Interesting article in the Federalist about MEATEATER Inc and Back Country Hunters and Anglers and powerful Democratic anti gun/anti hunting activists.
MeatEater, a popular hunter-focused entertainment company started by outdoorsman and writer Steven Rinella, was purchased by a rabidly anti-gun Democrat financier late last year in a move that has raised alarms among hunters and gun-rights activists. The Chernin Group, a California-based investment fund run by wealthy Democratic activist and Hollywood producer Peter Chernin, purchased a controlling stake in Rinella’s MeatEater in 2018.
The left-wing, anti-gun political activism of MeatEater’s largest investor, as well as political commentary and activity from some of its key partners and sponsors, complicates the company’s expansion plans given that such a large percentage of hunters in the United States — who comprise MeatEater’s core audience — staunchly support both gun rights and Republican political candidates. Chernin’s company announced the investment in MeatEater and its hiring of a new CEO for the company via a press release last October.
Chernin, who has donated nearly $500,000 to Democratic candidates and causes since 2015, has repeatedly attacked gun rights and Second Amendment activists over the last year. He retweeted comedian Michael Ian Black’s attack on the National Rifle Association as a “terrorist organization” and a separate Hollywood personality’s attempt to force FedEx and Visa to sever their ties with the NRA.
In addition to endorsing calls for a ban on so-called “trophy hunting,” Chernin also signed a petition backed by a Michael Bloomberg-funded gun control group demanding a federal ban on semi-automatic weapons.
Quote
His detractors, however, may have had a point, given O’Brien’s close connections to long-time Tester political operatives. That’s because O’Brien also serves on the board of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers (BHA), a non-profit run by Land Tawney, a Montana Democratic operative and former Obama presidential campaign surrogate. In 2012, Tawney ran the Montana Hunters and Anglers PAC, which spent seven figures to defeat Tester’s Republican challenger at the time.
According to Federal Election Commission Records, 100 percent of the expenditures from Tawney’s PAC–nearly $1.2 million–were used to oppose Republican Rep. Denny Rehberg, Tester’s opponent. The BHA chairman, Ryan Busse, served as a formal Tester campaign surrogate during the Democratic incumbent’s 2018 re-election campaign. Critics of BHA derisively refer to it as a “green decoy,” an organization that presents as pro-hunter but actually exists to push conventional left-wing environmental policies.
“Backcountry Hunters and Anglers (BHA) represents itself as good-ole-boy outdoorsmen who simply want to hunt and fish and be left alone,” the Environmental Policy Alliance (EPA) writes on the website GreenDecoys.com. “But don’t be fooled. As evidenced by both its sources of funding and current leadership, BHA is nothing more than a big green activist organization pushing a radical environmentalist agenda.”
A pretty good case can be made that Montana Democratic Senator Jon Tester owes his narrow reelection win to BHA activism and the red herring public land selloff issue.
I've stated more than once they are not our friends.
I do enjoy Rinella's show but if you listen to him in podcasts he's way off base on more than one thing and one of his producer's is an outright POS.
I don't trust anything associated with this conglomerate. They're playing the long game and the long game is (IMO) securing support of hunters so they can rub out ranchers and the harvesting of natural resources.
Good info and deserves further research. This is a group that is also supported by Randy Newberg and other public land advocates. I hate getting duped.
Good info and deserves further research. This is a group that is also supported by Randy Newberg and other public land advocates. I hate getting duped.
mike r
I know Randy Newberg is or was a member on here and I have posted on his forum before but I believe he has advocated for the reintroduction of the buffalo to areas that would seriously fugk up ranching and push ranchers off public land.
The big mistake with hunters is they see public land as their's to hunt. They don't realize that strong arming ranchers and other demographics off public land is only step one.
If I'm wrong about Newberg feel free to unload. Gently...
Good info and deserves further research. This is a group that is also supported by Randy Newberg and other public land advocates. I hate getting duped.
mike r
I know Randy Newberg is or was a member on here and I have posted on his forum before but I believe he has advocated for the reintroduction of the buffalo to areas that would seriously fugk up ranching and push ranchers off public land.
The big mistake with hunters is they see public land as their's to hunt. They don't realize that strong arming ranchers and other demographics off public land is only step one.
If I'm wrong about Newberg feel free to unload. Gently...
As long as privately owned bison are livestock this won't happen. Given make the make up of the Montana Legislature (as it is and always will be) and the strength of Montana Stock growers and Dept of Livestock, changing the classification of bison from livestock to wildlife won't ever happen.
Good info and deserves further research. This is a group that is also supported by Randy Newberg and other public land advocates. I hate getting duped.
mike r
I know Randy Newberg is or was a member on here and I have posted on his forum before but I believe he has advocated for the reintroduction of the buffalo to areas that would seriously fugk up ranching and push ranchers off public land.
The big mistake with hunters is they see public land as their's to hunt. They don't realize that strong arming ranchers and other demographics off public land is only step one.
If I'm wrong about Newberg feel free to unload. Gently...
As long as bison are livestock this won't happen. Given make the make up of the Montana Legislature (as it is and always will be) and the strength of Montana Stock growers and Dept of Livestock, changing the classification of bison from livestock to wildlife won't ever happen.
^^^If I had this dick head in my corner, I’d reconsider my corner. ^^^^
Good info and deserves further research. This is a group that is also supported by Randy Newberg and other public land advocates. I hate getting duped.
mike r
I know Randy Newberg is or was a member on here and I have posted on his forum before but I believe he has advocated for the reintroduction of the buffalo to areas that would seriously fugk up ranching and push ranchers off public land.
The big mistake with hunters is they see public land as their's to hunt. They don't realize that strong arming ranchers and other demographics off public land is only step one.
If I'm wrong about Newberg feel free to unload. Gently...
As long as bison are livestock this won't happen. Given make the make up of the Montana Legislature (as it is and always will be) and the strength of Montana Stock growers and Dept of Livestock, changing the classification of bison from livestock to wildlife won't ever happen.
^^^If I had this dick head in my corner, I’d reconsider my corner. ^^^^
I posted the Federalist article on here yesterday and it only got one comment. If you listed to Rinella's podcast, it makes you think at times he leans to the left, which I find pretty darn sad. The whole thing about Green Decoys has been going on for 25+ years. I was a Forestry major in college, and then I saw first hand anti's in both hunting, pro-forestry, etc, infiltrating the cause. This is how anti's are elected to the board of state and federal Fish and Game.
As far as Randy Newberg, just go to his website and read how many members are anti-conservative in the political section. That really opened my eyes to quite a few of the issues of late.
I posted the Federalist article on here yesterday and it only got one comment. If you listed to Rinella's podcast, it makes you think at times he leans to the left, which I find pretty darn sad. The whole thing about Green Decoys has been going on for 25+ years. I was a Forestry major in college, and then I saw first hand anti's in both hunting, pro-forestry, etc, infiltrating the cause. This is how anti's are elected to the board of state and federal Fish and Game.
As far as Randy Newberg, just go to his website and read how many members are anti-conservative in the political section. That really opened my eyes to quite a few of the issues of late.
There are fake ranchers too.
They use those to end hunting and trapping on public lands in western states.
"Local ranchers support trapping ban,,," Yeah. Riiight.
Read this over at Rokslide, nauseating reading from the liberal sh*tbags there defending this deal.
We're our own worst enemy.
Right there with you Frank, I’m amazed how blind those supposed hard core hunters are over there. I’ve always been suspect of groups like BHA and have expressed it on threads here several times. All these entities are like wolves in sheep’s clothing. Don’t understand how guys don’t see it.
Good info and deserves further research. This is a group that is also supported by Randy Newberg and other public land advocates. I hate getting duped.
mike r
I know Randy Newberg is or was a member on here and I have posted on his forum before but I believe he has advocated for the reintroduction of the buffalo to areas that would seriously fugk up ranching and push ranchers off public land.
The big mistake with hunters is they see public land as their's to hunt. They don't realize that strong arming ranchers and other demographics off public land is only step one.
If I'm wrong about Newberg feel free to unload. Gently...
As long as bison are livestock this won't happen. Given make the make up of the Montana Legislature (as it is and always will be) and the strength of Montana Stock growers and Dept of Livestock, changing the classification of bison from livestock to wildlife won't ever happen.
^^^If I had this dick head in my corner, I’d reconsider my corner. ^^^^
Good info and deserves further research. This is a group that is also supported by Randy Newberg and other public land advocates. I hate getting duped.
mike r
I know Randy Newberg is or was a member on here and I have posted on his forum before but I believe he has advocated for the reintroduction of the buffalo to areas that would seriously fugk up ranching and push ranchers off public land.
The big mistake with hunters is they see public land as their's to hunt. They don't realize that strong arming ranchers and other demographics off public land is only step one.
If I'm wrong about Newberg feel free to unload. Gently...
As long as bison are livestock this won't happen. Given make the make up of the Montana Legislature (as it is and always will be) and the strength of Montana Stock growers and Dept of Livestock, changing the classification of bison from livestock to wildlife won't ever happen.
^^^If I had this dick head in my corner, I’d reconsider my corner. ^^^^
"The two main classifications given to bison within the state are "domestic live stock" or "game animal", which is also considered wildlife." MT code legal classification of bison.
I sometimes have good instincts. Usually I need my face rubbed in it, tho.
I don't remember now if it was a TV episode, or print, but one exposure to BHA convinced me they are an elitist ashhole group - at least on the top end. They struck me as "my way, or the highway".
Right there with you Frank, I’m amazed how blind those supposed hard core hunters are over there. I’ve always been suspect of groups like BHA and have expressed it on threads here several times. All these entities are like wolves in sheep’s clothing. Don’t understand how guys don’t see it.
I'm convinced that mentally they're damaged goods. Most of them are from California or the East Coast and have been indoctrinated from day one. They can't identify with true Conservatism or common sense values, they simply don't know what those things are.
A lot of this controversy did start WAY back, as in the Sagebrush Rebellion and Wise Use Movements. Both of which promote/d privatization of Federal/State public lands.
Quote
A pretty good case can be made that Montana Democratic Senator Jon Tester owes his narrow reelection win to BHA activism and the red herring public land selloff issue.
In my mind, it's not a "red herring" at all. Many of us recreational users are concerned about repeated calls for privatization of public lands by "conservative" candidates and already elected officials. Most of the ones I know, in this CA ranching community and in other places I've lived (AZ and WA for instance), have no problem with some lands being used for cattle/sheep grazing, as long as it doesn't impact our ability to access "our" public lands. And yes, they are "ours". Yours too, Texans .
Living where I do, I was amazed to find out it takes years, if ever, to draw an elk tag near my home and I live smack dab in the middle of millions and millions of acres of prime elk habitat. Where I lived in the White Mountains of AZ there were thousands more elk in a very similar habitat (juniper grasslands surrounded by Ponderosa/fir forests). Not here, as the elk were killed off years ago and the ranchers now prefer the few here stay up in the mountains. Some of you have likely seen pics of posted of my "backyard", the BLM land right out back. It looks as similar as any I've seen to Unit 10 in AZ and many of us know what kind of elk numbers and quality that Unit has. I've heard the elk were slowly expanding their range, but not fast enough I'll see much benefit in my lifetime and therefor will likely never get a chance to hunt elk where I live. (There's this other issue with wild (non-native) horses, but that's for another thread someday)
Many on here profess to be big supporters of the North American system of game management. I'm one of them. That system will disappear rapidly with any privatization of public lands. Game will revert to the ownership of the property holder, not the public as it is now. Either directly, or by limiting access as has happened already in many areas of the west (Our MT, WY and other members already know about that due to rich folks buying up the large ranches they used to hunt on). That is what got organizations like BHA and some others started.
Am I happy with the way things seem to be going with BHA and Rinella's company? Not particularly. As a matter of fact not at all. Was the takeover of Meateater a hostile one? Did Rinella have and say-so? Was it publicly traded stock the new guy just purchased on the Market? Whatever it turns out to be, it would be nice for Rinella to disavow himself of the whole deal and tell his supporters he disagrees with the way things might go.
It's unfortunate, but the "antis" have worked for many years to get between different "factions" of hunters, fishers, ranchers/grazers, miners,hikers, horsemen, cyclists,rock climbers etc. The real deal, as I see it , would be to unify those diverse interest in order to keep public land PUBLIC. But as in so many aspects of life, there is the 'I want my share first" attitude that works in the interest of those who want to destroy our heritage. Either for private use, no use, or just the uses a particular group may espouse.
I don’t give a chit how cool looking your website is, how many pictures of hunters are on there and what the mission statement is. When you go into business with or receive substantial monetary investments from liberals or liberal groups that are the enemy (there’s no other name for what they represent) you have let the fox into the hen house. There’s no statements on Twitter, Facebook or whatever social media platform in response to the above actions that changes that, unless of course you are a dumbass!
"The two main classifications given to bison within the state are "domestic live stock" or "game animal", which is also considered wildlife." MT code legal classification of bison.
Reading and understanding are hard for some, keep trying.
Read this over at Rokslide, nauseating reading from the liberal sh*tbags there defending this deal.
We're our own worst enemy.
Then there’s the lunacy about lead poisoning through eating game taken with lead projectiles... Check out Wikipedia’s entry for lead poisoning and scroll down to bullets. The first two paragraphs approach complete nonsense, citing research and opinion papers toward wholly spurious implications.
"The two main classifications given to bison within the state are "domestic live stock" or "game animal", which is also considered wildlife." MT code legal classification of bison.
Reading and understanding are hard for some, keep trying.
Here's your quote: "As long as bison are livestock this won't happen. Given make the make up of the Montana Legislature (as it is and always will be) and the strength of Montana Stock growers and Dept of Livestock, changing the classification of bison from livestock to wildlife won't ever happen."
The MT.FWP document. file:///C:/Users/Rovar/Downloads/Pages%20109-112%20Legal%20Classifications%20of%20Bison.docx%20(1).pdf
And the quote from the first paragraph from the document: ""The two main classifications given to bison within the state are "domestic live stock" or "game animal", which is also considered wildlife."
You're right it doesn't say what it says. Kinda like defining what the word "is" is.
I respect his views and positions. But to offer bits of rebuttal...
Those that take financial support from any entity are subject to that entities' regulation.
It makes no difference who or what entity. They all come with strings, and sooner or later, those strings can and will be pulled.
In lots of cases, the tunnel vision syndrome occurs. You start out in a very big tunnel... Lots of room in it. Lots of things encompassed. Then, the further you travel down that tunnel, the smaller in diameter it becomes.
Example: "We support the 2nd Amendment".... Then further down the tunnel, they take bump stocks. But that's OK. Hunters don't use bump stocks. Then a bit further down the tunnel, they ban high capacity mags. But we don't really use hi-caps, so it isn't affecting us. Then further down the tunnel, it narrows yet again, and bans semi-auto firearms. How many "real" hunters use those? Not many, and we really look down on those that do. So it's acceptable. A bit further down that tunnel, it gets narrower to the point that ammo is restricted to 100 rounds a year... (You see now how narrow the tunnel is getting) But you can't back out now....
You don't want to know what you have left when you are squirted out the small opening at the end. But, if you are at least a bit curious as to what awaits, then look at Europe... Because that's where we are headed. One chip at a time. One inch at a time. The tunnel is ever narrowing.
It's as if he thinks our principles have never been sold out before.
His response came across as indignant and contemptuous to me. Obviously, he didn't like having to explain his business decision to those who make what he does financially possible. Felt like he was one step away from using the "tin foil hat" or "clingers" pejoratives.
No matter... he can go be Martha Stewart somewhere else as far as I'm concerned.
I watched the video and I agree with your post above. Your post talks about what might happen, and there's no way to deny what might happen.
Looks to me like many have concluded that it's already happened though.
There's also no denying that in the past 60 years, the tunnel has been getting increasingly narrower.
History shows that.
At what point do we stop that?
Anywhere we can. The part of his video I agree with though is that we need to get more people into hunting and I think his show does that by appealing to a wider swath of the population than any other "hunting show" I can think of. If we stick to recruiting new hunters from people we agree with 100% on everything, the pool of recruits shrinks considerably, like it or not.
We see the same things in our hunter ed classes, lots of people that I know I don't agree with politically but they want to hunt and own guns. I'll take it.
I have no idea about Montana politics, campaign funding or any of that, I'm stricly talking about Rinella's message.
The resident Tester ball keeper sure thinks they're great.
Tester owes his squeaker of a win to Land Tawney/BHA and Ben OBrian.
Randy Newberg also gave Tester a very friendly platform with zero hard questions.
The fake public lands issue was played brilliantly by the Democrat operatives in Montana to nudge enough sportsmen over to Tester.
Newberg may as well be Neville Chamberlain. Doesn’t surprise me he’d let Tester go unchecked right in front of him. I mean…. we can’t dare interfere with leisurely pursuits. After all, that’s what built this country and our standard of living…. leisurely pursuits.
The resident Tester ball keeper sure thinks they're great.
Tester owes his squeaker of a win to Land Tawney/BHA and Ben OBrian.
Randy Newberg also gave Tester a very friendly platform with zero hard questions.
The fake public lands issue was played brilliantly by the Democrat operatives in Montana to nudge enough sportsmen over to Tester.
Burns,
Randy offered Rosendale the same platform...and he chose not to participate.
If Rosendale was such a champion of MY PUBLIC LANDS, wouldn't you think he would want to use any and all platforms to get that message out?
Rosendale was done before he started, and if not for the Trump machine spending massive tax payer dollars campaigning on his behalf...it wouldn't have been a "squeaker of a win".
Its embarrassing how much money, lots of it taxpayer money, the R's blew on Rosendale and still lost.
The one thing for certain, is that even though you think that public land transfer, which is part of the RNC platform, is not an issue...there is no doubt it is. That issue will continue to sway elections across the West. Those that think its "fake" are going to be on the losing end of a lot of elections. Count on it.
The one thing for certain, is that even though you think that public land transfer, which is part of the RNC platform, is not an issue...there is no doubt it is. That issue will continue to sway elections across the West. Those that think its "fake" are going to be on the losing end of a lot of elections. Count on it.
Other than a few, sparse mentions of the land issue which are really not that popular among republicans, I don't really see that it's an RNC platform, as you say.
I do see plenty of liberal fearmongering from the likes of you though.
Ben O'Brien is now a producer for Steve Rinella's show and if you listen to that guy your warm and fuzzies will disappear quickly.
He claims to have created the "Pro-Nuance/Anti-Bullschit" slogan used by the show. Yet whenever someone talks gun control or wanting to shoot an elephant, he stays very fugking clear of nuance.
Rinella is personable and came up with a good show but he's the last guy I want advocating for anything politically. In interviews he allows anti-gun sentiments to cruise right by and he doesn't do a good job of defending all types of hunting. He will defend baiting and the use of dogs but he isn't horribly articulate about it and he approaches everything from a "please understand so I can keep doing this" approach. He and his show are in bed with the anti-gun community. Period.
He can use examples like Fox News as never being influenced by left leaning sponsors but he only displays his own naivety when he does so.
I for one DO NOT want more hunters. I would much rather see hunters get on a unified front with companies in the renewable resource business and make compromises with those demographics than some left leaning cock sucker that has only one goal.
The one thing for certain, is that even though you think that public land transfer, which is part of the RNC platform, is not an issue...there is no doubt it is. That issue will continue to sway elections across the West. Those that think its "fake" are going to be on the losing end of a lot of elections. Count on it.
Other than a few, sparse mentions of the land issue which are really not that popular among republicans, I don't really see that it's an RNC platform, as you say.
I do see plenty of liberal fearmongering from the likes of you though.
Newberg may as well be Neville Chamberlain. Doesn’t surprise me he’d let Tester go unchecked right in front of him. I mean…. we can’t dare interfere with leisurely pursuits. After all, that’s what built this country and our standard of living…. leisurely pursuits.
You nailed it and that's one of the reasons I can't stand the influx of new hunters.
By and large they carry a chip on their shoulder and think cows belong in a slaughterhouse and not in a pasture.
The left is using these clowns to march through their first priority which is farmers, ranchers, logging industry, mining rights, etc. Hunters will be discarded of after that.
The one thing for certain, is that even though you think that public land transfer, which is part of the RNC platform, is not an issue...there is no doubt it is. That issue will continue to sway elections across the West. Those that think its "fake" are going to be on the losing end of a lot of elections. Count on it.
Other than a few, sparse mentions of the land issue which are really not that popular among republicans, I don't really see that it's an RNC platform, as you say.
I do see plenty of liberal fearmongering from the likes of you though.
The one thing for certain, is that even though you think that public land transfer, which is part of the RNC platform, is not an issue...there is no doubt it is. That issue will continue to sway elections across the West. Those that think its "fake" are going to be on the losing end of a lot of elections. Count on it.
Other than a few, sparse mentions of the land issue which are really not that popular among republicans, I don't really see that it's an RNC platform, as you say.
I do see plenty of liberal fearmongering from the likes of you though.
Nacy Pelosi would be proud.
Put on the readers old timer...
“Congress shall immediately pass universal legislation providing for a timely and orderly mechanism requiring the federal government to convey certain federally controlled public lands to states. We call upon all national and state leaders and representatives to exert their utmost power and influence to urge the transfer of those lands, identified in the review process, to all willing states for the benefit of the states and the nation as a whole. The residents of state and local communities know best how to protect the land where they work and live.”
