and Senate presidency they couldn't say it's illegal to own a gun. Right. It's to hold the battle. Right. So I'm looking at and saying public lands all of them are at risk with this lawsuit regardless of what Utah tells you What what their lawyers might tell you and regardless of what they wrote in their complaint regardless what their PR campaign says and

I come out at this and I say and this is to build off of something Brad said earlier as well They're running this PR campaign that's saying Your lands not going anywhere. We're just gonna manage it, and you're gonna have all this access. But if you actually read the complaint that they filed with the Supreme Court, and you look into what they allege the harm is, what's the harm they're suffering?

Why? It's gotta be economic. Yeah, but what is the economic harm? The things they raise are, we can't tax that land, and we can't use eminent domain on that land to move transmission lines or roads or other infrastructure because it's federally owned. And my retort to that is, well, if it were transferred to you, you wouldn't be able to tax, you're not going to tax yourself, and you wouldn't need to

use eminent domain to run transmission lines across state land. You just do it. The only reason you'd need those authorities is if your intent in the end is to sell it. And just because you have an administration right now and a law in place in Utah right now that says we're not going to sell it and here's how we're going to manage it, doesn't mean that this transfer happens and a new administration comes in or the politics in Utah change and they just change the law, the state statute, and then say it's the priority of us to make as much money off of this land as possible and we're going to turn around and sell it. This gets to the thing about when you're talking about something that you're not

actually talking about and it's got, I think that like anyone that's being intellectually honest and if we had someone in who's the architect of this lawsuit if they were being intellectually honest they would have to admit that this is about divestiture and sale and development. Even one of the other so there were amicus briefs filed right? 13 additional states through either their attorney general governor or legislature filed amicus in support of Utah saying take the case In one of them there was a footnote in one of the briefs that I'll just paraphrase paraphrase We think we want national parks to right like Wyoming right? Yeah, that's right the legislature

Yeah, just like what a gold mine, man. Oh yeah. To hit yellow, if Wyoming picked up Yellowstone, dude, because think about it, you could do like, if you did condo stuff and you did a hundred year leases even on condos, I mean, you could develop gold, you could develop Yellowstone National Park and just make gold. Literally, because you could mine a lot of minerals, do big developments, put in ski hills. But the size. Imagine if you could buy your own hot spring and shit. What a gold mine. The crazy thing too is. I'd want it too. If the state of Wyoming had to manage Yellowstone tomorrow, like body for body, dollar for for dollar with the federal government does

I mean to double state government You found whatever hosers ran big sky Okay, whatever people originally put big sky together and like did a bunch of land swaps got this hill Yellowstone Club all this bullshit, right? Golf courses all over the place. If you wouldn't got that crew and you said, listen, man, we just got possession of Yellowstone National Park.

What do you boys have in mind? They're gonna come up with a plan. They're gonna come up with a plan that makes a little jingle. Everywhere. Hot water slides, hot water slides. Could you imagine a water slide? So when parents gotta get on the water slide with their kid,

they're not, the whole line as they climb that ladder, they're not being like, oh, it's gonna be so cold. I know that feeling. You get up there and it's hot water coming down that slide. You know, on the plus side, my dream trip has always been to backpack into, or horse pack into the thoroughfare, and then pack raft thoroughfare creek

down into Yellowstone Lake, but that's illegal because you can't be on have a floated float hating flotation device on sorry a raft or anything I got on Rivers or streams in Yellowstone. So maybe if the state took it over I could actually fulfill my dream. Yeah, so now Supporting this argument. No, it's a gold mine. It's a gold mine. Yeah. What happened? Are you going to be able to hunt it? For a minute? Well, I mean, that's one of the things that kills me right now, man. I feel like it's, uh, somebody's like trying to sell you a car.

Yeah. And you're like, well, what about the warranty? All right. Oh, don't worry about that. There will be one. Yeah. You're like, okay, well. The manager's drawing it up in the back right now. How are the tires in good shape?

Oh yeah, it's got tires. Okay, well, what kind of gas mileage? Oh, we'll get to that. Yeah. You know, and you're like. So you're sure everything's good, right? Yeah. Should I be buying this car?

And because it's not a who manages it best argument. It's not a, um, I mean, all it is again, is just coming down to we want it because we want it and we're going to make a bunch of money off of it. I mean, that's all there is to it. And, and, you know, it was hard to talk about this stuff during the election cycle because people were so charged up and they're like, Oh God, if you're voting for public lands, you can't have your second amendment rights or you're voting for transvestites or you're voting for this.

And, you know, and it's like, no, no, no if you stop and think about it right now You have your guns and you have public lands and access to them All good, how did that happen? It's because we demanded to have it right and That's exactly what we need to keep doing and unfortunately like, like, I swear to God, every 10 years, we need to reeducate everybody and say, no, no, no, no. You have got to stand up and make a big stink about this. It is absolutely not a real thing

that you have to give up rights over here in order to have access to public ground. I mean, if you guys remember the monuments rescinding fight and all the jack wagons coming out, I think it was like Sean Hannity, right? It was like, monuments in Utah, you can't physically touch them. Right? And people were like,

you can't even walk on them. There it is. Sean Hannity, wherever the hell he lives. And people in Utah, God knows what, right? They're like, what are you talking about? You get his loafers all dirty? Yeah, Christ Almighty, yeah. I mean, it's so bizarre.

It's like, we just had this great talk with Field and Stream Australia, which is kind, uh, kind of akin to like a Delta waterfowler ducks, unlimited group. And, and talking with those guys, it's like a dystopian future of what the U S could be where there's, there's protesters out in the marsh, stealing your ducks before they hit the water, trying to flare birds, and, you know, really aggressive gun laws. And they have this whole experience that we could learn a lot from. And for years, they've been telling folks in the US and they were very, very interested

in the banning mountain lion fight. And they're interested in this public lands argument that's coming up again, because they're like, well, boy, once the hunters went away, there was nobody telling people that that marsh was of value. And now that marsh is ag land. And so now that we've actually gotten, uh, better regulations for duck hunters and now it's a, uh, not a future in question for at least the next couple

of years, there's no duck hunters coming back because the marsh has gone in, in this part of Victoria. Yeah. And you know, it's like firearm possession has gone way, way down because people are like, well, why do I need firearms when people were out there harassing me when I try to go hunt? Like the, it's all out there and it's, it's an amazing, horrifying tale. But it's like, when you see this stuff, you see the Mount Lion bands, you see this argument that, uh, like people will literally email me and be like, you just don't even have a

clue of how many public acres there are. That's the issue. I'm like, no, I do. I do. And it's not that much. Like, do the math in the United States. Like, we're hanging on to a very small amount. What do you think would happen, something I've been thinking about this, is like, if one of the things we all hear a lot about is like, just hunter crowding, right? Too many people in the field. People get frustrated by it everywhere you go. I'm talking about the West, in the West in particular.

But the reason, part of the reason that there are so many people hunting is because, well, A, people want to do it and there's a lot of tags available in a lot of Western states. What do you think would happen with just the amount of tags available? Like opportunity to hunt. Let's talk like forget access, right? What do you think would happen with like tag availability? I'm asking an honest question. I have no idea. I don't know what the implications would be. Well like if would the tags become unlimited and good luck finding access? That's what I'm saying. Or you get more fragmentation and development and animal numbers drop and tags drop. Yeah, yeah. I don't know. I just think about

what is the potential opportunity loss for hunting in an already, like, finite environment where people are frustrated. Like, what is that gonna look like under this scenario? Can I also point out one legal piece that we haven't talked about? We've made some assumptions here We're talking as if the result of this would be that land would be transferred to Utah and then they would sell it Because that's what they've asked for and we presume that the court would give them what they ask for

That you know in their complaint they say dispose of lands in accordance with state law and I frequently have to remind people that the federal courts are applying federal law and the United States Constitution and That if they side with Utah, they actually would have to dispose of the lands in accordance with federal law not state law And that could mean it's the federal government selling the lands and Utah may not be the high bidder selling the lands and Utah may not be the high bidder. Like right now, the process that's laid out in, in Flippma is for, for sell of lands is you have a bidding process and you have to, you have to sell them for the fair market value of the land,

but there's a bidding process. Maybe they're not the high bidder. Maybe we wind up having to go to the Elon Musk arches park. I mean, it's like there's, that's a piece that we're not talking about. The architects of this would be like, yeah, we didn't think of that. Yeah, I mean, because the state of Utah is not entitled to those lands, legally. They're trying to make the argument that they are, but they in their own constitution, as a condition of statehood, which every Western state and like, I have a spreadsheet of all the states with this. Almost every state as a condition of statehood

had to give up all claims to, and it actually, they use the term unappropriated lands in these constitutional provisions, but unappropriated lands at the time meant non privately held lands. So they had to give up claims to those as a condition of admission to the union. So they don't have a legal claim. They forever gave up their legal claim to those lands. They're trying to say there's this constitutional loophole, I guess. We've always interpreted this constitution wrong. And so the lands, the federal government can't own them. And so by default, they should come to us. And that's why they give a ball of claims to those. A giant mining firm from Australia owns

Southern Utah. And kids. And that's the risk. I've had, I had somebody write to me recently and said, you know, one of the big risks with this case is just that. You have a lot of people that are concerned about concerned about you know foreign governments buying up land in the United States and what's going to happen if Utah wins this and they and the result isn't the transfer of the land to the state the result is the federal government has to sell those lands who's going to buy them and it could be foreign governments we don't know who's going to buy them. Maybe Utah buys it. Maybe

California buys all this land in Utah. I just want to undo all of the stuff I just did. There's a hot take for you. I don't think they have any water rights. They just buy up the Colorado River Basin. I never thought that California would buy it. Yeah. I don't think that the, if I can speculate about what success looks like for these guys, I don't think they care if, I mean, it would be great if you're the guy in the state of Utah, you're like, ideal scenario, best case scenario, we get the land, we get to sell it and make some money, right? We're happy. But if they, I don't think they really care.

I think it's wrong. Oh, because it would enter into, it would generate the kind of economic activity they're looking for. That philosophically. Which is like right now, yeah. Yeah, that they agree with philosophically, which is like, there's a philosophical problem they seem to have with the idea of public land

when you come down to the intent of it. So like. Like if a bunch of big sky guys had it, they'd be glad. They could tax it. They'd be happy. They could tax it. Yeah. If the Chinese government bought it, like, I don't know if they'd be happy or not. It'd be a bittersweet.

They'd still be able to tax it. They'd still tax it. Cal, bring up a really good point. I'm going to verge into ground. I'm going to verge very briefly into territory that I don't like to on this podcast, but but Cal made a point about talking about this after the election. Like I'm talking very, I'm not speaking for anybody in the room with me, but I'm speaking very personally after the election, there was so many areas I was happy about.

Like I was very happy about border security. I was very happy about crime. I was very happy about free speech issues. I could go on and on and on of stuff that I was elated about. But part of my head was like, you know what though? This ain't gonna be good for public land. And I think that voters and like Americans voters, whoever have to realize no political party is ever gonna do everything you wish it did. You will always make a compromise. And if anyone thinks deep, when a political party gets together and they have a convention and they lay out their like the planks and their platform, you will never find

representation of all of your ideals and all of your dreams within two political parties in this country. They decide the agenda. It's never going to be that they all line up and it doesn't, you do not need to sit and think that I have to support everything the party says. Apparently you haven't read the 1836 wig party platform. You like gives me warm fuzzies. You joking. I was trying to do an impassioned speech. He ruined it.

Great joke though. You like, you have to like, you just look and admit no party will represent all of your interests. So if you get the party you want, there's still work after the fact to go like, okay, now I need to make micro adjustments. Like, I got who I want. Like, you know, I have who I want in the White House. I have who I want in the Senate, whatever. But these people that I support, I'm talking about whoever's out there,

these people I support have to ease off this issue because this is not representing me, it's not representing other constituent members. And remember, we went through this 10 years ago, I remember all these surveys of what percent of hunters in Utah hunt on public land? What percent of Montanans hunt on public land? What percent of people in Wyoming hunt on public land? Want to be like 68% of hunters or something like that? Like in this day, I

think it was like 68 or 70% of hunters hunt on public land. And hunters, like you know, this is not a rule, but it's generally true hunters have generally the hunters generally vote Republican We need to convince them to not go down this path I Don't think the hunters need convincing. No, no, right. I'm talking the politicians Yeah, I need to say like listen man. I got you border security. listen man, I got you. Border security, I'm with you. The whole list of things, I'm with you. But listen, this public lands thing, this is not for us. It shouldn't be a political issue at all.

Everything's political. Well, but the polling data suggests it's really not for public lands. Like support of public lands is, it's like non-partisan. Everybody supports it. That's why it's become a word. It's a little bit, years ago we went to Rob Bishop's office in Utah and had a conversation on this podcast with Rob Bishop and, and, and, uh, um, very respectful. He was great.

Okay. It was very respectful conversation about some things we don't agree on. I would do it again with his, with his current counterpart. Uh, and it was funny because everyone likes the word access. We sort of agree, we like, just like conservation. Like what the hell does that mean? Everybody's like, are you for conservation? No politician in America is gonna say no, I hate conservation.

Everybody's like, yeah, because I know what I mean when I say it, and then it's not what you mean when you say it, but when I say it, I know what I mean. And Rob Ishaq Katoomba access, access, access. And you think he means like increasing, like that there'd be more land for the public to use. What he means is basically, yeah, access for semi trucks. Yeah.

Or whatever. I put words about, but you know, like when he says like, everyone's like, I'm pro access. Oh, me too. Me too. What kind of access in particular? Yeah. What? Here's what I'm talking about. What are you talking about? I mean, like that you can drive your truck more places. Everyone likes access, right? So I think, I think he used recreational vehicles. Like, like if you can't drive that up there and hook it up, that's not access to me. So, so you get these words that get squishy. And I think it's like after that big public land shootout from 20, 10 years ago, most politicians are like, man, okay, there's one lesson

I learned here. Do not get labeled an anti-public lands person. So it hasn't changed what you're after, but you're like, okay, so from now on rhetorically, I have to be more careful. Yeah. And I have to say, this is for public lands, meaning for me. I'm pro public lands for me. Right? And people are like, oh yeah, he's pro public lands.

He said so. It's like he wants some too. Sometimes when it comes to your personal fitness goals, you just need a plan. Peloton can give you the plan. Absolutely. And Steve, you've got a Peloton. I sure do. And Steve benefits from things like a variety of challenging classes.

There are four week strength building classes, running, cycling, everything in between. Peloton can adapt to any goal in this season of your life. And by the way, the holidays are around the corner. Now is when you need to be on the Peloton. Find your push, find your power with Peloton at onepeloton.ca. I think to your earlier point about like the election is not, it doesn't end there, right? Like this is where conservation groups especially are very effective because like they're, they're getting ready to work with the new administration. And like there's, there's multiple ways that you can apply pressure to decision makers. And there's one way, like in

the last big cycle, I mean, there's this huge public outcry, right? And like you saw rallies and you saw people taking their shots at Jason Chaffetz, but I think too, like, this is where the rubber meets the road in terms of like having policy groups lean in and have conversations with decision makers and try to get them to see all the different sides of the issue. So, yeah, it's like you can't ever sort of step back from the policymaking process for four years as an engaged hunter or angler, right? You've got to support the groups that are working on your behalf. You gotta talk to your lawmakers when you have a chance. Cause like, we're all sort of enjoying the,

no more marketing calls from campaign offices. My mailbox hasn't seen a flyer in days. It's fantastic. Just bills and, you know, credit card bills. Yeah, yeah. But like, like it, we're just now getting started on this stuff, you know, like in terms of, as a country, like this is the road is way far ahead of us,

even though we feel like we can kind of get a break from politics. Yeah. As we've been seeing it on our TVs for the past year. I read all through the campaign. Like I read voraciously, like, uh, I, I, I follow it as an American. I read voraciously like I Follow it as an American. I follow someone's just like I'm just interested in politics Maybe I missed it. I don't think that this issue came up It came up in a way did it tell me housing. Yeah. Yeah, that's how the Montana deal Yeah, so it came up in the context of we need more housing in this country and it actually came up in one of the I think it was in the presidential debate even of

There are all these public lands out there that and I can't remember the exact way it was phrased But it was they're not being used for anything right now we we should be using them to address the nation's housing crisis and You can see in Utah places maybe like the Wasatch Front, where there's a lot of overcrowding starting to occur. You could see, in Las Vegas area is another great example, where you're going to see pushes for using public lands and it could be bipartisan for housing.

And we have to have a serious conversation about if the Democrats win it'll be thousands of tiny homes, if the Republicans win it'll be eight really big homes. But you know the the feds worked with the state of Nevada and they they did give up some BLM land there in Vegas so it's not like there's a process. There is a process, right? It does happen occasionally. Yeah, and you know, that's something that frankly this is what Congress exists for I mean there have been plenty of to your point Nevada bills that protected public land and gave land Specifically to be sold for development around Vegas. I don't think many I don't know if you guys remember Harry Reid

Yeah development around Vegas. I don't think many, I don't know if you guys remember Harry Reid? Yeah. Yeah, Harry Reid back when he was in charge of Senate, like he was the unofficial king of doing these big land deals. So point is like there's a process, if there are legitimate issues like housing crisis or whatever, like there are ways you can go about addressing those issues in a reasonable way. I just want to say one thing you said, C, which I think is really important. I think too often people assume that whoever they support politically is like, they're gonna represent my 100% of what I believe 100% of the time.

I can just check out after I voted. And I think people, especially on this issue, like if you hunt and fish, if you like to ride dirt bikes, whatever you like to do in public land, if you like to ride dirt bikes, whatever you like to do in public land, park your ATV or your RV or whatever, like you really do need to pay attention to this issue because it's not going away. Um, and like I said, I think one of the really annoying things

to me is when I look at the people that are behind this, I've never seen one of them holding a gun out on public land. Maybe they do. Like, remember that photo Jason Chafetz? Very natural looking with his wiener dog. You know what I mean? It's like, I don't think they don't do the things that we do. Sure. They don't understand. And so like help them understand. It's an opportunity. They may not want to understand, but make them understand. That's our job. That's our job.

That's your job. They work for us. Don't forget that. If you're sitting at home thinking like, how could I ever go against, or how could I ever go against some aspect of the political party I involved in? Ask yourself this.

When you read about one of the campaigns going on, and you read about those million dollar a plate dinners every one of those people going to those dinners is saying when they get their chance they're saying we could really use some help by yeah every one of them it's a caveat but it's conditional yeah I just got this one thing I could really use some help. Um, I remember I went to a dinner one time and I, uh, I'll sit neck. I had dinner and I'll sit with a, a Senator from Wyoming and he was being, he

was being awarded a prize for having really done this kind of like very like esoteric sort of legal maneuver, which helped the bison meat industry. Okay. And they were honoring him at the dinner because he had, they had this like economic annoyance. They had this annoyance, this sort of like regulatory annoyance, okay? And they were thanking him for the help

on this regulatory annoyance. He didn't campaign on that. He might not have been aware of, but people come and say, I love you, man. I love you, here's some money. I could really use some campaign on that. He might not have been aware of, but people come and say, I love you, man. I love you, here's some money. I could really use some help on whatever. There's nothing wrong with going to your party that you voted for.

Your representatives you voted for. It says, man, most everything you're talking about is great, man, we could really use some help on this public lands issue, because we hunt that shit. Oh, absolutely. You can go to the party that you didn't vote for too. You're like, you know what? Hey, I gotta be honest, I didn't vote for you on this

here's part of what you do that that I I do agree with get on board with this and You know, you might have my vote in four years or whenever that terms up Like there's nothing that says you have to vote for the person to go visit their office There's no prerequisite and money doesn't you don't have to donate either. I want to make sure like, and money, maybe. I'm not saying it to myself. I'm just trying to help people understand that. That's what those conversations are. Those conversations aren't do everything you're doing.

It's like, do all that, but also this. Hey, tell me about where you grew up. But I wanted to say, like, I worked for a governor, former governor, right? And hearing from people, particularly in state, I mean, we took calls from people out of state, but it really mattered when people called from in state and had an issue that they really cared about, it mattered to the governor. It mattered to us as his staff. Like it could have been one person calling in

and they might raise an issue that we hadn't even thought about. That's a great point, we'll get on that. But when you start hearing from a lot of people, when it's this tidal wave coming at you of people, particularly in these western states where it's a tidal wave of hunters coming at you saying, here's what we want to see. They take it really, really seriously. You don't have to be

a big donor. You don't have to say if you voted or not. I think it helps to be a big donor. You keep saying that. I'm telling you from my position is maybe it did behind and I didn't know about it, but it mattered. Anybody that called it it mattered and I guess my point is, you know people out listening and whatnot, right? like Picking up the phone and calling your governor's office or calling your congressional delegation like That matters you can build relationships there You can get information there and it can make it really can make a difference. Well, it's not scary It's it's an easy thing to do for shockingly easy.

Yeah, Cal, that's first thing Cal does every morning when he wakes up. Let's just, you know, it's very good about letting... Hello, Cheryl. Yeah, letting his elected representatives know. It's great. When I brought up like it was like how much it was or was not a big campaign issue in the presidential election, I was kind of getting at this idea that, um, this might still be regarded as with the incoming administration, new,

new Senate house. Um, this still might be, you know, this could be regarded as a fringe issue, right? Like it could be that the, the jury's still out on this. Like if you went to the Trump administration said, love everything you're doing, but chill out about the border, you're not going to get anywhere. Right? Like that's, that's, that stone has, that's been cast. Right? He, that was run on. The issue of, of, of like, hey, um, you came out against this in 2015. You, you like verbalized opposition to divestiture of public lands in 2015. How much ever you, you know, like you knew enough to bring it up. You guys didn't do a bunch around that

and like we would really appreciate not having to go down this path again of talking about fewer acres to hunt and fish on. Do you remember the return act? Yeah. That you know the act that was introduced what a couple years ago now that would have gutted Pittman Robertson and all the act that was introduced, what, a couple of years ago now that would have gutted Pittman Robertson and all the money that goes into state wildlife agencies and how hunters went apoplectic over that. And because of that, and they flooded offices of sponsors of that and co-sponsors of that bill dropped off before the phone was hung up.

They're like, oh man, I did not realize what I signed up for. Get me off of this thing. I think this has to turn into that. I view this as one of those, the hunting community view the Pittman Robertson Act as one of the most, one of the most fundamental tenants to support the North American model is having the resources to do it, right, and

not having money diverted to other purposes. It has to be the same thing in my mind for public lands. The Hunters and Anglers have to go apoplectic over this. So it's something that politicians just don't want to touch. Right now you have 13, well 14 states counting Utah, you have 14 states that have said we think the court should take a look at this. That's making it more mainstream than I want to see it. Absolutely. Right and so I kind of analysis, make the analogy of like this

should be like that return act. Like this is so fundamental to who we are as a country and what we do and and you know our livelihoods and personal endeavors and so forth yeah like it's that important that it should be taken that seriously and shouldn't be allowed to get legs it should it needs to stay on the fringe and it shouldn't be allowed to get legs so there's me making an opinion like I came off the fence from the top rope there's an opinion I want to clarify here too, because I just want to make sure that, like, I'm clear of what I'm getting at. If the state, if a state was suing,

because here's the state and they said, you know what we want to do? We want to give a sort of toned down wilderness act protection to all BLM land. We don't think that you're protecting it enough for future generations. And we have this whole system by which we're going to take this land from you, the BLM, and we're going to create wilderness areas all over the place. I would be like, that's a great idea. I hope they win that lawsuit. To me, it's not, it's not, I should just be clear, like to me, it's not who has it. It's what is allowed to happen there and what is not allowed to happen there.

It's like, it's not whose name is on it. It's what is the way, what is the most likely path that would be that me, my kids, future generations, wildlife and perpetuity has a place to exist, right? And it's like, I'm gonna go with whatever I think is the greatest chance to create continued habitat, continued access for people to pursue outdoor activities. And I just feel like, when I see kind of the arguments and the players, I question that,

I feel that this is not moving in that, this is not going to move in that direction. I feel this is going to move to fewer acres of wildlife habitat, fewer acres of public land for people to recreate on. It ain't gonna be good. Agreed. Well yeah, yeah we used to talk about this just all the time, right? We'd go out and lobby in DC and talk to people and it's interesting because we have somebody who represents the nonprofit space and then we we have a business owner entrepreneur, right? And this is something that I used to get tapped with all the time, right? It's like, Hey, can you come join this fly into DC? Because all it is is individuals and nonprofits.

We need some, we need the business aspect, right? And I would go in on behalf of first Light and say, Hey, we're this Idaho business, this is how many people we employ. This is, you know, roughly how much buying and selling that we're doing, our economic impact, I'd try to frame up. And, uh, and then I would tell them about our origin story on public lands. You'd be like, our whole thing is selling to people who have these big places to go out and push themselves.

Like we love the people that sit in box blinds. I've had a lot of fun sitting in a box blind, but the reality is you don't need this stuff. We want you to get it, but you really don't need it in a heated room on, on stilts. Right. Yeah. Um, this is how the stuff was developed. It's, it's part of our experience by going out and trying to go deeper or push harder.

Get to the top of the mountain faster on public lands. That's why we developed this clothing line. This is why we keep developing this clothing line. This is how our brand is growing by talking to people about public lands and engaging them where they want to be. And don't jeopardize this because you're going to kill this business and you're going to kill our economic impact. Talking their own language. Yeah. Business and you're gonna kill our economic impact talking their own language Yeah, and and that is it's pretty funny. You can see the more rooms you go into It's like they're checking the box right and it's like, okay heard from the nonprofits. What else you got? Oh What's your deal?

It's like give it kind of glaze over if it's another Nonprofit person and they're like, oh, oh, okay. That's different. What's that? It's like, okay got the carpenters great and Move on move on, you know, so I think that's why maybe I'd take it. So Personally this issue is I hunt private land. I've got a lease in Oklahoma I like hunting private land too. So it's not like I don't hunt private land But my you know the ideas I mean I have. But the ideas for my products, the ideas for my business have all been forged on public land. All my best ideas have happened on hunting trips

on public land. It's the only place I have to think, get away from crazy world, right? I think that's like a common thing. And so just, yes, would it affect like businesses like ours, like in first light and others? Like, absolutely, there's undeniable, but it's more than that for me.

This is personal. You're talking about coming after like my sanctuary. And that's what like is so visceral for me with this issue. Cause it's, yes, those are all true, but I think people tend to even like tune out the business argument. They're like, how many billions of dollars are recreation, blah, blah, blah? It's like, I don't care. I care about that. But ultimately, what I really care about is like, you're coming after my home and that pisses me off. Right? So you're coming after the thing

that I really care about. I can deal with losing money. I can't deal with losing my home and neither can my kids. So like, just keep your damn hands off of it That's the thing when when people when defenders of when public land defenders when wildlife habitat defenders go down the path of talking about money Yeah, I always am like like I'll let them do it They when I let them do it, but I'm always like a little bit like man man, I'll be careful. You're treading in some dangerous territory because are you telling me that if wildlife didn't make financial sense, you wouldn't wind it around anymore? Like watch the language, man, because you could tell me that wildlife costs money and I'd be like, okay, work it out.

Whatever. Yeah. It doesn't change my mind about it. So I'm always like a little bit like, Hey, you know, the tip tread a little lightly about this whole financial thing. Yeah. It's emotional. It should be emotional. Yeah. Cause if someone said to me,

it wouldn't take very long for them to convince me to be like, you know, those kids of yours are costing you a lot of money. I wouldn't be like, oh shit. All right. Take them away. I think you said it, what, everything doesn't have to justify itself economically to exist in this world, right? And yeah, that's why I feel about it. No, it's to get your convertible. I mean, not yours, but. I mean not yours but Brad's Miata Christ Sir Sebring could you imagine that honey?

Guys I'm gonna bring something full circle and to give you a chance, but we started out this show talking about the podcast Trivia, uh-huh, and and we got a bunch of kids coming in here in a minute to record our kids' trivia tournament for our kids' podcast. So we're going to wrap it up in a minute, but I want to give you guys a chance to have a near. We used to do a thing in the old days where you get a closing thought. The long, long ago. I remember that.

I remember that too. And I'd like to extend that courtesy to you guys in our waning minutes here. If you have a closing thought and if you could within that closing thought someone could have the the Also do like a little bit of here's how to follow along with what's gonna happen with this whole thing You want to go first or we already did mine mine was the one I was talking all about how Not talking all about how everybody got I was talking all about how everybody got teary-eyed. You can vote for a party and then go say, but dude, chill out about this public lands deal.

I think I've already said mine. This is personal, should be personal for you. Stay vigilant. And if I may, I still, I think there's an open question around whether or not Guy Fieri is the player of Flavor Town. I was going to go back to Flavortown with my closing thought. Well, Randall, you should have gone first. I was going to do it. This is a Flavortown issue. I think my closing thought, I said at the very outset of this, which is we know Guy Fieri is the mayor of Flavortown. I don't know. I think we might as well have some hanging chads in that vote. Bush v Gore, another original cert. That went right to the Supreme Court. Well, I made a reference that you didn't catch. I said,

who's the president? Oh no, I caught that. Why are you going back and redoing my line? Well, because you're just doing it for all the people that didn't catch it? Yeah. You're trying to take credit. Well, yeah, I mean, it's been a while since Bush v Gore. Plus, I wanted to show that I think of another... Can I share a Bush v Gore story? We're going on a hunting trip. This is before, like, you couldn't... No in-reaches and stuff, okay? Whatever the hell year that was. And we're going on a hunting trip and we're like, everybody's like, okay, well, as soon as the election, everyone wants to see the election.

Because we're going sometime around that window. So the morning after the election, we're going on a long trip in the back country. I'm like, damn, how could it be? They don't know who the president is. There's no way to talk to anybody for four or five days. And then like the whole time, just dying to go find out and come back. They still don't know. We didn't miss anything after all. All right, so.

Mr. Hot Take himself. I'm gonna have another hot take. I feel like now I'm just. Two in one day. Oh yeah, just one day. Just listening up. Have a drink. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

That should be the thing with Dave. We have David and he has to give an opinion and take a shot. So he has to keep going opinion and take a shot. Just see where we are now. Just try to get him to pound the table. We'll solve the world's problems. If toward the end of the night he pounds the table, we'll know we won. So I guess my closing thought is a thought and then a hot take and then you said where you can find out. How do you pay attention to this? So the thing I'd say is apathy is not an option. Apathy and thinking this is just gonna go away,

saying ah, this is just a fringe issue, this lawsuit doesn't really have any merit, it's gonna go away. When you take that position, you wind up in a spot where bad things happen. And so, you know, I think it's incumbent upon everybody to really be vigilant and diligent. And I go back to this, you have to be in touch with your delegation, you have to be in touch with your governor's

office, you have to be in touch with, if you're supporting, you know, a nonprofit like mine or other nonprofits out there, be in touch with them. Let people know this matters to me and I want you to be engaged in this to make sure that our public lands aren't sold or transferred. Because if you don't, if you just take the position of, you know, we've been through this before, this might be the last time you have to go through it, right? And you might not like the outcome. So that's sort of my, I would call that my plea to people.

You asked me before, what do I think the likelihood of success on the merits is? You know, I don't know. I think there's a strong argument that the property clause, and we never talked about it, but the property clause of the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to manage lands in perpetuity. I think there's a very, very strong argument to be made there. There's some lower case law that supports that interpretation.

There's some dicta in some US Supreme Court cases that support that interpretation. There's some dicta in some US Supreme Court cases that support that interpretation. So I think there's a path to victory to protect public lands in the legal context, but it's not a foregone conclusion. But you have to be diligent on the political side too, because there are going to be efforts to strip things away and to transfer and, you know, all those things. So do that. Here's my little bit of hyperbole or, you know all those things so do that my here's my little bit of hyperbole or you know because I have one I analogize this to this is gonna age me a little bit remember that movie Ocean's Eleven oh yeah never saw but yeah I'm familiar what were they I'd like to see you never saw it what were

they they're thieves right but they were super sophisticated, creative thieves, right? Charismatic, professional, really invested in it. Right. And here's where it comes. Like, I'm just going to call this like halt the heist. That's kind of what this is. This feels like a really sophisticated heist of our public lands. Maybe that's as hyperbolic as I can get. Not violent. I can see that. And I also remember oceans 12, oceans 13. I mean there are some other parallels we could draw. They're coming good. I think it's well-founded. Right? And so I say that to say, you know, and this will be the total selfish plug here. Like if you want to follow more and learn more about what my organization, National Wildlife

Federation is doing, you can just go to nwf.org backslash halt the heist. And we've already made it. There you go. All kinds of resources will be there for you. Halt the heist. Yeah, that's exactly right. I already trademarked that before you said it though, so. That's weird. Yeah, I looked it up yesterday. Yeah, well, I'm sorry, man, yeah. He is a lawyer.

I'm the business guy. Was there another phrase that gave you the inspiration for that? It's on the tip of my tongue. No! Just a little alliteration going on. Yeah, there's some parallels you could draw, but if you wanted to go that way.

Hold the host. Yeah, so that's my... I'll sell it to you, though. I'll sell you the rest. I don't know how you... Did your brother say something? I don't want to disclose my method, but I'm just offering to sell it to you.

It's not worth anything right now. No, it is now. Now it's worth it. Now it's is now. Now it's worth it. Now it's worth it. Now it's worth it. We were joking there at X, I came up with a slogan, but I didn't have an organization for it. And it was, uh, today's children are tomorrow's enemies.

Yeah. And then it just came to me at dinner with my wife. And, um, and I thought, and that sounds like something she would have been really on board with. And I was like, what organization could use that slogan? And then my friend Savannah said it could be one of those book burning, one of those book banning organizations could use that slogan. There are kids now, they'll read these books and they'll be the enemies tomorrow. Well, thanks guys for coming on, man. Oh, and to follow it, give the URL again.

Oh yeah. NWF.org backslash halt the heist. All right. Thanks. Brad Brooks, Dave Wilms. Thanks for coming out, man. Men. Thanks. Yeah, appreciate it. Appreciate it. Appreciate it. Thanks a lot. The gate was open to the light That 40 long years, that's the first time he forgot He never forgets, he'll always remember Times when the rains fell and thunder would tremble Where are all the thunderstorms? Houston's help was a bullet call Where are all the thunderstorms? Use the yellow clubs, pull the call

Where's my country symphony? That old tin roof is the play for me Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, Bushing cubbies and the brush concealed Gone just the troughs can't stay filled Walked a mile today, not a single bird a-bill East dimensions 82 Every year a full wind blows the white still blue He left for the days, plow was for hire Snow so deep cattle walked over the wire Where are all the thunderstorms Used to help us grow a corn

Where's my country symphony That old tin roof is made for me Where are all the thunderstorms? Houston, El Paso, Roe and Corn Where's my country symphony? Play for me Where are all the thunderstorms? Used to help us run at home Where's my country symphony? That old timbre used to play for me Where are all the thunderstorms? Where's my country symphony? Meat Eater Radio Live is the newest addition to the Meat Eater Podcast feed.

Every Thursday at 11am Mountain Time, we'll be going live from Meat Eater HQ on the Meat Eater Podcast Network YouTube channel. This one-hour variety show will feature call-in guests, segments, and live feedback from the MeadEater audience. Then, on Friday morning, the episode will be available in audio form on the MeadEater Podcast feed. So come hang with me, Steve, Yanni, Cal and the rest of the MeadEater crew every Thursday at 11am Mountain Time on the MeadEater Podcast Network YouTube channel. And remember, it's live, so anything can happen. Well, almost anything.