Good lord, what happened to that once great state!?
It's not that, it's the fact that it's for literally anyone that's not a Caucasian heterosexual. About $50,000 per kid...God help them for trying to get people involved in the outdoors. Especially disabled youth and native youth. Cuz F’ those guys am I right?!?
Haha. You keep believing that is the point…God help them for trying to get people involved in the outdoors. Especially disabled youth and native youth. Cuz F’ those guys am I right?!?
God help them for trying to get people involved in the outdoors. Especially disabled youth and native youth. Cuz F’ those guys am I right?!?
Everything seems to be painted with the rainbow paint brush these days.
Your posts get dumber all the time.That's because saber-tooth tigers went extinct. When people needed to worry more about survival, the stupidity didn't exist.
I just realized I have been "traditionally excluded" from the Arizona tag allocation process. I apply, and apply, but I don't get a tag!I hate the term "traditionally-excluded" in the text above. Maybe a Monster Muley group should band together to create some opportunity for someone without grants, or a special draw.
It got Californicated!Good lord, what happened to that once great state!?
Has anyone met our governor and 1st "gentleman "? That answers a lot of questions right there IMO.
I don't disagree roadrunner. Yet he has a strong following. They have greater ambitions too wanting to be president and with that in mind I'd look for more of this type of stuff to come forward.
I’ve got two gay coworkers. Two of the nicest people I’ve ever met and one of them is as good of a hunter as anyone I know. She killed a 175” whitetail with her bow this year.when was the last time you saw a LTGBQ "person" interested in anything outdoors besides picking flowers??
Ok so I stand corrected, But what exactly was excluding them from getting involved before??I’ve got two gay coworkers. Two of the nicest people I’ve ever met and one of them is as good of a hunter as anyone I know. She killed a 175” whitetail with her bow this year.
Just a thought but maybe your comment is the exact reason they are doing this. How is getting people involved in the outdoors a bad thing? Just because you don’t agree with them on things and they don’t look like you doesn’t mean that the outdoors community doesn’t need more people involved.
I’m not sure. They are definitely underrepresented in the outdoor community though. (As you so eloquently pointed out with your first post). Lack of exposure due to upbringing perhaps? That’s likely where some of the earmarked money will go, figuring out why and how to get more people involved. Maybe with a little research and understanding we can get more of these “people” (only in parentheses because you felt it necessary to put it that way like they were something other then) on board with what we all love to help protect it in the future.Ok so I stand corrected, But what exactly was excluding them from getting involved before??
Agreed, But why does it take money on someone else's part to get them involved? How they were brought up has nothing to do with rubbing money on it? Why do they need special funds and programs to get involved? We didn't have any special funds or help? Whats next? Their own special season?I’m not sure. They are definitely underrepresented in the outdoor community though. (As you so eloquently pointed out with your first post). Lack of exposure due to upbringing perhaps? That’s likely where some of the earmarked money will go, figuring out why and how to get more people involved. Maybe with a little research and understanding we can get more of these “people” (only in parentheses because you felt it necessary to put it that way like they were something other then) on board with what we all love to help protect it in the future.
Every state has money set aside for hunter recruitment, nothing new there. You and I fund programs to get more hunters involved. Only reason this triggers people is because it is targeting groups that traditionally have LESS involvement than white hetero males. I don’t see how that’s a problem. When I hunt I don’t hunt the entire unit, I pick out areas of high potential to have a good result. Targeting a demographic through smart recruitment makes sense.Agreed, But why does it take money on someone else's part to get them involved? How they were brought up has nothing to do with rubbing money on it? Why do they need special funds and programs to get involved? We didn't have any special funds or help? Whats next? Their own special season?
Every state has money set aside for hunter recruitment, nothing new there. You and I fund programs to get more hunters involved. Only reason this triggers people is because it is targeting groups that traditionally have LESS involvement than white hetero males. I don’t see how that’s a problem. When I hunt I don’t hunt the entire unit, I pick out areas of high potential to have a good result. Targeting a demographic through smart recruitment makes sense.
So we should target “white hetero males” with our outdoors recruitment efforts? They’re already buying what they’re selling. Why would you want your money to go there? Let’s get some diversity in the woods, those LGBTQ native disabled kids have friends and family that might be a little more understanding of hunting and fishing in the future. That’s good for all of us. Even those among us that don’t like LGBTQ Native disabled kids.Maybe because some of the largest contributors to the social slush fund are "white hetero males"? Maybe?