I respect his views and positions. But to offer bits of rebuttal...
Those that take financial support from any entity are subject to that entities' regulation.
It makes no difference who or what entity. They all come with strings, and sooner or later, those strings can and will be pulled.
In lots of cases, the tunnel vision syndrome occurs. You start out in a very big tunnel... Lots of room in it. Lots of things encompassed. Then, the further you travel down that tunnel, the smaller in diameter it becomes.
Example: "We support the 2nd Amendment".... Then further down the tunnel, they take bump stocks. But that's OK. Hunters don't use bump stocks. Then a bit further down the tunnel, they ban high capacity mags. But we don't really use hi-caps, so it isn't affecting us. Then further down the tunnel, it narrows yet again, and bans semi-auto firearms. How many "real" hunters use those? Not many, and we really look down on those that do. So it's acceptable. A bit further down that tunnel, it gets narrower to the point that ammo is restricted to 100 rounds a year... (You see now how narrow the tunnel is getting) But you can't back out now....
You don't want to know what you have left when you are squirted out the small opening at the end. But, if you are at least a bit curious as to what awaits, then look at Europe... Because that's where we are headed. One chip at a time. One inch at a time. The tunnel is ever narrowing.
Oh, and speaking of fear mongering old timer....you would know it when you see it, no arguing that.
I've stated more than once they are not our friends.
I do enjoy Rinella's show but if you listen to him in podcasts he's way off base on more than one thing and one of his producer's is an outright POS.
I don't trust anything associated with this conglomerate. They're playing the long game and the long game is (IMO) securing support of hunters so they can rub out ranchers and the harvesting of natural resources.
“Congress shall immediately pass universal legislation providing for a timely and orderly mechanism requiring the federal government to convey certain federally controlled public lands to states. We call upon all national and state leaders and representatives to exert their utmost power and influence to urge the transfer of those lands, identified in the review process, to all willing states for the benefit of the states and the nation as a whole. The residents of state and local communities know best how to protect the land where they work and live.”
Besides being younger than you, when I quote something, I'll post a link so that people can read the entire item, and it's relevance.
I've stated more than once they are not our friends.
I do enjoy Rinella's show but if you listen to him in podcasts he's way off base on more than one thing and one of his producer's is an outright POS.
I don't trust anything associated with this conglomerate. They're playing the long game and the long game is (IMO) securing support of hunters so they can rub out ranchers and the harvesting of natural resources.
I've stated more than once they are not our friends.
I do enjoy Rinella's show but if you listen to him in podcasts he's way off base on more than one thing and one of his producer's is an outright POS.
I don't trust anything associated with this conglomerate. They're playing the long game and the long game is (IMO) securing support of hunters so they can rub out ranchers and the harvesting of natural resources.
After that, they'll turn on hunters.
This guy is correct.
Yep.
That's the tunnel getting narrower and narrower.
Don't jump when you see your shadow in that tunnel.
Buzz, you only come here to defend your POS organization and spread lies. Just as bad as Piddler. Or worse.
After seeing what the liberals have openly done to our country, I could not possibly spread enough hate and fear of them to do any good. All any American has to do is watch the news. It's in the open daily. If people have not seen that by now, then shame on them.
After seeing what the liberals have openly done to our country, I could not possibly spread enough hate and fear of them to do any good. All any American has to do is watch the news. It's in the open daily. If people have not seen that by now, then shame on them.
Wait, what? I thought the news was all "fake"?
Maybe spend that hour, between oatmeal time and Matlock reruns, getting your story straight old timer...
BuzzH is a screaming, elitist, I know better than you type. In short a liberal POS with a deer mount in his great room.
Blowing it right out of your a$$ as usual.
Nothing screams elitist more than coming from a family that made its living working in the wood products industry, railroad, etc. in a State dependent on Natural Resource extraction. No, unlike you, I've never forgotten my roots and where my family came from. They, like me, have always been staunch supporters of public lands where the hard-working families not only derived their living from, but also recreated on.
In your simple mind those two things have to be mutual exclusively, for those with history in Western States, they most certainly are not. We learned long ago, that we don't have to open the flood-gates to unrestricted exploitation of our natural resources for people to make a living. We can have regulations that allow for proper use of our natural resources, while at the same time, having clean water, clean air, and expansive wild places to hike, camp, hunt, fish, dirt bike, ATV, etc. etc. In short, the people closest to those places, that have lived, and still live there, have found a way to approach the challenge of "having it all"...without sacrificing either. Happens all the time, you're just too far removed from the awesome reality of those in the west, having it all. Rather than embrace the fact that you, along with 327 million other public land owners, have this reality, you're stuck on a 20 acre piece of dirt in Tennessee shooting whitetails. I think that's great, but what I find more great, is that a person from any State can come to the West, and hunt a huge variety of game on MY PUBLIC LANDS.
To further ice the cake of your "elitist" statement...which couldn't be any further from the truth about BHA or me personally. The WYBHA board, by design, has 2 of the 4 executive board members that work directly for the mining/oil and gas industries in Wyoming. They bring a balance to the organization and the perspective of how we MUST take into consideration the importance of both industry and wild places, hunting, fishing, etc.
Finally, I guess I also fail to understand how you consider what happened just this last week "elitist". I helped a long-time high school friend (who's family also was in the wood products industry) and his 2 cousins go 3 for 3 on cow elk on publicly accessible lands in Wyoming. I had never met either of my friends cousins, both of whom work in the coal mining industry in North Dakota. Both salt of the earth guys that I hosted here at my house for 5 days while they hunted here. One of my friends cousins shot his first elk, the other his second.
My long time friend and I:
His 2 cousins, both new "elitist" friends who work for the coal industry:
So go ahead steelhead, keep talking out of your a$$ all you want...
The one thing for certain, is that even though you think that public land transfer, which is part of the RNC platform, is not an issue...there is no doubt it is. That issue will continue to sway elections across the West. Those that think its "fake" are going to be on the losing end of a lot of elections. Count on it.
Other than a few, sparse mentions of the land issue which are really not that popular among republicans, I don't really see that it's an RNC platform, as you say.
I do see plenty of liberal fearmongering from the likes of you though.
Nacy Pelosi would be proud.
Put on the readers old timer...
“Congress shall immediately pass universal legislation providing for a timely and orderly mechanism requiring the federal government to convey certain federally controlled public lands to states. We call upon all national and state leaders and representatives to exert their utmost power and influence to urge the transfer of those lands, identified in the review process, to all willing states for the benefit of the states and the nation as a whole. The residents of state and local communities know best how to protect the land where they work and live.”
Could you be more specific as to where this quote came form and what "certain federally controlled lands" are that would be conveyed to the states by the feds?
“Congress shall immediately pass universal legislation providing for a timely and orderly mechanism requiring the federal government to convey certain federally controlled public lands to states. We call upon all national and state leaders and representatives to exert their utmost power and influence to urge the transfer of those lands, identified in the review process, to all willing states for the benefit of the states and the nation as a whole. The residents of state and local communities know best how to protect the land where they work and live.”
Besides being younger than you, when I quote something, I'll post a link so that people can read the entire item, and it's relevance.
Flave is spot on about you you as well.
rockin'
I was interested in seeing the truth of the matter as I, too, had heard it was in the platform. It was, in no uncertain terms.
Not that I'm entirely opposed to the idea of transfer of some lands, but I get very leery of weasly wording like "convey certain federally controlled public lands to the states". No elaborating on which "certain" lands those might be. Would any of us like to see terminology such as that in any party platform in regards to "certain" firearms regulation? "Certain" farming practice regulations? More friggen political language to get what they want without telling "we the people" what it is they want. Remember this little one “But we have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what’s in it....”
In the minds of some of us, wording such as "certain federally controlled lands" sounds suspiciously like "we'll tell you after we get the OK to transfer them".
Here's one of many links I found about the 2016 GOP Platform. This link is from an organization that supports the transfer as far as I can tell, just so you know it's not made up by some greenie organization or HuffPost. And through some searching it appears similar language has been in the party platform for many years.
Interesting in that the platform at least seems to attempt to address access for recreational use, but would that access continue on the "certain" transferred lands? Which is the major concern of folks like myself and many many others, some of whom join organizations like BHA.
"These are public lands, and the public should have access to them for appropriate activities like hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting."
Geno, for the most part, you have to have the entire context, then look at what was meant by it.
It's already happened.
It was to stop the abuses of the Antiquities Act by presidents Obama & Clinton, in the large land grabs.
Quote
Dec. 4, 2017
SALT LAKE CITY — President Trump sharply reduced the size of two national monuments in Utah on Monday by some two million acres, the largest rollback of federal land protection in the nation’s history.
The administration shrank Bears Ears National Monument, a sprawling region of red rock canyons, by 85 percent, and cut another monument, Grand Staircase-Escalante, to about half its current size. The move, a reversal of protections put in place by Democratic predecessors, comes as the administration pushes for fewer restrictions and more development on public lands.
The decision to reduce Bears Ears is expected to set off a legal battle that could alter the course of American land conservation, putting dozens of other monuments at risk and possibly opening millions of preserved public acres to oil and gas extraction, mining, logging and other commercial activities.
“Some people think that the natural resources of Utah should be controlled by a small handful of very distant bureaucrats located in Washington,” Mr. Trump said, speaking at Utah’s State Capitol beneath a painting of Mormon pioneers. “And guess what? They’re wrong.”
“Together,” he continued, “we will usher in a bright new future of wonder and wealth.”
President Barack Obama designated Bears Ears a monument in 2016, and President Bill Clinton classified Grand Staircase-Escalante in 1996, using a century-old law called the Antiquities Act that grants presidents the authority to set aside landmarks and “other objects of historic or scientific interest.”
The law says that presidents should limit designations to the “smallest area compatible with proper care and management.” In both cases, Utah politicians have argued that the actions of the previous presidents abused the law by exceeding that limit and were illegal.
Environmentalists and some native nations say Mr. Trump’s decision will destroy the national heritage and threaten some 100,000 sites of archaeological importance in the monuments’ desert landscapes.
Conservative lawmakers and many Westerners argue that the move is the proper response to decades of federal overreach that have sometimes starved communities of revenue and autonomy. When Mr. Clinton formed Grand Staircase, the move halted plans for a coal mining project there that would have brought desperately needed jobs to a poor county.
Mr. Trump’s move is viewed as a victory for Republican lawmakers, fossil fuel companies and others. The federal government controls about two-thirds of the land in Utah, and the state’s leading politicians have long pushed for more local control.
“He’s been sympathetic to the fact that we’ve been mistreated,” Senator Mike Lee of Utah said of the president, “and I’m grateful that he is willing to correct it.”
The big fear of the feds transferring land to the states is the states will then sell the land to private interests or resource extraction/developers etc. forever destroying public use of those lands.
If anything it would be easier from the fed perspective, especially considering our debts owed to so many around the world.
So the $64,000 question is, what stops the feds from doing the same thing?
Geno, for the most part, you have to have the entire context, then look at what was meant by it.
It's already happened.
It was to stop the abuses of the Antiquities Act by presidents Obama & Clinton, in the large land grabs.
Quote
Dec. 4, 2017
SALT LAKE CITY — President Trump sharply reduced the size of two national monuments in Utah on Monday by some two million acres, the largest rollback of federal land protection in the nation’s history.
The administration shrank Bears Ears National Monument, a sprawling region of red rock canyons, by 85 percent, and cut another monument, Grand Staircase-Escalante, to about half its current size. The move, a reversal of protections put in place by Democratic predecessors, comes as the administration pushes for fewer restrictions and more development on public lands.
The decision to reduce Bears Ears is expected to set off a legal battle that could alter the course of American land conservation, putting dozens of other monuments at risk and possibly opening millions of preserved public acres to oil and gas extraction, mining, logging and other commercial activities.
“Some people think that the natural resources of Utah should be controlled by a small handful of very distant bureaucrats located in Washington,” Mr. Trump said, speaking at Utah’s State Capitol beneath a painting of Mormon pioneers. “And guess what? They’re wrong.”
“Together,” he continued, “we will usher in a bright new future of wonder and wealth.”
President Barack Obama designated Bears Ears a monument in 2016, and President Bill Clinton classified Grand Staircase-Escalante in 1996, using a century-old law called the Antiquities Act that grants presidents the authority to set aside landmarks and “other objects of historic or scientific interest.”
The law says that presidents should limit designations to the “smallest area compatible with proper care and management.” In both cases, Utah politicians have argued that the actions of the previous presidents abused the law by exceeding that limit and were illegal.
Environmentalists and some native nations say Mr. Trump’s decision will destroy the national heritage and threaten some 100,000 sites of archaeological importance in the monuments’ desert landscapes.
Conservative lawmakers and many Westerners argue that the move is the proper response to decades of federal overreach that have sometimes starved communities of revenue and autonomy. When Mr. Clinton formed Grand Staircase, the move halted plans for a coal mining project there that would have brought desperately needed jobs to a poor county.
Mr. Trump’s move is viewed as a victory for Republican lawmakers, fossil fuel companies and others. The federal government controls about two-thirds of the land in Utah, and the state’s leading politicians have long pushed for more local control.
“He’s been sympathetic to the fact that we’ve been mistreated,” Senator Mike Lee of Utah said of the president, “and I’m grateful that he is willing to correct it.”
Yes Barry, but I trust NO politicians to stop where they allude they might. On most any issue. What's to stop them (other than the fact the Dems now control the House) from going further and offering millions of acres/sq miles to the states and/or private industry after passing a bill allowing that?
While stopping the excesses of "preservationist" designations of earlier regimes, this is what really concerns me:
"The move, a reversal of protections put in place by Democratic predecessors, comes as the administration pushes for fewer restrictions and more development on public lands."
More undefined "development" of public lands is not something I want to see. Logging responsibly (clear cuts can be responsible, so I'm not what could be called a tree hugger), certain types of mining/mineral extraction, things along those lines are what I think the multiple use nature of our public lands should be. I DON'T want to see forest or rangelands turned over to the Recreational Vehicle Industry for a 500 space, fully powered, satellite TV, cell phone towered, off road motorcycle/buggy trail, olympic pool, and casino, which is not precluded by wishy washy wording of the platform.
Therefor my statement in an earlier post that the public lands issue is not a "red herring" , and that issue is probably a good reason certain Democratic Party candidates are elected in the West. It's not unnoticed by some of us voters that the wording in some of the platforms of "conservative" candidates leaves a lot to be desired.
BuzzH is a screaming, elitist, I know better than you type. In short a liberal POS with a deer mount in his great room.
Blowing it right out of your a$$ as usual.
Nothing screams elitist more than coming from a family that made its living working in the wood products industry, railroad, etc. in a State dependent on Natural Resource extraction. No, unlike you, I've never forgotten my roots and where my family came from. They, like me, have always been staunch supporters of public lands where the hard-working families not only derived their living from, but also recreated on.
In your simple mind those two things have to be mutual exclusively, for those with history in Western States, they most certainly are not. We learned long ago, that we don't have to open the flood-gates to unrestricted exploitation of our natural resources for people to make a living. We can have regulations that allow for proper use of our natural resources, while at the same time, having clean water, clean air, and expansive wild places to hike, camp, hunt, fish, dirt bike, ATV, etc. etc. In short, the people closest to those places, that have lived, and still live there, have found a way to approach the challenge of "having it all"...without sacrificing either. Happens all the time, you're just too far removed from the awesome reality of those in the west, having it all. Rather than embrace the fact that you, along with 327 million other public land owners, have this reality, you're stuck on a 20 acre piece of dirt in Tennessee shooting whitetails. I think that's great, but what I find more great, is that a person from any State can come to the West, and hunt a huge variety of game on MY PUBLIC LANDS.
To further ice the cake of your "elitist" statement...which couldn't be any further from the truth about BHA or me personally. The WYBHA board, by design, has 2 of the 4 executive board members that work directly for the mining/oil and gas industries in Wyoming. They bring a balance to the organization and the perspective of how we MUST take into consideration the importance of both industry and wild places, hunting, fishing, etc.
Finally, I guess I also fail to understand how you consider what happened just this last week "elitist". I helped a long-time high school friend (who's family also was in the wood products industry) and his 2 cousins go 3 for 3 on cow elk on publicly accessible lands in Wyoming. I had never met either of my friends cousins, both of whom work in the coal mining industry in North Dakota. Both salt of the earth guys that I hosted here at my house for 5 days while they hunted here. One of my friends cousins shot his first elk, the other his second.
My long time friend and I:
His 2 cousins, both new "elitist" friends who work for the coal industry:
So go ahead steelhead, keep talking out of your a$$ all you want...
Geno, for the most part, you have to have the entire context, then look at what was meant by it.
It's already happened.
It was to stop the abuses of the Antiquities Act by presidents Obama & Clinton, in the large land grabs.
Wrong again.
The idea of public land transfer has been going on for a long time, and ramped up wayyy before Trump was elected to office.
Monument designation of Bears Ears wouldn't have transferred the land away from the BLM, the same agency would have managed the Monument. You like to whine and cry about "facts", and "fear mongering" and then make posts like that...unbelievable. Try to educate yourself, as you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Monument designation and the RNC platform of public land transfer are not in any way the same.
The RNC platform agenda is 100% about transferring all BLM, FS, and USFWS lands to the States, which would immediately become a fire-sale to private ownership. Apparently you've been playing Rip Van-Winkle the last 5-6 years as State Legislatures in MT, ID, WY, etc. have been wasting tax payer money funding studies to determine the feasibility of transferring Federal Lands to the States.
One such study, by the land grab capital of Utah, concluded that the costs of fire-fighting alone, would force the State of Utah to sell off lands. The consensus of the study, payed for and hand picked by the dominate Republican party of Utah, concluded that Utah would have to sell the most profitable half of their newly acquired lands to manage the less profitable remaining half.
Similar study conducted, and again from a hand picked Republican dominated legislature in Wyoming, concluded the same thing...that the only feasible option in Wyoming acquiring Federal Public Lands would be to sell at least half of it.
Of course, there's the State Enabling Acts that the brain trust in the RNC has chosen to ignore, that under the agreement of becoming a State, they gave up the right of claim to all parts of the unoccupied Federal Lands within their borders. In exchange they received every section 16 and 36...and in some cases, more than that (Utah).
Its also not surprising that many States have squandered their State Land assets and very few have even close to 100% of their State Land Grants anymore. In the case of Nevada, all but a few thousand acres have been essentially given to private land owners. Most States at least sold some of their State land rather than giving it to their cronies. Either way, its land that is no longer accessible to the public, and unless sale proceeds of the land were put into an endowment or Trust, is land the State no longer receives revenue from.
There's only one Party waging war on public lands and part of their platform. They cant act surprised, when many within their own Party hand them their ass on the issue and in many cases are choosing to vote for the "other team" to ensure their public land legacy. Until such time that the R's get it right on public lands, I predict their "team" will continue to lose elections over the issue...has happed many times in the last few years in many local and national races.
Public land users vote...and positions on public lands have consequences.
Just the way it is, and exactly why Tester beat Rosendale.
BuzzH is a screaming, elitist, I know better than you type. In short a liberal POS with a deer mount in his great room.
Blowing it right out of your a$$ as usual.
Nothing screams elitist more than coming from a family that made its living working in the wood products industry, railroad, etc. in a State dependent on Natural Resource extraction. No, unlike you, I've never forgotten my roots and where my family came from. They, like me, have always been staunch supporters of public lands where the hard-working families not only derived their living from, but also recreated on.
In your simple mind those two things have to be mutual exclusively, for those with history in Western States, they most certainly are not. We learned long ago, that we don't have to open the flood-gates to unrestricted exploitation of our natural resources for people to make a living. We can have regulations that allow for proper use of our natural resources, while at the same time, having clean water, clean air, and expansive wild places to hike, camp, hunt, fish, dirt bike, ATV, etc. etc. In short, the people closest to those places, that have lived, and still live there, have found a way to approach the challenge of "having it all"...without sacrificing either. Happens all the time, you're just too far removed from the awesome reality of those in the west, having it all. Rather than embrace the fact that you, along with 327 million other public land owners, have this reality, you're stuck on a 20 acre piece of dirt in Tennessee shooting whitetails. I think that's great, but what I find more great, is that a person from any State can come to the West, and hunt a huge variety of game on MY PUBLIC LANDS.
To further ice the cake of your "elitist" statement...which couldn't be any further from the truth about BHA or me personally. The WYBHA board, by design, has 2 of the 4 executive board members that work directly for the mining/oil and gas industries in Wyoming. They bring a balance to the organization and the perspective of how we MUST take into consideration the importance of both industry and wild places, hunting, fishing, etc.
Finally, I guess I also fail to understand how you consider what happened just this last week "elitist". I helped a long-time high school friend (who's family also was in the wood products industry) and his 2 cousins go 3 for 3 on cow elk on publicly accessible lands in Wyoming. I had never met either of my friends cousins, both of whom work in the coal mining industry in North Dakota. Both salt of the earth guys that I hosted here at my house for 5 days while they hunted here. One of my friends cousins shot his first elk, the other his second.
My long time friend and I:
His 2 cousins, both new "elitist" friends who work for the coal industry:
So go ahead steelhead, keep talking out of your a$$ all you want...
my public lands???? What's that even ph ucking mean? You own it? Far BHA ph uck them! The local chapter up here is headed by the biggest liberal turd living in homer. They opposed aerial wolf hunting, they opposed brown bear baiting, were in cahoots with the wolf lover outfit wolfsong of Alaska.. anyhow pretty sure they are not very relevant, since one of the cofounders of that chapter broke off and started his own group that promotes antiguide and anti out of state hunter animosity rhak.
BuzzH is a screaming, elitist, I know better than you type. In short a liberal POS with a deer mount in his great room.
Blowing it right out of your a$$ as usual.
Nothing screams elitist more than coming from a family that made its living working in the wood products industry, railroad, etc. in a State dependent on Natural Resource extraction. No, unlike you, I've never forgotten my roots and where my family came from. They, like me, have always been staunch supporters of public lands where the hard-working families not only derived their living from, but also recreated on.
In your simple mind those two things have to be mutual exclusively, for those with history in Western States, they most certainly are not. We learned long ago, that we don't have to open the flood-gates to unrestricted exploitation of our natural resources for people to make a living. We can have regulations that allow for proper use of our natural resources, while at the same time, having clean water, clean air, and expansive wild places to hike, camp, hunt, fish, dirt bike, ATV, etc. etc. In short, the people closest to those places, that have lived, and still live there, have found a way to approach the challenge of "having it all"...without sacrificing either. Happens all the time, you're just too far removed from the awesome reality of those in the west, having it all. Rather than embrace the fact that you, along with 327 million other public land owners, have this reality, you're stuck on a 20 acre piece of dirt in Tennessee shooting whitetails. I think that's great, but what I find more great, is that a person from any State can come to the West, and hunt a huge variety of game on MY PUBLIC LANDS.
To further ice the cake of your "elitist" statement...which couldn't be any further from the truth about BHA or me personally. The WYBHA board, by design, has 2 of the 4 executive board members that work directly for the mining/oil and gas industries in Wyoming. They bring a balance to the organization and the perspective of how we MUST take into consideration the importance of both industry and wild places, hunting, fishing, etc.
Finally, I guess I also fail to understand how you consider what happened just this last week "elitist". I helped a long-time high school friend (who's family also was in the wood products industry) and his 2 cousins go 3 for 3 on cow elk on publicly accessible lands in Wyoming. I had never met either of my friends cousins, both of whom work in the coal mining industry in North Dakota. Both salt of the earth guys that I hosted here at my house for 5 days while they hunted here. One of my friends cousins shot his first elk, the other his second.
My long time friend and I:
His 2 cousins, both new "elitist" friends who work for the coal industry:
So go ahead steelhead, keep talking out of your a$$ all you want...
Geno, for the most part, you have to have the entire context, then look at what was meant by it.
It's already happened.
It was to stop the abuses of the Antiquities Act by presidents Obama & Clinton, in the large land grabs.
Wrong again.
The idea of public land transfer has been going on for a long time, and ramped up wayyy before Trump was elected to office.
Monument designation of Bears Ears wouldn't have transferred the land away from the BLM, the same agency would have managed the Monument. You like to whine and cry about "facts", and "fear mongering" and then make posts like that...unbelievable. Try to educate yourself, as you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Monument designation and the RNC platform of public land transfer are not in any way the same.
The RNC platform agenda is 100% about transferring all BLM, FS, and USFWS lands to the States, which would immediately become a fire-sale to private ownership. Apparently you've been playing Rip Van-Winkle the last 5-6 years as State Legislatures in MT, ID, WY, etc. have been wasting tax payer money funding studies to determine the feasibility of transferring Federal Lands to the States.
Again, you are a lyin' sack of shat.
It's right there, in black and white.
Section 4. Platform Page, RNC
The residents of state and local communities know best how to protect the land where they work and live. They practice boots-on-the-ground conservation in their states every day. We support amending the Antiquities Act of 1906 to establish Congress’ right to approve the designation of national monuments and to further require the approval of the state where a national monument is designated or a national park is proposed.
Come over here when your POS organization gets called out for being Commies, and post lies and hero pics of animals you scouted while on duty with you job the taxpayers were paying you to do with the USFS.
C'mon! WE all want to see more of those outdated hero pics you post time and time again.
But we all know you do it as a deflection to the fact that your organization cannot stand the scrutiny of truth about where a VERY large amount of your funding comes from.
As I said earlier, you come here and do the same thing over and over again, and more and more people see who and what BHA is.
Geno......your concerns are valid...…….for the record I don't belong to bha…..I didn't vote for tester....bla..bla..bla
anyone one who doesn't believe that the republicans want to transfer land to the states is not being honest.....case in point...friends of ours are big in the republican party here....goes to all the events....fund raisers at their house....treasure for the party here....we have this running discussion all the time...…..yes ultimately they would like to see them transferred.
they tone it down, and put it on the back burner, because they know its a hot topic ….and any group that is for anything to do with public land, gets called green decoys..etc
I do support the Montana wildlife federation....est 1936 I believe, one of the oldest in the country...their work, along with farmers and ranchers...has lead to a lot of opportunity I believe...…..again dismissed as a green decoy.
my friends are from down south.....its hard for people not born in the west to understand our relationship with the public land.
Come over here when your POS organization gets called out for being Commies, and post lies and hero pics of animals you scouted while on duty with you job the taxpayers were paying you to do with the USFS.
C'mon! WE all want to see more of those outdated hero pics you post time and time again.
But we all know you do it as a deflection to the fact that your organization cannot stand the scrutiny of truth about where a VERY large amount of your funding comes from.
As I said earlier, you come here and do the same thing over and over again, and more and more people see who and what BHA is.
Old timer,
Sometime after Matlock and before pudding time, have the nice people at the home explain the difference between the RNC's platform positions on PLT and the AA. They aren't the same thing, if only obviously.
Green Decoys is nothing other than a shell/front company run by the Public Relations firm of Bergman & Co. for interested industries. Green Decoys is one of dozens of such front groups run by Bergman & Co. to disseminate falsehood, rumor, and innuendo to help interested industries.
The fact some here will take the bought and paid for “word” of a corporate PR firm representing those that want to exploit public ground for personal gain is fascinating...
Green Decoys is nothing other than a shell/front company run by the Public Relations firm of Bergman & Co. for interested industries. Green Decoys is one of dozens of such front groups run by Bergman & Co. to disseminate falsehood, rumor, and innuendo to help interested industries.
The fact some here will take the bought and paid for “word” of a corporate PR firm representing those that want to exploit public ground for personal gain is fascinating...
They say some pretty bad things about your organization. It's been out there for several years. It's probably damaging your organization and brand name.
Why don't you sue them for libel?
Of course the valid defense for libel is what is said is the truth....
Green Decoys is nothing other than a shell/front company run by the Public Relations firm of Bergman & Co. for interested industries. Green Decoys is one of dozens of such front groups run by Bergman & Co. to disseminate falsehood, rumor, and innuendo to help interested industries.
The fact some here will take the bought and paid for “word” of a corporate PR firm representing those that want to exploit public ground for personal gain is fascinating...
They say some pretty bad things about your organization. It's been out there for several years. It's probably damaging your organization and brand name.
Why don't you sue them for libel?
Of course the valid defense for libel is what is said is the truth....
So You’re saying Green Decoys isn’t a front co run by a PR firm for corporate profit?
Apparently the truth doesn’t fit your “narrative.”
Use it to your advantage and watch membership double again, just like it has for the last 4 or 5 years.
Secondly, you suggesting to sue for libel sounds a lot like something a snowflake would do.
WY is on track to have 2k members by the end of 2019...38 when I stepped up to form the chapter. Having influence and working on behalf of the average hunter, wildlife, and public lands is easy for a lot of diverse people to like.
Green Decoys is nothing other than a shell/front company run by the Public Relations firm of Bergman & Co. for interested industries. Green Decoys is one of dozens of such front groups run by Bergman & Co. to disseminate falsehood, rumor, and innuendo to help interested industries.
The fact some here will take the bought and paid for “word” of a corporate PR firm representing those that want to exploit public ground for personal gain is fascinating...
They say some pretty bad things about your organization. It's been out there for several years. It's probably damaging your organization and brand name.
Why don't you sue them for libel?
Of course the valid defense for libel is what is said is the truth....
So You’re saying Green Decoys isn’t a front co run by a PR firm for corporate profit?
Apparently the truth doesn’t fit your “narrative.”
Actually, the truth is ALL that matters to me. And the Constitution, of course, as that's where our freedom is declared.
I don't know who own GD. Could care less if they are being truthful...
If it were me they were lyin' about, I'd sue their asses off. No matter who they were.
I don't think you would care to get into ANOTHER discussion out here in the open about tracing the roots of BHA benefactors, the dollar amounts donated, and who that can clearly be traced backed to, right?
Every time those origins come to light, you lose more and more members. More and more know the truth.
And BTW, you’re apparently unaware that ocassioanlly disparate interests can sometimes find a common ground (BHA and some of their funders). None of which means anything other than intersecting interests.
That’s the real world... not the tinfoil hat one inhabited by some
Land Tawny, the director of BHA, is also a leftist operative who ran the liberal political action committee (PAC) with an equally-deceptive name, “Montana Hunters and Anglers Leadership Fund (MHA),” which, according to Activist Facts: “
…spent $1.1 million against Republican U.S. Senate candidate Danny Rehberg, who was challenging Democratic U.S. Sen. Jon Tester. [Land Tawny’s PAC] also spent $500,000 in support of the libertarian candidate as a strategy of drawing votes away from the Republican. MHA received several hundred thousand dollars from the League of Conservation Voters, a liberal environmentalist group.”
Liberal supporting BS artists. Nothing more.
Quote
BHA’s largest funding sources as the Western Conservation Foundation (WCF), which in 2011 and 2012 donated $278,423 to BHA. WCF has given to other known far-left radical groups including Earth Justice and the Tides Foundation. BHA also receives donations from the Wilburforce Foundation, Pew Charitable Trusts, and several other foundations known for their extremist ideological leanings.
Again, you’ll take the BS of a bought and paid for PR firm (Bergman) pushing an agenda for the same industries funding it through the front group Green Decoys to exploit public resources over a sportsman’s group (BHA) fighting to limit the influence of the very corporations funding Green Decoys?
