$FW, NRA, still waiting

hossblur

Long Time Member
Messages
10,414
LAST EDITED ON Jul-23-18 AT 01:20PM (MST)[p]Mike Lee is threatening to introduce bills to help facilitate the idea of "land transfer".

Supposedly our "spokesmen" for hunters here in Utah, $FW are pro public land.

Same as the NRA. Just ask them they will say so.

SOOOOOOOOO, when can we expect $FW and the NRA to PUBLICALLY join in the fight. When can I expect the new grand champion of hunters on the Fed level, THE DON to represent hunters?

Seems pretty quiet.


Ya I know, they are with us, yada,yada, yada


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-23-18 AT 05:32PM (MST)[p]WTH does the NRA have to do with public land in Utah. Thank them for overturning that dumb ?temporary game preserve? law they got rid of in 2011.. I would love to see SFW step in even though the only thing they care about is getting more money from suckers.

The NRA doesn't have anything to do with public lands. They should keep focused on the 2nd..

Todd
 
What's better than pimping Utah?s wildlife and making millions in the process?
Answer
Owning the land that those critters live on!

Don?t hold your breath that $FW will help keep it public.

It will be sold to the highest bidder and DP will be in the mix.

Then all those years,possibly decades.... waiting toward the back of the line for that premium tag will render it useless cuz you won't even be able to access the land.
Unless you got a big bank account





"Wildlife and its habitat cannot speak. So
we must and we will."
Theadore Roosevelt
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jul-23-18
>AT 05:32?PM (MST)

>
>WTH does the NRA have to
>do with public land in
>Utah. Thank them for overturning
>that dumb ?temporary game preserve?
>law they got rid of
>in 2011.. I would love
>to see SFW step in
>even though the only thing
>they care about is getting
>more money from suckers.
>
>The NRA doesn't have anything to
>do with public lands. They
>should keep focused on the
>2nd..
>
>Todd

You should check with them. Their stance is "we will be there when you need us".

Not to mention that sticky little issue of hundreds of thousands of gun owners hunting public land.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Being a member of the NRA, I just assume they stick to Constitutional law. Just like they do. You don't have a constitutional right to hunt. The 2nd amendment has ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with hunting. My funds better go to preserving something THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of Americans have died for.

Don?t get me wrong, I love hunting more than most and 99.9 of what I do is on public land but the NRA doesn't have a damn thing to do with your public lands. That is NEVER what they have been about. RMEF, NWTF, MDF, BCH&A and a host of others are great organizations that genuinely care about public lands are worth supporting.

I'm a Utah native and just killed a bonafide B&C bear on public lands in SE Utah. It's my home. But I hope it collapses in on itself. Let the State sleep in the bed it's made, and let all the suckers that feed the SFW get what they have coming.

Todd
 
First. The bear don't exist unless there are pics!! Good in you man!

Second the NRA most definitely does involve itself in shooting ranges. Plus last I heard they run hunts. State ownership doesn't mean you can shoot on state land. Pretty sure you need only look at Colorado to see that.

Your talking hundreds of thousands of shooters losing their place to shoot. That is in the NRA arena.



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-23-18 AT 08:11PM (MST)[p]https://www.nrahunting.com/we-are-hunters/

NRA has gotten itself involved in hunting-related issues in the past. For instance, they were instrumental in delisting wolves (which SFW tried to take credit for and then NRA publicly rebuked them).

For the history of the claims of SFW see here... http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID5/24645.html#2

NRA has a history of taking pro-hunting stances, and I wish they would here. But they're so heavily funded by oil money nowadays, I doubt it will happen. And hence, I'm no longer a member of NRA.

We all know where SFW stands. They're either "officially neutral" (like they were with stream access, see quote below) or at the Chapter-level have publicly and officially supported the Land Grab.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
>First. The bear don't exist
>unless there are pics!!
>Good in you man!
>
>Second the NRA most definitely does
>involve itself in shooting ranges.
> Plus last I heard
>they run hunts. State
>ownership doesn't mean you can
>shoot on state land.
>Pretty sure you need only
>look at Colorado to see
>that.
>
>Your talking hundreds of thousands of
>shooters losing their place to
>shoot. That is in
>the NRA arena.
>
>
>
>From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN,
>PUBLIC LAND.

There is a thread titled ?Brewin? up a Summer Bruin? just a few threads down.

For the record, I love where your heart is....

Todd
 
Hey Hoss instead of constantly standing around picking a fight with the NRA while picking your rectum, why don't YOU DO something and lead a charge. Anyone can stand around, point fingers, and ##### as you've proven time and time again. It gets real old watching your fearless criticism. It's not as noble as you seem to think. You?ve mastered identifying the problems...great. Now you should be able to clearly chart a course instead of waiting and crying for everyone else to do it.
4abc76ff29b26fc1.jpg
 
Hossblur is truly a boring, broken record.

I know he has the ability to read but he can't comprehend. I'd suggest he brush up just a little bit on other politicians platforms.

Blah blah blah, without public land my guns are useless, yes I've heard his drivel.

1911....you can say all of that again Sir.
 
>Hossblur is truly a boring, broken
>record.
>
>I know he has the ability
>to read but he can't
>comprehend. I'd suggest he brush
>up just a little bit
>on other politicians platforms.
>
>Blah blah blah, without public land
>my guns are useless, yes
>I've heard his drivel.
>
>1911....you can say all of that
>again Sir.

Unlike you I actually have. I talked to Jenny Wilson and Ericson. Unlike you I actually did talk to Lee's office in D.C.

Unlike you I realize the 6 months upcoming that I will be hunting, IT IS ALL on public land.

Funny how I'm the broken record. Have YOU talked to your politician? Have you researched what is ACTUALLY being pushed? No. The republicans are for "states rights". The FS and BLM suck so we gotta take it back(pay no attention to the Republican from Utah in charge of both).

Most likely not. Most likely your a "conservative",which means in Utah selling land off to pay for political campaigns.

It is a broken record. Has been for decades. I'm sure YOU will be hunting Andarko and Wilks land, I'm sure.




From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
All the flame throwing aside. I read Lee speach. What he is proposing isn't the usual "Utah should manage the land" lie. He is proposing a "new homestead" act. He is, to his credit at least honest about his desire to SELL the land.

I sat for a few weeks looking, waiting, actually thinking that perhaps this might actually spur into action the "neutrals". That $fw who takes in millions selling public land tags, might see this as a threat to their livelihood. That the thought of 600 million or so acres open to shooters might create a stir. A whisper. Something.

Sorry its a broken record, but at some point do we get to see action? Or is it just more opportunity to fund raise?




From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Keep it up Hoss, I and I'm sure plenty of others appreciate your efforts.
You and a few others on here are the reason I chose to get off the sidelines and get involved.
 
I agree with you on $FW. NRA, not so much.

Why not call on Ducks unlimited to join the fight? Trout unlimited? SCI? Mule deer foundation. Why pick on an organization whose stated goal is to preserve the right to bear arms and not others?

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
>I agree with you on $FW.
> NRA, not so much.
>
>
>Why not call on Ducks unlimited
>to join the fight?
>Trout unlimited? SCI? Mule
>deer foundation. Why pick
>on an organization whose stated
>goal is to preserve the
>right to bear arms and
>not others?
>
>txhunter58
>
>venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore
>I am)

Money and power. NRA uses both to back candidates that are now trying to sell YOUR land. It would be one thing to have no opinion, and not be involved in hunting, or sponsoring hunters, but they aren't neutral.

But lets be real, do you truly believe Rob Bishop would challenge the NRA if they spoke up? Would Mike Lee suddenly sponsor an assault weapons ban if the NRA publically pointed out the hundreds of thousands of their members who use public land to exercise their right?

I don't expect NRA to be as active as SFW should be, but a whisper from them goes a long way.

Your right, too often SFW step brother MDF gets to sick up the cheese, and let SFW take the hit.

From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-24-18 AT 06:13PM (MST)[p]By all means then, villianize and gut the NRA. Once they are gone count what you have left. You won't even need two hands. Maybe David Hogg will jump on your band wagon if you promise him enough face time.
4abc76ff29b26fc1.jpg
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jul-24-18
>AT 06:13?PM (MST)

>
>By all means then, villianize and
>gut the NRA. Once
>they are gone count what
>you have left. You
>won't even need two hands.
>Maybe David Hogg will jump
>on your band wagon if
>you promise him enough face
>time.
>
4abc76ff29b26fc1.jpg


David Hogg was a great fundraiser for the NRA.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Let's take the two options to their furthest possible conclusion and see where we end up.

1. NRA gets destroyed and guns are banned. Do you actually think 300 Million guns are going to be confiscated? Will you turn yours in to some future National Guard going door-to-door? Even after previous bans have passed, existing guns were grandfathered. Not to mention the fact that gun bans can be changed with the next Legislature or Court ruling. See Clinton Gun Ban. See today's Ninth Circuit Ruling finding guns legal even outside the home. Gun bans are not permanent, even if the worse should happen... they can change.

2. Public lands are sold. This has the backing of a major political party (that most here vote for), zero Constitutional protections, and would be permanent and irrevocable. There is no "taking back" public land once it's sold to the MegaDonors.

To me, it's painfully obvious which threat is more serious.

If I had to make the choice... I'd take hiking, wildlife watching, photography, fishing, camping, archery-only hunting, etc on public lands; instead of the theoretical worst-case scenario of no public lands but keeping my guns in my safe so I could drive to the indoor/outdoor range to target practice.

I don't have much use for guns without public land, but without public land I lose all my passions and the ability to raise my children with the lifestyle I love.

Guns are a tool. Public lands are my life.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
And there in turn is the delusion. Your worst case for certain republicans isn't going to happen.

Your worst case for the Democrats, isn't the worst case. Assuming you'd keep archery only hunting? Because suddenly, bowhunting is loved amongst the Dems? Perhaps you should look at archery tackle laws in Australia to see your bright future.

Like I said, your worst case scenarios are off the charts crazy for the republicans and not even close to reality about the Dems. Just admit it, you're a dem. Both of you.
 
Bowhunting is the biggest hate amongnst the anti hunters. But don't let that fact stand in the way. We all know who the antis side with.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-24-18 AT 11:44PM (MST)[p]I'll save that post for a different thread... Got a little off topic :)
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-18 AT 07:00AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-18 AT 06:55?AM (MST)

Dc, how exactly is the NRA standing up for hundreds of thousands of their members who shoot public land bringing about the end of the NRA or the 2A?

Like I asked,is Mike Lee such a 2A beliver that if the NRA told him his stance was anti shooter, that overnight he would then oppose the 2A? Seems you don't have much faith in the folks you support.

It is possible to be pro gun and pro land. We are surrounded by R states (and even D states) that are.

The NRA is NOT neutral on hunting. They run hunts. They sponsor hunting shows. They are not neutral.

They are ONLY neutral on this subject for the same reason $fw is. They love the revenue pipeline from the groups that desire to sell YOUR LAND.

You have an R pres, R congress, soon to be R supreme court.

Lee is introducing bills now. Utah has $3million to head to court. Seems like one scenario is a little more dire.

Lastly DC, 1911. WHY is it that when Tom Gresham, or Uncle Ted, etc rail on hunters that they are riding coattails if they are NRA members, you cheer, but when hunters point out the NRA is SILENT on where 70% of the west hunts, that's off limits?



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
The three main lobby groups trying to open up public land for drilling via lobbying for The Wilderness and Roadless Area Release Act... American Petroleum Institute, National Mining Association, and National Rifle Association.

According to one article, "More than 200 wildlife managers and scientists?wrote to Congress?voicing their opposition, noting that ?most of us are dedicated hunters and anglers.?

Representatives from eight sportsmen?s groups in Colorado?wrote?their congressional delegation, calling the bill ?an affront to a long-standing public process and our outdoor heritage.?

This repeated claim that NRA doesn't historically involve themselves in hunting or public land related issues is provably false.

They have a history of joining the oil industry in lobbying for drilling on public land. Who do you think their biggest donors are?

Hint: Gun manufacturers and oil companies.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
>What is the primary objective of
>the NRA?

To make money!

They get between $40,000,000 - $70,000,000 annually from gun manufacturers in donations and advertising revenue. NRAs role in that is to scare people into thinking a team of Pelosi's are ready to show up and take their guns; something that has never even been close to happening as even previous gun bans have included grandfathering of existing guns and have since been overturned by legislative wrangling (Clinton Gun Ban) or the courts (see the Ninth Circuit Court ruling this week affirming right to possess firearms outside of the home).

People buy into the fear then run out and buy guns in record numbers. Check out gun sales under Dems vs. Repubs for proof in how it works. Nobody sold more guns than Obama (Smith & Wesson stock has lost 50% of it's value in the past year).

NRA also takes millions from oil companies which it somehow parlays into advocating for the loss of protection of public lands.

I used to wear my tinfoil hat and read American Hunter while watching the old NRA propaganda film about Australia's gun control, but then I did my research. I also realized that if the NRA actually succeeded in "protecting the 2nd Amendment" they'd be out of a job. It's a false economy.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It’s time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-18 AT 11:00AM (MST)[p]Why not promote the groups that are going to help your cause rather than complaining about a group who never claimed to be involved with your cause?


#livelikezac
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-18 AT 11:18AM (MST)[p]This is got to be about the 478th thread like this and I'm sure it's been mentioned but I can't recall which organizations that are aligned with your cause. All that I remember from these threads is SFW and NRA are bad. An NRA membership is 25 bucks a year, not a big deal to me for a group that will stay on top of our 2nd Amendment right. Guess what? I can afford a couple other $25 a year memberships to other organizations better looking out for my interest in public lands. I'm sure you guys had mentioned in these 478 threads which organizations those would be but I can't recall which organizations those are over all the pissing and whining about the NRA and SFW. And due to all the pissing and whining over the NRA and SFW I'm not sure I trust your judgement on telling me about other organizations looking out for my best interest in public lands.


#livelikezac
 
DW how does NRA loose by supporting hundreds of thousands of public land shooters? Would you leave? Would DC? Would the 70% of the west hunters revolt?

NO. But Andarko will. The Wilks and Kochs will. Which, are the same groups trying to buy YOUR LAND. I doubt you'd be sending $25 to NRA to take your front yard. I hope you get your thought process right. THIS IS YOUR LAND. Not Trumps, not BLM, its YOURS.





From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
MENU
NRA ILA

Search
?
APPEARS IN LEGAL & LEGISLATION
Utah: BLM Proposes to Close Thousands of Acres in Utah County to Target Shooting
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 2016 Utah: BLM Proposes to Close Thousands of Acres in Utah County to Target Shooting
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has released a draft plan to manage target shooting on the east side of Utah County?s Lake Mountains.

View Related Articles
BLM?s proposal will amend the Pony Express Resource Management Plan to address the long term management of target shooting within the planning area.

Three management alternatives are presented. Alternative A would allow the current 893-acre temporary closure to lapse and implement no further closures or restrictions. Alternative B would make the temporary closure long term. Alternative C would expand the closure to other adjacent lands for a total of 3,450 acres closed to target shooting.

Recently the BLM announced the transfer of 150 acres of BLM lands to Utah County for the development of a shooting range at the southern end of the planning area on Soldier Pass Road.

The draft plan can be read online at: https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/eplanning/nepa/nepa_register.do or at the following website: https.//www.blm.gov/ut/enbb/index.php(Navigate both sites via Utah>Salt Lake Field Office>EA>2015.Eastern Lake Mountains target Shooting Plan Amendment).

The public can submit comments on the draft plan through May 16th by email at [email protected]. Comments can also be faxed to 801-977-4397 or sent by mail to Salt Lake Field Office, Eastern Lake Mountains Target Shooting Plan Amendment, 2370 South Decker Lake Boulevard, West Valley City, Utah 84119.

The BLM will be hosting a public meeting on May 11th at the Talons Cover Gold Club, Saratoga Springs, from 6:00 to 8:00 pm.

Keeping public lands open for hunting and target shooting is a priority of the NRA?s. We are asking those of you who depend on federal and state public lands for hunting and shooting to take the time to review this draft plan and submit your comments to the BLM. There is a lot of public land at stake that could be closed to target shooting. We also request that target shooters take the time to attend the May 11th public meeting that BLM is hosting.

The ability to target shoot on public lands in an informal setting is being threatened by conflicts with other recreationists, increased public use of these lands, as well as the illegal and poor behaviors of a minority. Don?t let those be the reasons for closing public lands for your enjoyment.


NRA-ILA

Article written on BLM proposing closing shooting areas due trash left.

I guess the NRA does take an interest on shooting on public land?


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Like the left bringing up the fact every time Trump farts, all it does is confirm my thoughts on Trump who will get my vote again in 2020. You guys constantly banging on the NRA does not drive me away from the NRA, in fact it does the exact opposite. Drive me to the greatest advocate of public lands by telling me about that advocate and all the things they're doing rather than telling me about all the things the NRA isn't. The fact that the first thing you brought up after I asked for the group's advocating for public land is the NRA tells me my message has gone nowhere.


#livelikezac
 
BHA, RMEF, TRPC. Probably the big 3.
But I hear you on the constant yapping. Thats the reason I canceled my NRA membership. The daily crisis and call to action complete with donation card actually did drive me away.

Like I said, if the NRA didn't get involved or want to be involved that would be one thing.
But they are involved, deeply, so they deserve to be called out.




From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
I support the NRA but not SFW.

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
>I support the NRA but not
>SFW.
>
>-Hawkeye-
>
>My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:
>
>"It is fair to ask how
>much comes in with the
>five dollar application fees and
>how much went onto the
>ground.? Don Peay of
>SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board
>Meeting.
>
>"There will be a full accounting
>of how the applications fees
>are spent.? Don Peay
>of SFW - 9/26/2006 -
>Monstermuleys.com


Freaking. Commie!!!!

Glad you clarified, I thought you took Peays job when he got promoted?

I don't get why hunters should be put in the position of supporting land sale in order to support 2A. I find it sad the NRA has made that decision necessary.

Spoke my piece.

Hope DW, 1911, and Hawk have successful seasons

202-224-5444
Mike Lee's #.

Hopefully you'll give him a call and let him know you'll be hunting public land this fall, and would like to continue.

From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>BHA, RMEF, TRPC. Probably the
>big 3.
>But I hear you on the
>constant yapping. Thats the
>reason I canceled my NRA
>membership. The daily crisis
>and call to action complete
>with donation card actually did
>drive me away.
>
>Like I said, if the NRA
>didn't get involved or want
>to be involved that would
>be one thing.
>But they are involved, deeply, so
>they deserve to be called
>out.
From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN,
PUBLIC LAND.


Called out for what! If it wasn't for the NRA, we would have lost everything by now and would be using spears and sling shots! They want to keep the public land open for shooting and target practice and rightly so. It's not the NRA that's the problem, as every range I go to that isn't private is the same way and that is trash and garbage everywhere with shot up TVs, computers, bottles, etc. because of a few slobs that shouldn't be allowed out of their friggin homes or allowed to own a firearm IMHO! Take care of that problem a few are causing and we wouldn't have to have the NRA even weigh in on the subject. If a person doesn't like the NRA mailings, simply throw them in file 13 and if you don't like a call from them it's very simple nowadays to block a caller!
 
There?s a lot of folks who don't even have a clue what's going on.
Personally, I like when people like hoss bring this stuff up because it should be concerning.
Even if some of you get tired of his rants.
I hope it doesn't come down to having to choose between 2A or land grabs and you're right hoss. It shouldn't have to come to that.

Currently I am on the fence with NRA and whole heartedly oppose SFW.

Had a dream. A bad one.
SFW signed a big fat check for 10 million missing dollars to buy up some premium ground.DP started a guide service and Denny was his first client. Denny killed a bull called the trianchula bull








"Wildlife and its habitat cannot speak. So
we must and we will."
Theadore Roosevelt
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-18 AT 06:20PM (MST)[p]Conservative commentator, George F. Will, wrote an interesting paragraph in today's newspaper.

"In the 1830s, a Baptist preacher predicted Jesus would return to Earth sometime between March 21, 1843 and March 21, 1844. When the world persisted, its end was re-predicted by the preacher's followers for October 22, 1844. Between March and October, the number of believers increased substantially. Despite their great disappointment on October 23, many followers held to their beliefs and went on to found the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The lesson from this story: The persuasive power of evidence is overrated."

I could write for days giving specific examples of anti-public land stances of hunting and gun organizations and there are still well-meaning folks that will deflect from the truth. Not just outwardly, but to themselves as well.

I believe he is correct, The persuasive power of evidence is overrated.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
"You guys have me on the edge of sending money to sfw."



How does that saying go? A fool and his money is easily parted.

What are you waiting for? Do it. Put your money where your mouth is. All talk no action. I'm sure $FW takes checks, credit cards and cash.

Maybe you could help $FW spread their BS to Colorado too. You guys can give them some of your unit 44 3rd and 4th season tags, maybe a few of your unit 10 elk tags, defiantly they'll need a good chunk of your sheep tags to auction off. They're not interested in any of your tags that take 0 to 1 point to draw, only the premium ones will do. Oh but don't ask where the money from the sell of those tags is being spent. It's a secret.
 
>Why aren't you cussing Ducks Unlimited?
>


F*@& DU!

They showed their true colors when they fired one of their employees for writing an article that casted a bad light on one of their rich douche bag donors who wants to lock everyone out of a public marsh in Montana.

There, how's that?
 
Towelie, excellent point.

And right on target considering it's another case of rich special interests taking over public land via hunting organizations.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
>"You guys have me on the
>edge of sending money to
>sfw."
>
>
>
>How does that saying go? A
>fool and his money is
>easily parted.
>
>What are you waiting for? Do
>it. Put your money where
>your mouth is. All talk
>no action. I'm sure $FW
>takes checks, credit cards and
>cash.
>
>Maybe you could help $FW spread
>their BS to Colorado too.
>You guys can give them
>some of your unit 44
>3rd and 4th season tags,
>maybe a few of your
>unit 10 elk tags, defiantly
>they'll need a good chunk
>of your sheep tags to
>auction off. They're not interested
>in any of your tags
>that take 0 to 1
>point to draw, only the
>premium ones will do. Oh
>but don't ask where the
>money from the sell of
>those tags is being spent.
>It's a secret.

Are you high again Towelie? Have you heard of dramatic effect?


#livelikezac
 
>>Why aren't you cussing Ducks Unlimited?
>>
>
>
>F*@& DU!
>
>They showed their true colors when
>they fired one of their
>employees for writing an article
>that casted a bad light
>on one of their rich
>douche bag donors who wants
>to lock everyone out of
>a public marsh in Montana.
>
>
>There, how's that?

How did the story end?