So we should target “white hetero males” with our outdoors recruitment efforts? They’re already buying what they’re selling. Why would you want your money to go there? Let’s get some diversity in the woods, those LGBTQ native disabled kids have friends and family that might be a little more understanding of hunting and fishing in the future. That’s good for all of us. Even those among us that don’t like LGBTQ Native disabled kids.
All of those people the state is trying to help need to put in with the general population! That is Fair, Not pulling out millions in a pork fat proposal. I am not gay or Indian or etc, Where the hell is the special treatment for Me Me Me!I’ve got two gay coworkers. Two of the nicest people I’ve ever met and one of them is as good of a hunter as anyone I know. She killed a 175” whitetail with her bow this year.
Just a thought but maybe your comment is the exact reason they are doing this. How is getting people involved in the outdoors a bad thing? Just because you don’t agree with them on things and they don’t look like you doesn’t mean that the outdoors community doesn’t need more people involved.
You’ll have to ignore RR. He’s bitter about pissing away the opportunities his white privilege afforded him.So we should target “white hetero males” with our outdoors recruitment efforts? They’re already buying what they’re selling. Why would you want your money to go there? Let’s get some diversity in the woods, those LGBTQ native disabled kids have friends and family that might be a little more understanding of hunting and fishing in the future. That’s good for all of us. Even those among us that don’t like LGBTQ Native disabled kids.
The funding comes from lottery money that’s earmarked toward this. So I guess if you’d rather they build more buildings for the game and fish or buy more trucks (seemingly everyone’s gripe about fish cops and spending) then on sportsman recruitment that’s your deal, but it’s not your tax money doing it. I for one love to see them putting money toward new potential hunters. If they’re the wrong color skin for people on this forum then that’s on them and they maybe need to think long and hard about that for themselves.I would rather my tax dollars be spent on infrastructure where it belongs.
I would rather Game and Fish funds be spent on wildlife management and an equal opportunity for the recruitment of all youth.
Jared and marlon! HahahaHas anyone met our governor and 1st "gentleman "? That answers a lot of questions right there IMO.
The last time I went to the bow range, I introduced myself to the other shooters as: Hello, my name is Landon and I am a heterosexual white male, my pronouns are He/Him. What are your preferences?I’m not sure. They are definitely underrepresented in the outdoor community though. (As you so eloquently pointed out with your first post). Lack of exposure due to upbringing perhaps? That’s likely where some of the earmarked money will go, figuring out why and how to get more people involved. Maybe with a little research and understanding we can get more of these “people” (only in parentheses because you felt it necessary to put it that way like they were something other then) on board with what we all love to help protect it in the future.
The funding comes from lottery money that’s earmarked toward this. So I guess if you’d rather they build more buildings for the game and fish or buy more trucks (seemingly everyone’s gripe about fish cops and spending) then on sportsman recruitment that’s your deal, but it’s not your tax money doing it. I for one love to see them putting money toward new potential hunters. If they’re the wrong color skin for people on this forum then that’s on them and they maybe need to think long and hard about that for themselves.
What does the color of your skin, your sexual preference, have to do with taking it upon YOURSELF to get involved in the outdoors? Why does it take funding,help etc etc? The opportunity has been there all along.The funding comes from lottery money that’s earmarked toward this. So I guess if you’d rather they build more buildings for the game and fish or buy more trucks (seemingly everyone’s gripe about fish cops and spending) then on sportsman recruitment that’s your deal, but it’s not your tax money doing it. I for one love to see them putting money toward new potential hunters. If they’re the wrong color skin for people on this forum then that’s on them and they maybe need to think long and hard about that for themselves.
^^^ I grew up in a family that didn’t hunt. And when I came of age to where I was interested I found ways to do it. Thanks to a few people for taking me under their wing. But I had to get the wheels moving.What does the color of your skin, your sexual preference, have to do with taking it upon YOURSELF to get involved in the outdoors? Why does it take funding,help etc etc? The opportunity has been there all along.
There are far fewer people to “take you under their wing” in certain demographics. I know nothing of golf because it wasn’t something that was popular in rural white America when I was raised. It was something rich people in cities did. I have no drive to golf, but if I had been exposed to it through a targeted push like this when I was a kid, I may have taken to it. Would have been good for the sport I guess to get more people interested. More golfers = more money spent on golf = more golf courses and so on. Same goes for hunting and fishing. I have no “poor me” feelings because I didn’t get exposure to golf like some of you seem to have about your upbringing. Just something I wasn’t exposed to. Had I been I may have been involved, hard to say.^^^ I grew up in a family that didn’t hunt. And when I came of age to where I was interested I found ways to do it. Thanks to a few people for taking me under their wing. But I had to get the wheels moving.
Yes. I would say it’s aligned with the CPW mission, and par for the course. And it’s old news.Did you read it?
There are far fewer people to “take you under their wing” in certain demographics. I know nothing of golf because it wasn’t something that was popular in rural white America when I was raised. It was something rich people in cities did. I have no drive to golf, but if I had been exposed to it through a targeted push like this when I was a kid, I may have taken to it. Would have been good for the sport I guess to get more people interested. More golfers = more money spent on golf = more golf courses and so on. Same goes for hunting and fishing. I have no “poor me” feelings because I didn’t get exposure to golf like some of you seem to have about your upbringing. Just something I wasn’t exposed to. Had I been I may have been involved, hard to say.
The very definition of identity politics is basing policy on identity. Seems pretty cut and dried.What makes you guys think that this is about identity politics? It’s supposed to be about outreach to underrepresented demographics. Prove to me it’s not.
Please explain to me what’s wrong with that?
Personally I hope it’s paid for 100% by non residents. I wish the cost was printed on the face of the document too like the S&R fee is. I wish we could charge RR double
What a bunch of cranks.
I did a poor job of making my point, party because I’m in the odd position of defending the CPW.The very definition of identity politics is basing policy on identity. Seems pretty cut and dried.
Prove to me it isn’t about identity politics. There’s tons of people of all races, sexual orientations, religious and otherwise different socioeconomic backgrounds that are in some way disadvantaged. Many of them are white heterosexuals. If it isn’t about identity why are they excluded ?
Exactly.That's because saber-tooth tigers went extinct. When people needed to worry more about survival, the stupidity didn't exist.
This money was a Grant mostly from the FEDS earmarked for this effort.
It’s from lottery revenue. No government theft just willing buyers and willing sellers.Where do you think the FEDS get their money from...
It’s from lottery revenue. No government theft just willing buyers and willing sellers.
Just sayin the money did not come from the CO coffer. Not saying it was right or wrong.Where do you think the FEDS get their money from...
Thanks for explaining your position.I did a poor job of making my point, party because I’m in the odd position of defending the CPW.
The identity politics of this happened years ago when a decision was made to reach out to these constituencies. That’s when the earmarks happened. This equity nonsense has been discussed here before I believe. When we start having racial quotas for hunters safety classes let me know.
Theyre now in the grant award phase, and I haven seen anything that indicates that these grants were improperly awarded thru a politicized process, nor anything that says their award resulted in some other group losing their award to the gays and minorities. That’s what I meant that it looks to be consistent with policy.
I could be wrong, and I’m sure some here will point out that I am.
So besides giving crybabies like RR another chance to bang their spoon on their highchair, whats wrong with introducing these groups to the outdoors, even if it’s a bird or bug in a park?
Who is harmed?
Incidentally, these grants get discussed frequently in the CPW newsletters. I assume the info is on the website as well.
Hunt some of the finest ranches in N.W. Colorado. Superb elk, mule deer, and antelope hunting.
Great Colorado elk hunting. Hunt the backcountry of unit 76. More than a hunt, it's an adventure!
Hunt Colorado's premier trophy units, 2, 10 and 201 for trophy elk, deer and antelope.
Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear and cougar hunts in Colorado units 40 and 61.
Hunt trophy elk, mule deer, moose, antelope, bear, cougar and turkey on both private land and BLM.
We offer both DIY and guided hunts on large ranches all over Colorado for archery, muzzleloader and rifle hunts.
Colorado landowner tags for mule deer, elk and antelope. Tags for other states also available.
For the Do-It-Yourself hunters, an amazing cabin in GMU 12 for your groups elk or deer hunt.