Land Tawny, the director of BHA, is also a leftist operative who ran the liberal political action committee (PAC) with an equally-deceptive name, “Montana Hunters and Anglers Leadership Fund (MHA),” which, according to Activist Facts: “
…spent $1.1 million against Republican U.S. Senate candidate Danny Rehberg, who was challenging Democratic U.S. Sen. Jon Tester. [Land Tawny’s PAC] also spent $500,000 in support of the libertarian candidate as a strategy of drawing votes away from the Republican. MHA received several hundred thousand dollars from the League of Conservation Voters, a liberal environmentalist group.”
Liberal supporting BS artists. Nothing more.
Quote
BHA’s largest funding sources as the Western Conservation Foundation (WCF), which in 2011 and 2012 donated $278,423 to BHA. WCF has given to other known far-left radical groups including Earth Justice and the Tides Foundation. BHA also receives donations from the Wilburforce Foundation, Pew Charitable Trusts, and several other foundations known for their extremist ideological leanings.
More lies?
Denny Rehberg Barri. If you are going to use quotes make sure they are accurate including the basics like names.
Is anyone actually surprised that BHA would back Democrats in elections?
Wilderness advocates have found a way to make outdoorsmen fund the fight to keep control out of the hands of locals, all with the dire warning of public lands being liquidated to developers.
The big fear of the feds transferring land to the states is the states will then sell the land to private interests or resource extraction/developers etc. forever destroying public use of those lands.
If anything it would be easier from the fed perspective, especially considering our debts owed to so many around the world.
So the $64,000 question is, what stops the feds from doing the same thing?
Well, if you're looking for precedent, the Feds did sell a bit off over the years. 270 million acres as part of the Homestead acts alone. In fact, they gave most of that away for free
Randy offered Rosendale the same platform...and he chose not to participate.
If Rosendale was such a champion of MY PUBLIC LANDS, wouldn't you think he would want to use any and all platforms to get that message out?
Rosendale was done before he started, and if not for the Trump machine spending massive tax payer dollars campaigning on his behalf...it wouldn't have been a "squeaker of a win".
Its embarrassing how much money, lots of it taxpayer money, the R's blew on Rosendale and still lost.
The one thing for certain, is that even though you think that public land transfer, which is part of the RNC platform, is not an issue...there is no doubt it is. That issue will continue to sway elections across the West. Those that think its "fake" are going to be on the losing end of a lot of elections. Count on it.
Buzzy,
Never said Rosendale was anything but better than Tester.
You are spot on with the blown money issue as more buck were spent per vote in MT than the Cruz/Beto race in TX.
The public land selloff idea was brilliant and the Republican tards in UT that fueled the narrative deserve special derision.
Land did good work for his bosses and delivered a win in MT and a slap in Trumps face.
No mention of Tester's hand picked 9th Circuit judge stopping Wyoming's Grizzly hunt.
You fellers did good work for your side in MT this year, I am just not letting it go past without a bit of daylight.
Ben O'Brien is now a producer for Steve Rinella's show and if you listen to that guy your warm and fuzzies will disappear quickly.
He claims to have created the "Pro-Nuance/Anti-Bullschit" slogan used by the show. Yet whenever someone talks gun control or wanting to shoot an elephant, he stays very fugking clear of nuance.
Rinella is personable and came up with a good show but he's the last guy I want advocating for anything politically. In interviews he allows anti-gun sentiments to cruise right by and he doesn't do a good job of defending all types of hunting. He will defend baiting and the use of dogs but he isn't horribly articulate about it and he approaches everything from a "please understand so I can keep doing this" approach. He and his show are in bed with the anti-gun community. Period.
He can use examples like Fox News as never being influenced by left leaning sponsors but he only displays his own naivety when he does so.
I for one DO NOT want more hunters. I would much rather see hunters get on a unified front with companies in the renewable resource business and make compromises with those demographics than some left leaning cock sucker that has only one goal.
Don't forget Joe Rogan, He is no friend of ours either!
deflave he has one edge! And it isn't pro hunting and 2A. Ben O'Brian, Rogan, Newburg, and Rinella are all cut from the same cloth. Rogan bags on pretty much all African hunting, He never ever defends 2A. Add that interview with Dudley and I say good riddance to to Rogan. He blatantly said I don't care about your hunting spot, if you take me there I can do what I want. I would never disrespect another persons hunting spot that they scouted, hunted, and allowed me to go to with them. Never would I go there without asking them first, and never would I take another person. Rogan is a POS.
I've heard him defend the 2nd more than once he just does it in an uneducated way.
What he does do that I think is helpful is he rails against the SJW, left wing nonsense in an open forum.
I would agree though that he isn't doing anything good for hunting or the 2nd. On those two platforms he is idiotic. But at the same time, nobody ever explains it to him either. Because the "experts" he surrounds himself on these subjects are guys like O'Douche and Rinella.
I've heard him defend the 2nd more than once he just does it in an uneducated way.
What he does do that I think is helpful is he rails against the SJW, left wing nonsense in an open forum.
I would agree though that he isn't doing anything good for hunting or the 2nd. On those two platforms he is idiotic. But at the same time, nobody ever explains it to him either. Because the "experts" he surrounds himself on these subjects are guys like O'Douche and Rinella.
I agree all but the 2A part. He has a platform that could do serious damage to anti-hunting and anti-2A. Yet he screws it up every chance he gets. I lost every once of respect I had for him after listening to the Dudley interview.
I agree all but the 2A part. He has a platform that could do serious damage to anti-hunting and anti-2A. Yet he screws it up every chance he gets. I lost every once of respect I had for him after listening to the Dudley interview.
I don't know that I have heard that one.
I haven't watched the one with Nugent either because I can't listen to Nugent for more than five minutes. Even though I agree with pretty much everything he says.
Well, I had a lengthy response written, but it seems to have disappeared.
Coles Notes, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers were handpicked as the only "hunting" group to consult with the leftist NDP government of Alberta on the locking up of a huge area called the Bighorn. The Y2Y Initiative is involved, they want no industry or human occupation so animals like grizzly bears can wander freely from Yellowstone to the Yukon, maintaining (they claim) genetic diversity. The NDP say hunting and shooting will be allowed, but they are creating numerous provincial parks etc. And severly limiting access to the region. If you aren't a 25 year old backpacker, you probably can't hack it and access most of the area.
You can know a group by the company they keep. The BHA, by aligning themselves with the NDP, and Y2Y, is not on the side of hunters and shooters, but on the side of elitist backpackers and preservationists. No you cannot use horses etc in most areas.
A.) You're both gay. B.) You defend his safe space with vigor.
My comments on that other thread had nothing to do with Jeff, or being his "friend." They had everything to do with asking (politely) a couple of douchenozzles to keep their juvenile personal attacks and insults off a thread that had gone on for a couple years without their bullsh**.
Aw, after reading this thread (thanks Steelie) I really enjoyed it. As for Brad's attacks on the Green Decoy's paper, those funding streams are documentable, and no sportsman would ever like what entities like Wilburforce fund otherwise. Go to www.guidestar.org, register (free) and you can download the Form 990 returns which, way in the back of usually hundreds of pages, documents donations made. Yes, paid PR people at Green Decoys were hired to do the research, and it honestly would be nice to know the funder. But public records show the leanings of this Chernin guy. He's a Bolshevik. Period. And while Rinella can claim he's still got "creative control" the sick reality is, Chernin's group would not invest without some kind of due diligence. Chernin or his advisors really like the shape of Rinella's narrative, and thats why they throw down, just like the funders of BHA like what BHA paid staff say to the public. I'm glad the Federalist saw fit to look into Chernin's investment. Hope he loses it in the end.
Aw, after reading this thread (thanks Steelie) I really enjoyed it. As for Brad's attacks on the Green Decoy's paper, those funding streams are documentable, and no sportsman would ever like what entities like Wilburforce fund otherwise. Go to www.guidestar.org, register (free) and you can download the Form 990 returns which, way in the back of usually hundreds of pages, documents donations made. Yes, paid PR people at Green Decoys were hired to do the research, and it honestly would be nice to know the funder. But public records show the leanings of this Chernin guy. He's a Bolshevik. Period. And while Rinella can claim he's still got "creative control" the sick reality is, Chernin's group would not invest without some kind of due diligence. Chernin or his advisors really like the shape of Rinella's narrative, and thats why they throw down, just like the funders of BHA like what BHA paid staff say to the public. I'm glad the Federalist saw fit to look into Chernin's investment. Hope he loses it in the end.
Aren't you a shill for the Timber industry...or are you still pretending to be a journalist.
You always seem to assign a negative motive to anyone who may not have a black and white view of issues. People can align to a common goal with out "strings" being pulled.
The US left used to deny that they were anti-American, anti-white, anti-male, anti-Christian, pro-socialist, anti-free speexh. But now many openly advocate all these things and it’s spread to the mainstream left. And the Democrats candidates cannot pander hard enough.
The left, democrats, liberals, communist, socialist, islamites, the news media, and globalist want power/control of the American people. They hate Americans, the Constitution, and the USA. They are all enemies and traitors of America. They are using immigration/illegals to change the demographics of our once great nation. Globalists are turning it into a 2nd rate country they can control. That is the end game! Educated Christians which can think and have guns cannot be controlled by government.
Oh, right, the anonymous "Shillblaster" comes out of nowhere, makes a post as a virgin and then crawls back into the BHA woodwork. You sure you want to revive this thread, sweetness?
Aw, after reading this thread (thanks Steelie) I really enjoyed it. As for Brad's attacks on the Green Decoy's paper, those funding streams are documentable, and no sportsman would ever like what entities like Wilburforce fund otherwise. Go to www.guidestar.org, register (free) and you can download the Form 990 returns which, way in the back of usually hundreds of pages, documents donations made. Yes, paid PR people at Green Decoys were hired to do the research, and it honestly would be nice to know the funder. But public records show the leanings of this Chernin guy. He's a Bolshevik. Period. And while Rinella can claim he's still got "creative control" the sick reality is, Chernin's group would not invest without some kind of due diligence. Chernin or his advisors really like the shape of Rinella's narrative, and thats why they throw down, just like the funders of BHA like what BHA paid staff say to the public. I'm glad the Federalist saw fit to look into Chernin's investment. Hope he loses it in the end.
Aren't you a shill for the Timber industry...or are you still pretending to be a journalist.
You always seem to assign a negative motive to anyone who may not have a black and white view of issues. People can align to a common goal with out "strings" being pulled.
BHA does not support sportsmen and there's no denying that
The one thing for certain, is that even though you think that public land transfer, which is part of the RNC platform, is not an issue...there is no doubt it is. That issue will continue to sway elections across the West. Those that think its "fake" are going to be on the losing end of a lot of elections. Count on it.
Other than a few, sparse mentions of the land issue which are really not that popular among republicans, I don't really see that it's an RNC platform, as you say.
I do see plenty of liberal fearmongering from the likes of you though.
Aw, after reading this thread (thanks Steelie) I really enjoyed it. As for Brad's attacks on the Green Decoy's paper, those funding streams are documentable, and no sportsman would ever like what entities like Wilburforce fund otherwise. Go to www.guidestar.org, register (free) and you can download the Form 990 returns which, way in the back of usually hundreds of pages, documents donations made. Yes, paid PR people at Green Decoys were hired to do the research, and it honestly would be nice to know the funder. But public records show the leanings of this Chernin guy. He's a Bolshevik. Period. And while Rinella can claim he's still got "creative control" the sick reality is, Chernin's group would not invest without some kind of due diligence. Chernin or his advisors really like the shape of Rinella's narrative, and thats why they throw down, just like the funders of BHA like what BHA paid staff say to the public. I'm glad the Federalist saw fit to look into Chernin's investment. Hope he loses it in the end.
Aren't you a shill for the Timber industry...or are you still pretending to be a journalist.
You always seem to assign a negative motive to anyone who may not have a black and white view of issues. People can align to a common goal with out "strings" being pulled.
Ain't you special!
Such a coward to create a new handle, slander someone and then slide back into your self righteous deniability.
Aw, after reading this thread (thanks Steelie) I really enjoyed it. As for Brad's attacks on the Green Decoy's paper, those funding streams are documentable, and no sportsman would ever like what entities like Wilburforce fund otherwise. Go to www.guidestar.org, register (free) and you can download the Form 990 returns which, way in the back of usually hundreds of pages, documents donations made. Yes, paid PR people at Green Decoys were hired to do the research, and it honestly would be nice to know the funder. But public records show the leanings of this Chernin guy. He's a Bolshevik. Period. And while Rinella can claim he's still got "creative control" the sick reality is, Chernin's group would not invest without some kind of due diligence. Chernin or his advisors really like the shape of Rinella's narrative, and thats why they throw down, just like the funders of BHA like what BHA paid staff say to the public. I'm glad the Federalist saw fit to look into Chernin's investment. Hope he loses it in the end.
Aren't you a shill for the Timber industry...or are you still pretending to be a journalist.
You always seem to assign a negative motive to anyone who may not have a black and white view of issues. People can align to a common goal with out "strings" being pulled.
Well, I had a lengthy response written, but it seems to have disappeared.
Coles Notes, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers were handpicked as the only "hunting" group to consult with the leftist NDP government of Alberta on the locking up of a huge area called the Bighorn. The Y2Y Initiative is involved, they want no industry or human occupation so animals like grizzly bears can wander freely from Yellowstone to the Yukon, maintaining (they claim) genetic diversity. The NDP say hunting and shooting will be allowed, but they are creating numerous provincial parks etc. And severly limiting access to the region. If you aren't a 25 year old backpacker, you probably can't hack it and access most of the area.
You can know a group by the company they keep. The BHA, by aligning themselves with the NDP, and Y2Y, is not on the side of hunters and shooters, but on the side of elitist backpackers and preservationists. No you cannot use horses etc in most areas.
This has no basis. BHA is solidly a pro hunting group, I have heard no Y2Y talk at all. If I see leftist behavior I will call it out.You only have to pick up and read their publication to see this. BHA serves a usefully place for the argument to keep public land, public for hunting purposes. Yup, I am a card carrying Consrvative.
Why would Washington state BHA align themselves with an anti hunting group Conservation NW ?
Conservation NW has lobbied heavily for introduction of grey wolves into Washington, lobbied heavily for a carbon tax and supports radical anti groups like howling for wolves
Conservation NW is run by a self admitted eco terrorist who was a member of earth first for 20 years and spiked trees that injured loggers and caused millions of dollars of property damage .
Originally Posted by comerade
Originally Posted by AB2506
Well, I had a lengthy response written, but it seems to have disappeared.
Coles Notes, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers were handpicked as the only "hunting" group to consult with the leftist NDP government of Alberta on the locking up of a huge area called the Bighorn. The Y2Y Initiative is involved, they want no industry or human occupation so animals like grizzly bears can wander freely from Yellowstone to the Yukon, maintaining (they claim) genetic diversity. The NDP say hunting and shooting will be allowed, but they are creating numerous provincial parks etc. And severly limiting access to the region. If you aren't a 25 year old backpacker, you probably can't hack it and access most of the area.
You can know a group by the company they keep. The BHA, by aligning themselves with the NDP, and Y2Y, is not on the side of hunters and shooters, but on the side of elitist backpackers and preservationists. No you cannot use horses etc in most areas.
This has no basis. BHA is solidly a pro hunting group, I have heard no Y2Y talk at all. If I see leftist behavior I will call it out.You only have to pick up and read their publication to see this. BHA serves a usefully place for the argument to keep public land, public for hunting purposes. Yup, I am a card carrying Consrvative.
Well, I had a lengthy response written, but it seems to have disappeared. Coles Notes, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers were handpicked as the only "hunting" group to consult with the leftist NDP government of Alberta on the locking up of a huge area called the Bighorn. The Y2Y Initiative is involved, they want no industry or human occupation so animals like grizzly bears can wander freely from Yellowstone to the Yukon, maintaining (they claim) genetic diversity. The NDP say hunting and shooting will be allowed, but they are creating numerous provincial parks etc. And severly limiting access to the region. If you aren't a 25 year old backpacker, you probably can't hack it and access most of the area. You can know a group by the company they keep. The BHA, by aligning themselves with the NDP, and Y2Y, is not on the side of hunters and shooters, but on the side of elitist backpackers and preservationists. No you cannot use horses etc in most areas.
This has no basis. BHA is solidly a pro hunting group, I have heard no Y2Y talk at all. If I see leftist behavior I will call it out.You only have to pick up and read their publication to see this. BHA serves a usefully place for the argument to keep public land, public for hunting purposes. Yup, I am a card carrying Consrvative.
Card Carrying Conservatives also gave us the first Assault rifle ban and the unfettered illegal immigration problems we face today.
BHA encourages discussion with all groups. Our chapter) I have no problem with dialogue, our position is clear. Attend a meeting and decide for yourself. Assessing it otherwise will not give a clear view of the BHA objectives. This is not the Sierra club.
Was a member for a few years. Went to few pint nights. Surprised at number of Elmer Fudd types( hunters that support gun control) that were members.
I think RMEF and mule Deer Foundation does much better work.
Originally Posted by comerade
BHA encourages discussion with all groups. Our chapter) I have no problem with dialogue, our position is clear. Attend a meeting and decide for yourself. Assessing it otherwise will not give a clear view of the BHA objectives. This is not the Sierra club.
Oh, right, the anonymous "Shillblaster" comes out of nowhere, makes a post as a virgin and then crawls back into the BHA woodwork. You sure you want to revive this thread, sweetness?
You like to tout "following the money," and then make wild assumptions/accusations about people's intentions then politicize everything into left vs. right. I looked into you, working for a timber company front, pretending its not about the money. You might be able to hide from the "confirmation bias" crowd, but not from critical thinkers.
Aw, after reading this thread (thanks Steelie) I really enjoyed it. As for Brad's attacks on the Green Decoy's paper, those funding streams are documentable, and no sportsman would ever like what entities like Wilburforce fund otherwise. Go to www.guidestar.org, register (free) and you can download the Form 990 returns which, way in the back of usually hundreds of pages, documents donations made. Yes, paid PR people at Green Decoys were hired to do the research, and it honestly would be nice to know the funder. But public records show the leanings of this Chernin guy. He's a Bolshevik. Period. And while Rinella can claim he's still got "creative control" the sick reality is, Chernin's group would not invest without some kind of due diligence. Chernin or his advisors really like the shape of Rinella's narrative, and thats why they throw down, just like the funders of BHA like what BHA paid staff say to the public. I'm glad the Federalist saw fit to look into Chernin's investment. Hope he loses it in the end.
Aren't you a shill for the Timber industry...or are you still pretending to be a journalist.
You always seem to assign a negative motive to anyone who may not have a black and white view of issues. People can align to a common goal with out "strings" being pulled.
Ain't you special!
Such a coward to create a new handle, slander someone and then slide back into your self righteous deniability.
It's the equivalent of a drive by shooting.
he likes to call out "strings being pulled," and y'all are happy to listen, but Dave skinner is the real decoy. #reddecoy
Good info and deserves further research. This is a group that is also supported by Randy Newberg and other public land advocates. I hate getting duped.
mike r
I know Randy Newberg is or was a member on here and I have posted on his forum before but I believe he has advocated for the reintroduction of the buffalo to areas that would seriously fugk up ranching and push ranchers off public land.
The big mistake with hunters is they see public land as their's to hunt. They don't realize that strong arming ranchers and other demographics off public land is only step one.
If I'm wrong about Newberg feel free to unload. Gently...
As long as privately owned bison are livestock this won't happen. Given make the make up of the Montana Legislature (as it is and always will be) and the strength of Montana Stock growers and Dept of Livestock, changing the classification of bison from livestock to wildlife won't ever happen.
I am not nearly as confident. When you have people pushing for bison to be reintroduced as wildlife and some of the tribes throwing in as well, and then throw in east and west coast money, I can see it happening and it will be a huge mistake for those of us in this state.
Timber companies are evil. Have heard that one before at a BHA meeting
Originally Posted by SHILLBLASTER
Originally Posted by Dave_Skinner
Oh, right, the anonymous "Shillblaster" comes out of nowhere, makes a post as a virgin and then crawls back into the BHA woodwork. You sure you want to revive this thread, sweetness?
You like to tout "following the money," and then make wild assumptions/accusations about people's intentions then politicize everything into left vs. right. I looked into you, working for a timber company front, pretending its not about the money. You might be able to hide from the "confirmation bias" crowd, but not from critical thinkers.
Very nicely read response that totally ignores the primal fact.
A guy that is rabidly anti-gun has a huge stake in meat eater. So 2 things are in play here, I personally have ZERO interest in further enriching the gentleman who hates me and my way of life by supporting meat eater. Second is, if Rinella thinks that the guy who put all that money in won't step up and start imposing his will at some point in time, then he has not been around very many ultra-wealthy people.
“Congress shall immediately pass universal legislation providing for a timely and orderly mechanism requiring the federal government to convey certain federally controlled public lands to states. We call upon all national and state leaders and representatives to exert their utmost power and influence to urge the transfer of those lands, identified in the review process, to all willing states for the benefit of the states and the nation as a whole. The residents of state and local communities know best how to protect the land where they work and live.”
Ummmmmm, Just what the hell is state land????? It is public land you stupid sh!!tt
I’m not even going to begin to read all the BHA/Communist/radical greenie apologetics. The BHA is simply the Sierra Club in drag and BHA members are just useful idiots for the leadership.
Timber companies are evil. Have heard that one before at a BHA meeting
Originally Posted by SHILLBLASTER
Originally Posted by Dave_Skinner
Oh, right, the anonymous "Shillblaster" comes out of nowhere, makes a post as a virgin and then crawls back into the BHA woodwork. You sure you want to revive this thread, sweetness?
You like to tout "following the money," and then make wild assumptions/accusations about people's intentions then politicize everything into left vs. right. I looked into you, working for a timber company front, pretending its not about the money. You might be able to hide from the "confirmation bias" crowd, but not from critical thinkers.
Not nearly as bad as mining. According to the BHA if one ounce of copper is mined in northern Minnesota the whole BWCA, Quetico, Voyageurs parks will be destroyed forever. Even Lake Superior will be ruined forever. Little do these azz hats know is that there were gold and copper mines in what is now the BWCA and Voyageurs years ago when there wasn't any regulations on the mines. They believe that the BWCA is virgin! Heck that whole area was mined and completely logged out in the late 1800's- early 1900's.
Aren't you a shill for the Timber industry...or are you still pretending to be a journalist.
You always seem to assign a negative motive to anyone who may not have a black and white view of issues. People can align to a common goal with out "strings" being pulled.
Pretty sure Dave is a journalist. Heard where he won some journalism awards this past year.
You like to tout "following the money," and then make wild assumptions/accusations about people's intentions then politicize everything into left vs. right. I looked into you, working for a timber company front, pretending its not about the money. You might be able to hide from the "confirmation bias" crowd, but not from critical thinkers.
You sound like a shill for BHA or Meateater, which is it?
Timber companies are evil. Have heard that one before at a BHA meeting
Originally Posted by SHILLBLASTER
Originally Posted by Dave_Skinner
Oh, right, the anonymous "Shillblaster" comes out of nowhere, makes a post as a virgin and then crawls back into the BHA woodwork. You sure you want to revive this thread, sweetness?
You like to tout "following the money," and then make wild assumptions/accusations about people's intentions then politicize everything into left vs. right. I looked into you, working for a timber company front, pretending its not about the money. You might be able to hide from the "confirmation bias" crowd, but not from critical thinkers.
Never said they were, but they obviously have a vested interest in land transfer for logging purposes. You have made up your mind because you cant see beyond partisan lines, and promote "what if" fear monngering...sad
You like to tout "following the money," and then make wild assumptions/accusations about people's intentions then politicize everything into left vs. right. I looked into you, working for a timber company front, pretending its not about the money. You might be able to hide from the "confirmation bias" crowd, but not from critical thinkers.
You sound like a shill for BHA or Meateater, which is it?
not a member of BHA, and only seen a few episodes of meateater. spend most of my time doing the deal. lucky for y'all the wind is blowing too hard today for me to work.
Originally Posted by Tarkio
Originally Posted by SHILLBLASTER
Aren't you a shill for the Timber industry...or are you still pretending to be a journalist.
You always seem to assign a negative motive to anyone who may not have a black and white view of issues. People can align to a common goal with out "strings" being pulled.
Pretty sure Dave is a journalist. Heard where he won some journalism awards this past year.
i think you mean bought and paid opinion writer, big difference
Yes, Shill dear, I DO have opinions. Most of them are opinions based on fact. One of those opinions is, a "hunter and angler" group that the facts show is paid for by the usual-suspect Green foundations and staffed by refugees from other Green groups, as the facts show, is probably Green first, last and always. The fact that some of them can touch a rifle without hurting themselves is secondary to the Green part. And as we all know, Greens are Marxist Red on the inside -- again, that's based on fact and is therefore a pretty solid opinion.
As for your opinion that my interest in "land transfer" is "vested" -- you're dang right, but it's not for "logging." Sure, forestry (actually vegetation management), or the LACK THEREOF, is a huge factor driving the terrible conditions on federal public land. I don't like the idea of having all that habitat, and all that valuable wood, and all those pretty trees, mindlessly burnt because litigous morons abuse the federal court system and federal management laws in order to burn the village to save it. The mentality, and this is based on a paper trail, is that the zero-cut morons would rather burn the greatest habitat utterly black and flat rather that let it be "exploited" for gain. Think about it.....burn an entire basin, leave it to rot, and you won't have to worry about "logging" or anything else positive for a LOOOOOONG effing time.
That "gain" actually generates the taxable profits upon which "the government" depends to give free stuff away never enters their dim little minds. That maybe good, targeted management that pays for itself works pretty well over the long run -- is a concept far beyond the ability of the eco-mind to understand.
The "vested" part for me comes from the fact that I've lived in sight of federal forests all my adult life, minus maybe four years. I've seen the good, and a hell of a lot of awful that wasn't from "logging" but from its absence. Even the "worst" clearcuts don't come close to what happens when an entire mountainside is burnt and then runs off into the watershed.
The vested interest is like what I think Washington said -- that government closest to the people is best. I'd expand on that and say that citizens should have the most say based on how much they will be affected by the policy chosen. Those with the most to gain, or to lose, should count more than someone who has never, and never will.
You like to tout "following the money," and then make wild assumptions/accusations about people's intentions then politicize everything into left vs. right. I looked into you, working for a timber company front, pretending its not about the money. You might be able to hide from the "confirmation bias" crowd, but not from critical thinkers.
You sound like a shill for BHA or Meateater, which is it?
not a member of BHA, and only seen a few episodes of meateater. spend most of my time doing the deal. lucky for y'all the wind is blowing too hard today for me to work.
Originally Posted by Tarkio
Originally Posted by SHILLBLASTER
Aren't you a shill for the Timber industry...or are you still pretending to be a journalist.
You always seem to assign a negative motive to anyone who may not have a black and white view of issues. People can align to a common goal with out "strings" being pulled.
Pretty sure Dave is a journalist. Heard where he won some journalism awards this past year.
i think you mean bought and paid opinion writer, big difference
Care to share what you do to put food on the table?
The vested interest is like what I think Washington said -- that government closest to the people is best. I'd expand on that and say that citizens should have the most say based on how much they will be affected by the policy chosen. Those with the most to gain, or to lose, should count more than someone who has never, and never will.
Funny how people who proclaim to be conservative or concerned with the state of the USA, really don't like Federalism unless it suits their particular desires at the moment.
I would much rather have the public land under the control of our state government where I at least stand a chance to have a say and have an impact on its management.
So many of these strong, independent tyoes on here are so dependent on THEIR PUBLIC LAND, that they would shrivel up and die without it.
Funny, I cannot recall where it states in the Constitution that the federal government has a responsibility to own land just so these yahoos don't have to be a civil and decent human being in order to traipse all over and shoot what they want.
So, who is using who? Is BHA using Meateater, etc to make money to further their goals, or is Rinella using BHA to reach the American public with his values and ideal... or both? Personally, I find it dangerous ground to bolster the "Left's purse" on any grounds. An enemy is an enemy and any venture that stands them up monetarily or gives them a potential stronghold in this "war" is a dangerous and contemptious position to be occupying.
Sorry comerade, if you haven't heard any Y2Y talk, you haven't been looking or listening. BHA and Y2Y had each other listed in their annual reports for a few years. A little digging can still turn up those documents.
In addition, the Alberta BHA Chapter board has/had a few outspoken critics of predator hunting and trapping.
Originally Posted by comerade
Originally Posted by AB2506
Well, I had a lengthy response written, but it seems to have disappeared.
Coles Notes, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers were handpicked as the only "hunting" group to consult with the leftist NDP government of Alberta on the locking up of a huge area called the Bighorn. The Y2Y Initiative is involved, they want no industry or human occupation so animals like grizzly bears can wander freely from Yellowstone to the Yukon, maintaining (they claim) genetic diversity. The NDP say hunting and shooting will be allowed, but they are creating numerous provincial parks etc. And severly limiting access to the region. If you aren't a 25 year old backpacker, you probably can't hack it and access most of the area.
You can know a group by the company they keep. The BHA, by aligning themselves with the NDP, and Y2Y, is not on the side of hunters and shooters, but on the side of elitist backpackers and preservationists. No you cannot use horses etc in most areas.
This has no basis. BHA is solidly a pro hunting group, I have heard no Y2Y talk at all. If I see leftist behavior I will call it out.You only have to pick up and read their publication to see this. BHA serves a usefully place for the argument to keep public land, public for hunting purposes. Yup, I am a card carrying Consrvative.
So, who is using who? Is BHA using Meateater, etc to make money to further their goals, or is Rinella using BHA to reach the American public with his values and ideal... or both? Personally, I find it dangerous ground to bolster the "Left's purse" on any grounds. An enemy is an enemy and any venture that stands them up monetarily or gives them a potential stronghold in this "war" is a dangerous and contemptious position to be occupying.
BHA was created by Trout Unilimited staffers and activists in Oregon for purely political purposes. The overall picture is, of 100 percent sportsmen/hookandbullets, there are about 20 percent who are Fudds, or "spiritual" type hunters who really get into the woo-woo side of being grateful for "Nature's bounty." The other 80 percent are pragmatic hunters, don't feel guilty about shooting a good animal et cetera, and/or they have guns not only in the context of hunting but in its constitutional context. That 20 percent is not going to support NRA, so BHA is a way to get these 20 percent to actively oppose NRA.
I have not supported TU in Years and have no plans to start!
I will not support BHA, Rinella, Newburg, or any sponsors of theirs. I don't care how good their products are. So whenever I see anything on Instagram about companies supporting these clowns I say bye bye to them. I am sure I have a few I need to weed out but they will get weeded out. I am almost to the point of weeding out things I follow that are supported by BHA, like the Full Draw Film Tour. Unless we speak up they will win. Let whoever or whatever companies know you do not and will not support anyone or anything that supports Rinella, Newburg, and BHA.
![[Linked Image]](https://i.postimg.cc/VNtV0W3B/82-D33-FB5-88-B7-48-EE-85-EC-818-A4-B616-A93.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.postimg.cc/FFYJyCP4/B52890-CD-6-DB8-43-B0-AECC-0-A3-B2136755-F.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.postimg.cc/bNzfXWKX/F41-D24-E9-230-E-41-CD-8970-4-A47-DF7-F6584.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://photos.imageevent.com/buzzandpat/elkhunting/websize/IMG954298.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://photos.imageevent.com/buzzandpat/elkhunting/websize/IMG954268.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://photos.imageevent.com/buzzandpat/elkhunting/websize/jpeg-imag.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://s37.photobucket.com/user/montanasam/media/montanasam014/3ef900f6-0ee6-418b-bc24-a0dd62de82ea.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.postimg.cc/fLyYvPqd/3-A4-EEFE1-0016-4167-B84-E-1-A3-BF673114-C.png)