#livelikezac
 
>>>Why aren't you cussing Ducks Unlimited?
>>>
>>
>>
>>F*@& DU!
>>
>>They showed their true colors when
>>they fired one of their
>>employees for writing an article
>>that casted a bad light
>>on one of their rich
>>douche bag donors who wants
>>to lock everyone out of
>>a public marsh in Montana.
>>
>>
>>There, how's that?
>
>How did the story end?
>
>
>#livelikezac

And basically you're saying Ducks Unlimited doesn't fight for public land. So why aren't they on the list of these hated groups


#livelikezac
 
Conservative commentator, George F. Will, wrote an interesting paragraph in today's newspaper.

"In the 1830s, a Baptist preacher predicted Jesus would return to Earth sometime between March 21, 1843 and March 21, 1844. When the world persisted, its end was re-predicted by the preacher's followers for October 22, 1844. Between March and October, the number of believers increased substantially. Despite their great disappointment on October 23, many followers held to their beliefs and went on to found the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The lesson from this story: The persuasive power of evidence is overrated."

I could write for days giving specific examples of anti-public land stances of hunting and gun organizations and there are still well-meaning folks that will deflect from the truth. Not just outwardly, but to themselves as well.

I believe he is correct, The persuasive power of evidence is overrated



I might be simply minded but what is your point with this story?
 
>Conservative commentator, George F. Will, wrote
>an interesting paragraph in today's
>newspaper.
>
>"In the 1830s, a Baptist preacher
>predicted Jesus would return to
>Earth sometime between March 21,
>1843 and March 21, 1844.
>When the world persisted, its
>end was re-predicted by the
>preacher's followers for October 22,
>1844. Between March and October,
>the number of believers increased
>substantially. Despite their great disappointment
>on October 23, many followers
>held to their beliefs and
>went on to found the
>Seventh-day Adventist Church. The lesson
>from this story: The persuasive
>power of evidence is overrated."
>
>
>I could write for days giving
>specific examples of anti-public land
>stances of hunting and gun
>organizations and there are still
>well-meaning folks that will deflect
>from the truth. Not just
>outwardly, but to themselves as
>well.
>
>I believe he is correct, The
>persuasive power of evidence is
>overrated
>
>
>
>I might be simply minded but
>what is your point with
>this story?

It's an analogy. He's using an article by a buffoon implying that he's shown proof that the NRA doesn't care about public lands and I'm foolish for supporting them for protecting the Second Amendment because the Second Amendment will never be in Jeopardy in his mind. I followed it but I'm not buying it. I'll continue to support the NRA so they protect my second amendment. I'll continue to support DU so they will continue to enhance the Prairie pothole region which is critical to the Ducks we all love to hunt. I'll continue support rmef for the work that they do with elk and protecting critical winter habitat. I'll look into the other two mentioned but if my memory serves one of them likes to rub elbows with groups who would just as soon eliminate hunting so I doubt they will catch any of my cash. A lot of guys think they're smarter than most on the internet, they're generally not.


#livelikezac
 
>>>>Why aren't you cussing Ducks Unlimited?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>F*@& DU!
>>>
>>>They showed their true colors when
>>>they fired one of their
>>>employees for writing an article
>>>that casted a bad light
>>>on one of their rich
>>>douche bag donors who wants
>>>to lock everyone out of
>>>a public marsh in Montana.
>>>
>>>
>>>There, how's that?
>>
>>How did the story end?
>>
>>
>>#livelikezac
>
>And basically you're saying Ducks Unlimited
>doesn't fight for public land.
>So why aren't they on
>the list of these hated
>groups
>
>
>#livelikezac

Let me know when DU starts getting public resources in the form of premium big game permits to pimp out.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-18 AT 10:54PM (MST)[p]DW, in the hunting-related realm, the most powerful group in the country is the NRA, and the most powerful group in Utah is SFW. I think it's appropriate to stick there and not expand into Whale Watchers Anonymous and Venus Flytraps Forever, but I appreciate your point.

If you want to send your $35 to NRA and SFW and believe you're saving guns and hunting, go for it. That's your prerogative. However, I choose to send my money elsewhere and am comfortable with my decision based on the information as I see it.

I always enjoy our discussions as they remain intellectual and we can refrain from personal attacks or false dichotomies. That's unusual in this world. Have a good evening.

Grizzly

-----------------------------------------
"This is a classic case of a handful of greedy fly fishermen getting too greedy." -Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as told to KUTV

"It's time to revisit the widely accepted principle in the United States and Canada that game is a public resource."
-Don Peay, Founder of SFW, as quoted in Anchorage Daily News
 
>>>>>Why aren't you cussing Ducks Unlimited?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>F*@& DU!
>>>>
>>>>They showed their true colors when
>>>>they fired one of their
>>>>employees for writing an article
>>>>that casted a bad light
>>>>on one of their rich
>>>>douche bag donors who wants
>>>>to lock everyone out of
>>>>a public marsh in Montana.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>There, how's that?
>>>
>>>How did the story end?
>>>
>>>
>>>#livelikezac
>>
>>And basically you're saying Ducks Unlimited
>>doesn't fight for public land.
>>So why aren't they on
>>the list of these hated
>>groups
>>
>>
>>#livelikezac
>
>Let me know when DU starts
>getting public resources in the
>form of premium big game
>permits to pimp out.

So you dont know how the story ended? I ask because I don't know and it sounds like it's near and dear to your heart. Is it still in litigation? Has it been resolved and it's back open to the public? Did the public get screwed?


#livelikezac
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-26-18 AT 00:04AM (MST)[p]I know when it gets right down to it we all want the same things. We want wide open spaces and pristine rivers full of Game and Fish. We don't like locked Gates and we probably want less government. I hinted earlier about the other two groups mentioned by Hossblur being involved with some shady groups that didn't have our best interests at heart. This is what I meant.


https://www.ammoland.com/2014/08/irs-complaint-targets-backcountry-hunters-anglers/#axzz5MKu0H1mZ

The Crux of the whole thing is in order to get anything done you need to have influence. Influence takes a pile of money. So do I take your advice and not contribute to BHA and TRPC because of where their funding comes from as you suggest I should do with the NRA? They want to keep our places open Wild and free but they're being funded by somebody that doesn't have our best interest at heart. The NRA wants to protect our second amendment but they're being funded by groups who don't have our best interest at heart. Or do I contribute to all of them and hope they don't succumb to the big money interest groups that are ultimately funding them and stab me in the back in the end? Power and influence is an ugly business. All I can do is hope these organizations we contribute to remember where they came from and remember what they set out to do!



#livelikezac
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-26-18 AT 08:13AM (MST)[p]DW, I wanted to be done, but we both know I have a big mouth.

We do agree. I don't want locked gates. Do want game/fish.

But you hinted at it so here it is. The NRA biggest funding is oil companies. The biggest money aimed at BHA, TRPC, Trout Unlimited, etc comes from oil companies via front groups from Berman and co. in DC.

At last count I own 35 guns(but 2 if My wife asks). I'm a redneck drywall contractor. I don't own backpacking equipment. I think fly fishing is elitist. I run heavy trucks, 20k miles a year. Some of my hunting camp are coal miners.

Point being, I burn tons of gas. I use oil. But, its MY land. Its YOUR land. If the petro companies want to drill it, fine. But they can do it in the open, with oversight.

What's happening now is an attempt to bypass all of that. And using "states rights", or gun confiscation to built political power.

Wayne LaPierre would die ten seconds into a real hunt. Same as Peay. But they are geniuses at building power through fear.

My point simply is to point out that neither are pro average sportsmen, and in fact work against them.

Like I said before, it would be nice if I didn't have to choose. I'd love to support NRA. Love to support a local group, SFW. But they both decided revenue was more important. That political power trumps all. Average guys like you and I sending $25 doesn't pay lobbyists. Doesn't buy houses, doesn't get you in presidential campaigns. The guys who do pay for that stuff, detest the idea of you and I on "their" landscape. You and your OTC tags. You and your Wal-Mart guns.

Theodore Roosevelt created what we have now. Yup I think he was a prissy east coast wanna be. But results matter.

He was a repub President. He was kicked out if his party for his conservation message. Point is, to those with money and power, money and power are what matters. The NRA and $fw walk that same path.

DW if we run onto each other, I got the first round(it will be KEYSTONE).



From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
>
>DW if we run onto each
>other, I got the first
>round(it will be KEYSTONE).
>
>
>
>From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN,
>PUBLIC LAND.

So long as you dont mind me gettin the second round and it bein Busch light!

#livelikezac
 
So why are they calling out the NRA and not others? MONEY. NRA has a lot and so lets call them out and try to get some.

As far as NRA not really being effective in getting their agenda accomplished. Not what I know to be true. If they were not there, we would already have more stringent gun controls after the recent mass shootings. I have no doubt.

And they are straying from their stated agenda to help out their biggest donors??? What a shock! Say it isn't so! Just can't believe that! They must be the only organization doing that huh?

Please tell me ANY other organization that is doing as good or better than the NRA in the gun rights area, I will consider joining them...?.. crickets......

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
>So why are they calling out
>the NRA and not others?
> MONEY. NRA has
>a lot and so lets
>call them out and try
>to get some.
>
>As far as NRA not really
>being effective in getting their
>agenda accomplished. Not what
>I know to be true.
> If they were not
>there, we would already have
>more stringent gun controls after
>the recent mass shootings.
>I have no doubt.
>
>And they are straying from their
>stated agenda to help out
>their biggest donors??? What a
>shock! Say it isn't
>so! Just can't believe
>that! They must be the
>only organization doing that huh?
>
>
>Please tell me ANY other organization
>that is doing as good
>or better than the NRA
>in the gun rights area,
>I will consider joining them...?..
> crickets......
>
>txhunter58
>
>venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore
>I am)

Ill assume that your name implies your from Texas. 2% public land. No disrespect, but the Texas model is what we are against.

Yeah. They are extremely effective. Extremely influential. But where? Last I checked the 2A was an individual right. Their support of corporations land policies vs the hundreds of thousands of individual shooters, on THIS subject is where the issue lies.

They ARE NOT NEUTRAL ON PUBLIC LAND. Not even close.

If they are proud of that stance, GREAT. But don't hide in the shaddows.

And especially when called out for it, don't scream about how you a single issue org. Their money and power usage say otherwise.

I didn't post orgs better on guns. I didn't muddy the water. These 2 orgs SUCK on land policy.

Yeah others do to. But $fw takes millions from Utah, where I'm from. The NRA plays backroom with YOUR PUBLIC LAND.

If that means I'm a lib, or David Hoggs boyfriend, I guess that's what it means. But it doesn't change the facts.


From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 
Default
I'm a life member of the NRA and I am glad they are advocating on 2nd Amendment issues, thus my financial support of their efforts even if I don't always agree with all they do. To your point, I'm not willing to give them a free pass on the public land issue, or other hunting issues. I'll try to explain why.

The NRA often claims they represent hunters. Anyone who doubts such only needs to attend a forum, hearing, or panel where the NRA is giving input on a hunting topic. I have seen it many times.

For my Life Membership in the NRA, I get a monthly magazine titled "American Hunter." The Editors column on Page 8 always contains a column by Scott Olmsted, Editor in Chief and a very good guy. He is very much committed to the hunting cause. At the bottom of that page are six points they call the "NRA Hunter's Code of Ethics."

I could list many other instances where the NRA stakes a claim to being a voice for hunters. They want all the benefits that come with proclaiming to represent hunters, so they need to actually represent hunters or just admit that representing hunters adds too much complication to their 2nd Amendment advocacy.

I am fine with the NRA claiming to represent hunters, so long as ......

...... so long as they truly advocate on behalf of hunters and hunting

...... so long as they don't give a free pass to those politicians who are damaging hunting

...... so long as they aren't doing things quietly that are detrimental to hunting

...... so long as they are not taking positions, privately or publicly, that negatively impact hunting access for those western hunters, 70+% of whom rely on public lands for their hunting access.


So long as the NRA is going to stand up and fight for hunters, I am happy to have them staking a claim for a mouthpiece of the hunting community. My experience of being involved in decades of political battles is that the NRA is too often on the wrong side of what I think is best for hunting/hunters, or when they could make a positive impact for hunters/hunting, the NRA is nowhere to be found.

I don't agree with is the NRA making a claim to support hunters/hunting/hunting access, while supporting politicians who are screwing over hunters in a big way, either at the state or national level. You can't have it both ways if you are the NRA.

Either you support hunters and you use your very large club to keep some of the fringe operators in line on hunting issues ....

Or,


You quit claiming to represent hunters/hunting/access when you leave hunters out in the cold if it comes down to a hard decision with a few of your friends on the fringe.


It's that simple. If you want the benefit of saying you represent hunters, then represent them when the time comes, don't run and hide.

I would still support them as part of defending the right to keep and bear arms even if they did state that hunting is not one of their priorities. I feel that strongly about the 2nd Amendment.

Being very engaged in political battles of access and public lands, it is frustrating to know that the NRA could make a huge impact with those policy leaders who are most damaging to access and public lands, a cause they would advocate for if they "walked the walk" of representing hunters, yet they are absent when those opportunities arise. Credibility with hunters requires you do what you say you are going to do. As a group, hunters have a pretty heavy BS filter and I suspect is why the NRA has such low membership rate among western hunters who see the NRA-supported politicians being their greatest threats to hunting.

And it is not an "either-or" proposition. A organization, and politicians, can be good on 2A and on hunting access. The two topics are not mutually exclusive, rather I would argue any politician wanting support from hunters should be good on both. We have plenty of examples of groups and politicians who are good on both.
My name is Randy Newberg and I approved this post. What is written is my opinion, and my opinion only.

"Hunt when you can. You're gonna run outta health before you run outta money."

I know, he's just another in the long list of commie, lib, david Hogg supporters.

From the party of HUNTIN, FISHIN, PUBLIC LAND.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom