I would like to know that as well. I need to learn more about this, but on a surface level, I'm conflicted.
One one hand, we can't burn oil and natural gas for our electricity forever. I accept that we need other forms of energy (wind, solar, nuclear), but oil and gas aren't going away anytime soon.
One the other hand, I don't want a giant solar farm to take over my favorite hunting spots.
It is sort of a macro vs. micro issue. If we burn oil and natural gas for eternity, there will likely be less wildlife (macro). But if you put a solar farm on my hunting spot, there will be less wildlife there (micro).
BHA did support (H.R. 3794, S. 2666), which isn't directly endorsing public land for these purposes, but directing how it would be done.
Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.www.backcountryhunters.orgSummary of H.R.3794 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Public Land Renewable Energy Development Act of 2019www.congress.gov
Rinella’s most recent podcast was tackling the topic of green energy with the nature conservancy and they touched on these very issues, as it stands now the projections of how much land would have to be taken up for wind and solar to power our grid as it stands now are anywhere between the size of the states of Maine and Texas with the consensus being that Arizona is probably about the size of landmass that would be covered up. There is no way in hell they can do all that without taking up useful wildlife habitat
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk