I've never heard of BHA until this thread. So I won't comment on it's past behavior .
But, just because some people don't like BHA does that take away from the merits of the corner crossing case at hand? I've hunted that exact mountain in question and I would love to have more access.
For those that don't like BHA..what is SCI doing to help on this case? Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation? QDMA? Mule Deer Foundation?
The corner crossing debate is a huge issue in numerous states and definitely one that needs to be addressed on a national level and not state by state as this is public lands owned by every American equally.
Reputable groups like SCI, RMEF and the like likely would have gotten involved at some point but once BHA got involved they won’t touch it as BHA is known the be bad for sportsman.
All one needs to know about BHA is shown in how Buzz brags and pats himself on the back on threads like this. He repeatedly points to the same half a dozen decent things BHA did for sportsman while ignoring the 50 times BHA slapped sportsman in the face. Political contributions are public information, look at the candidates BHA has financially supported on the national level and you will see NONE of them are friends of gun owners or sportsman.
Based on BHA’s board members pasts , BHA’s past support of anti hunter/outdoorsman initiatives, their past choices in political contributions and their refusal to publicly clarify their stance numerous times they have shown who they are at the core and I h e a hard time understanding why any sportsman gives them a dime.
I'm interested in the political contributions you're complaining about.
Provide your information and source.
I would also like you to provide specific information on when it became legal under IRS code for a 501c3 to provide political contributions.
If you're going to be a lying liar at least try to make them believable...
