Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Backpack Hunting Backpack hunters and anglers organization

LOL, call me whatever you want, that's seems to your strength. At least I know the difference between civil rights and roadless areas.

I'm sure the people who were on the wrong side of jim crow will be glad to know you equate what they were subjected to with bubba not being able to ride his ATV everywhere he wants to on the National Forest.

Where did you get that idea, I haven't said anything remotely like that. In fact, here's what I've said:





Try reading what's on the page before spouting off.

You seem to believe your wants and whims are civil rights.

Are you an official representative for bha?

What on earth gives you the idea I'm an "official representative" of anything? Are you an official representative for an organization opposed to wilderness designation?

My mistake for not clarifying "you' actually was a reference to "you" in the third person, not you directly. But you, (not in the third person) continue to criticise and call names and that is another weakness with your argument when you are trying to make a point and not make enemies.

The points of the BHA and followers are all selfish and self serving, that is where I have a problem with the Wilderness debate, because it continues to suit only one side of the whole issue. How the existing Wilderness is used is acceptable to me, I just get weary of the continual attempt at creating more and locking up more land to a limited use and access.

Another BHA thread?

Great.

Summary- No conservative organization lobbies for wilderness protection and access. This is because the republican party wants to liquidate your public lands.

Therefore, if you are interested in keeping those pesky republicans from selling your lands to big private landowner interests, you have to support some organizations with a liberal bent.

Its politics, its messy and I hate it. Likewise, I hate the small business regulations that besiege me every day too, which I why I vote for those republicans to represent me. I just wish they'd stop being to antithetical to public land hunters. Until then, I'll fight them them on that issue.

As a lifetime NRA member, as soon as they support keeping public lands public, I'll re-up with another lifetime membership. Until then, BHA is a public hunter's thug to fight our fight.

It was just a harmless question. Just curious is all. Sorry to offend your fragile psyche.

I would point out that you didn't answer.

Not so. As I said above, I'm at the age where I'll only be able to do backpack hunts for a few more years. And when I'm no longer able to do them, I'll still support preservation of wilderness areas so that others who want to get away from motorized vehicles can.

I also support the use of wilderness by people on horseback, and I don't ride horses. I support the use of wilderness by climbers, and I don't climb.

None of that can be called self-serving.

If you want to open up all wilderness, then everyone who values solitude in the backcountry (and there are lots of different user groups) will be denied. And you will be in effect ending backpack hunting because there won't be anywhere worth hiking into to hunt.

Even though the vast majority of public lands are open to vehicular travel, you would take the small fraction that isn't and deny all of those user groups. Yet it's "the other side" that's self-serving. Your argument doesn't hold water.

LOL, no offense taken Jackson. You would point out that I didn't answer? Wow, thanks, nothing gets by you.

I would point out that you didn't answer either.

That's a great summary, here's another:

I dont represent any organization and i am not sponsored or paid by any company, foundation, lobby group, or individual

You still haven't answered

That's right, I haven't answered. That's because I'm part of the vast left-wing conspiracy and we like to operate in secret.

Ooops, there's Yvon on the phone, gotta go!!

Your jokes suck almost as bad as your opinions

Very well said! No one seems to have an issue with the NRA being a single issue group, but because BHA is, and they are work with people on both sides of the political fence, just like the NRA used to (when there were Democrats that would earn an A rating with them), they are seen as the enemy. Just like the NRA, we need single issue groups fighting for public lands to fight the people on the other extreme. Where do we end up on most issues when you have this? In the middle, a place that works for most of the people that the issue matters to.

Opinions are like sock puppets, everybody's got one. Oops, there's Nancy Pelosi on line 2, talk to you later.

Was daddy tawney on line one?

No, line one was Michelle Obama but thanks for asking.

Are you in the habit of calling other men "daddy?" There seems to be a common thread in your posts, references to homosexuality. It appears to be all you think about.

No atv's in my garage, horses either.

Just an outdoorsman that wonders how an non-native species group gets wilderness access, but bicycles and game carts are a scourge upon the holy land.

Only when its an accurate description. And for you, papa tawney is accurate. It seems as though either his hand is shoved up your rear, or you just love him and his lobbying so much you think he's the second coming.

So are you affiliated with bha beyond just a card carrying member?

Dont get your patagucci undies in a wad..

Undies in a wad? Hardly Jackson. I just find your constant references to homosexuality puzzling and odd. No one else on here does that.

I've never met Land Tawney. You no doubt know more about him than I do.