BHA seems “all-in” with Biden

[Newtosavage]

another year like 2022 and they are deep dookie. one does wonder why so many "conservation" grants came in during 2021, after an election year.


View attachment 590979-

View attachment 590978

You're questioning why so many conservation grants after an election year? Are you not familiar at all with the impact of BIL and IRA on conservation? You should be.

I've been busy with a home remodel and haven't had time to give this a good look, but when I do, I'll form an opinion. Why you're so fascinated to hear it is beyond me though. I wouldn't think my opinion would matter so much to you especially since it appears you've made up your mind about their agenda and I'm pretty sure nobody is going to change that. I believe what you want is an argument to win.

This smells like yet another case of "not my brand of conservation" going on. IOW, don't support Audubon or the Issac Walton League or The Nature Conservancy because they aren't hard-core "conservative" orgs that push hunting and fishing and run the tired old narrative of game species first. I have no patience for that mindset. When hunters don't support ALL forms of conservation, they look foolish, ignorant and selfish.

 

[Buglebrush]

How about the "Tired old Narrative" of non game species and predators first? Should we support that kind of conservation?
Seriously, you're the one looking foolish and ignorant here. I'll be choosing to support the most important Conservation, not "All Conservation". Only so many dollars to go around, and I won't be giving any to BHA.

 

[william schmaltz]

Our current Secretary of the Interior, which BHA is absolutely in LOVE with has taken away more hunting opportunity from you just in Alaska than all anti-hunting groups have in all the lower 48 combined over the last two years. And there's no sign of it slowing down.

 

[Jimbee]

Our current Secretary of the Interior, which BHA is absolutely in LOVE with has taken away more hunting opportunity from you just in Alaska than all anti-hunting groups have in all the lower 48 combined over the last two years. And there's no sign of it slowing down.

Interested in hearing some examples. TIA

 

[Newtosavage]

How about the "Tired old Narrative" of non game species and predators first? Should we support that kind of conservation?
Seriously, you're the one looking foolish and ignorant here. I'll be choosing to support the most important Conservation, not "All Conservation". Only so many dollars to go around, and I won't be giving any to BHA.

Prioritizing "game" conservation over all conservation is the ignorant and foolish part, in case you barely passed biology, ecology or any other wildlife mgt. course. Read a book sometime. I'd recommend you start with Aldo Leopold.

 

[Newtosavage]

I just want to hear @Newtosavage 's opinion on their finances. I am genuinely curious.

You act as if you can really understand all the nuances of their finances based on that ledger above, and you can't. My guess is (based on my experience with grants) that those were matching grants and they solicited corporate donations to leverage their membership's money to qualify for the most grant funding possible. This is extremely common and if you don't do it you aren't very good at fundraising and grant management and if you keep it up your board of directors will find someone else who is.

You want to see some kind of "dark art" or nefarious intent here and that is obvious. Maybe dig into what those dollars were actually spent on (conservation?) instead of lobbing accusations. This smells like a case of "I don't like them because they are progressive and successful..." which is typical of the right-wing these days, regardless of whether their success is actually making a difference in the conservation world.

If BHA's practices or political leanings offend you, then there is an easy solution. Just don't join. Simple really. Or you can whine about them here and lob accusations that you can't back up and let everyone draw their own conclusions.

I'm not a member of BHA by the way. But they are clearly filling a niche in the outdoors/conservation/hunting and angling world that needed to be filled based on how successful they have been in such a short time. Don't hate them because you didn't think of it first.

 

[fwafwow]

Prioritizing "game" conservation over all conservation is the ignorant and foolish part, in case you barely passed biology, ecology or any other wildlife mgt. course. Read a book sometime. I'd recommend you start with Aldo Leopold.

Your condescension game today is strong to quite strong.

 

[D S 319]

No nuclear energy being mentioned just the worst ones lol!

 

[Newtosavage]

Your condescension game today is strong to quite strong.

Tell me how I'm wrong.

 

[fwafwow]

Tell me how I'm wrong.

I have no idea if you are right or wrong, but you can be either without being so condescending

 

[CJ19]

You act as if you can really understand all the nuances of their finances based on that ledger above, and you can't. My guess is (based on my experience with grants) that those were matching grants and they solicited corporate donations to leverage their membership's money to qualify for the most grant funding possible. This is extremely common and if you don't do it you aren't very good at fundraising and grant management and if you keep it up your board of directors will find someone else who is.

You want to see some kind of "dark art" or nefarious intent here and that is obvious. Maybe dig into what those dollars were actually spent on (conservation?) instead of lobbing accusations. This smells like a case of "I don't like them because they are progressive and successful..." which is typical of the right-wing these days, regardless of whether their success is actually making a difference in the conservation world.

If BHA's practices or political leanings offend you, then there is an easy solution. Just don't join. Simple really. Or you can whine about them here and lob accusations that you can't back up and let everyone draw their own conclusions.

I'm not a member of BHA by the way. But they are clearly filling a niche in the outdoors/conservation/hunting and angling world that needed to be filled based on how successful they have been in such a short time. Don't hate them because you didn't think of it first.

First let me separate my dislike for BHA from the back and forth discussion you and I had/are having. I understand that you are not their spokes person or accountant. I was under the impression you were a member and I was seeking your opinion. I appreciate your response. As far as disliking them because they are successful or thought of it first is not the case, I assure you. There are any number of organizations that can be said about. They are a lobbying group and in general I am inclined to not like lobbying groups until they can prove otherwise and I am not sure there is 1 out there that I am fond of. Please do not feel like I am attacking you with my response. I am not. I am explaining my dislike of what BHA has done.

I do agree with you on 2 things in your last couple posts:

1. I agree the passage of the BIL and IRA being a windfall for grant money flowing into BHA coffers. So its not as simple as not joining BHA imo. As a "conservation" lobbying group, they are getting my tax dollars through publicly funded grants.

2. I agree conservation of small species are as important to consider as the large "money makers". You rightly point out the legacy of conservation left to us by people like Leopold. But I am old enough to remember when the statue of Teddy Roosevelt was removed from in front of the NY Museum of Natural History. Not only did BHA and their members not speak out about it and fight for it to remain , no, BHA endorsed the ideological movement that was doing the removal. That same ideological movement has and will continue to push for Leopold and Roosevelt to be categorized and demonized as racist colonizers. Now ironically, the same ideological movement that BHA endorsed when that statue was removed is coming for the North American Model of Conservation starting with WA, then CO and Oregon, and then other states.

to the broader point.

As far as conservation goes, BHA is only interested in conservation and public access when it is on the terms of their political allies. Its plain for everyone to see. BHA is in the business of funneling tax dollars into their own pockets in the form of grants. Whether that ends up helping public lands is simply a biproduct of me as a public land owner having mutual interests as BHA political buddies. The influx of grants after lobbying for the IRA and BIL is a prime example. As far as evidence, maybe the granting agencies should be made public instead of remaining confidential on BHA's 990.

Our current Secretary of the Interior, which BHA is absolutely in LOVE with has taken away more hunting opportunity from you just in Alaska than all anti-hunting groups have in all the lower 48 combined over the last two years. And there's no sign of it slowing down.

Its the lower 48 also. The Biden Administration has committed 20 million acres of my public land to go under long term renewable development. I will never get to hunt or enjoy that land because it will be commercialized for energy development for multi generations. Combined with the 26 million or whatever it is in AK that william schmaltz referenced, thats almost 50 million acres (and counting) of public land out of reach for hunters under the administration that Land Tawney and BHA wanted. BHA cant even find the time to write a single press release condemning any of it. Maybe they forgot to budget some of that BIL and IRA grant money for those press releases. Or maybe they are just embarrassed since BHA and specifically Land Tawney endorsed renewables on public land in 2019. I thought they were committed to fighting for public land owners. I must have read 2 dozen press releases from BHA about how bad energy development of public land was under the Trump administration.

Here is another plain as day example, I must have read a half dozen BHA press releases about how bad it was that Trump was going allow drilling the Arctic refuge. Then Biden green lit drilling in the refuge, not a single article condemning the Biden Admin's decision to open it. And we have not even touched on the record setting acreage offshore and all those dead wright whales around the wind mills there.


Signed

-Public Land Owner

 

[Newtosavage]

I have no idea if you are right or wrong, but you can be either without being so condescending

but then a lifetime of crafting the art of condescension would be wasted, so...

 

[Newtosavage]

First let me separate my dislike for BHA from the back and forth discussion you and I had/are having. I understand that you are not their spokes person or accountant. I was under the impression you were a member and I was seeking your opinion. I appreciate your response. As far as disliking them because they are successful or thought of it first is not the case, I assure you. There are any number of organizations that can be said about. They are a lobbying group and in general I am inclined to not like lobbying groups until they can prove otherwise and I am not sure there is 1 out there that I am fond of. Please do not feel like I am attacking you with my response. I am not. I am explaining my dislike of what BHA has done.

I do agree with you on 2 things in your last couple posts:

1. I agree the passage of the BIL and IRA being a windfall for grant money flowing into BHA coffers. So its not as simple as not joining BHA imo. As a "conservation" lobbying group, they are getting my tax dollars through publicly funded grants.

2. I agree conservation of small species are as important to consider as the large "money makers". You rightly point out the legacy of conservation left to us by people like Leopold. But I am old enough to remember when the statue of Teddy Roosevelt was removed from in front of the NY Museum of Natural History. Not only did BHA and their members not speak out about it and fight for it to remain , no, BHA and its members, and allies like Randy Newberg endorsed the ideological movement that was doing the removal. That same ideological movement has and will continue to push for Leopold and Roosevelt to be categorized and demonized as racist colonizers. Now ironically, the same ideological movement that BHA endorsed when that statue was removed is coming for the North American Model of Conservation starting with WA, then CO and Oregon, and then other states.

to the broader point.

As far as conservation goes, BHA is only interested in conservation and public access when it is on the terms of their political allies. Its plain for everyone to see. BHA is in the business of funneling tax dollars into their own pockets in the form of grants. Whether that ends up helping public lands is simply a biproduct of me as a public land owner having mutual interests as BHA political buddies. The influx of grants after lobbying for the IRA and BIL is a prime example. As far as evidence, maybe the granting agencies should be made public instead of remaining confidential on BHA's 990.



Its the lower 48 also. The Biden Administration has committed 20 million acres of my public land to go under long term renewable development. I will never get to hunt or enjoy that land because it will be commercialized for energy development for multi generations. Combined with the 26 million or whatever it is in AK that william schmaltz referenced, thats almost 50 million acres (and counting) of public land out of reach for hunters under the administration that Land Tawney and BHA wanted. BHA cant even find the time to write a single press release condemning any of it. Maybe they forgot to budget some of that BIL and IRA grant money for those press releases. Or maybe they are just embarrassed since BHA and specifically Land Tawney endorsed renewables on public land in 2019. I thought they were committed to fighting for public land owners. I must have read 2 dozen press releases from BHA about how bad energy development of public land was under the Trump administration.

Here is another plain as day example, I must have read a half dozen BHA press releases about how bad it was that Trump was going allow drilling the Arctic refuge. Then Biden green lit drilling in the refuge, not a single article condemning the Biden Admin's decision to open it. And we have not even touched on the record setting acreage offshore and all those dead wright whales around the wind mills there.


Signed

-Public Land Owner

It appears as though you have a much larger axe to grind than just BHA.

If it is in fact Lobbyists in general that you hate, convince us all by explaining your hatred for the NRA.

And where on earth are you getting 20M ac that nobody will ever get to hunt? Source please so we can all follow your logic.

 

[fwafwow]

but then a lifetime of crafting the art of condescension would be wasted, so...

True dat

 

[CJ19]

It appears as though you have a much larger axe to grind than just BHA.

If it is in fact Lobbyists in general that you hate, convince us all by explaining your hatred for the NRA.

And where on earth are you getting 20M ac that nobody will ever get to hunt? Source please so we can all follow your logic.

nobody likes the NRA bc of Wayne La Pierre. The same exact argument that I am making for BHA. The leader corrupting the organizations mission.

Solar Energy | Bureau of Land Management

www.blm.gov

"Across the 245 million acres of public land it manages, the BLM has prioritized a combined total of roughly 870,000 acres for solar energy development within its land use plans. ....... In addition to the prioritized areas, the BLM maintains more than 19 million additional acres as open for potential solar development, subject to a variance process."

 

[Newtosavage]

nobody likes the NRA bc of Wayne La Pierre. The same exact argument that I am making for BHA. The leader corrupting the organizations mission.

Solar Energy | Bureau of Land Management

www.blm.gov

"Across the 245 million acres of public land it manages, the BLM has prioritized a combined total of roughly 870,000 acres for solar energy development within its land use plans. ....... In addition to the prioritized areas, the BLM maintains more than 19 million additional acres as open for potential solar development, subject to a variance process."

So far we've learned that 1) you think "nobody" likes the NRA and 2) you think 20M acres that BLM has identified as available for "potential" solar development will be off limits to you at some point during your hunting career? Do we have that right?

 

[CJ19]

So far we've learned that 1) you think "nobody" likes the NRA and 2) you think 20M acres that BLM has identified as available for "potential" solar development will be off limits to you at some point during your hunting career? Do we have that right?

You told someone a couple posts back to go read Leopold and now "its just a few solar panels." Yea, im worried that developmemt might impact my ability to use my public land. And my kids kids. You under stand that opening an area for potential development is another way of saying accepting permits now? And in BLMs case they have been ORDERED by the Biden Admininstration to develop these renewables on public land with solar and wind.

 

[Bump79]

Unfortunately, as western hunters no current political affiliation fits us. We're a mixed bag - wanting massive swaths of publicly funded lands to hunt while also wanting individual liberties to own property without massive tax burdens. Republicans and Libertarian's aren't big fans of federal public lands. Democrats are theoretically but have a big anti-hunting coalition within their ranks.

Honestly - I'm glad BHA exists as more democrat leaning people need outreach about what we do. They don't have to do it your way or the highway. They seem effective and I'm happy they can work without outfits like Patagonia to get stuff done where our interests overlap. We need a broad coalition to keep our rights as hunters. What we don't want it to have hunting be a battleground for the culture war.

 

[Newtosavage]

You told someone a couple posts back to go read Leopold and now "its just a few solar panels." Yea, im worried that developmemt might impact my ability to use my public land. And my kids kids. You under stand that opening an area for potential development is another way of saying accepting permits now? And in BLMs case they have been ORDERED by the Biden Admininstration to develop these renewables on public land with solar and wind.

Very familiar with this in fact, and nowhere did I say "it's just a few solar panels." But if you add up all the acreage covered by the 10 largest solar arrays, you still get less than 50k acres. So I'm not exactly sure how you jump from there to 20M, even in your kid's lifetimes.

You (like most folks) misunderstand what these "orders" and the term "available" actually mean in this context, and from the surface it appears you are using them either to scare yourself or more deliberately for fear mongering for political purposes, or both. If anything has been proven in the past four decades, it's that people who identify as conservative are easily motivated by scare tactics.

 

[Okhotnik]

Our current Secretary of the Interior, which BHA is absolutely in LOVE with has taken away more hunting opportunity from you just in Alaska than all anti-hunting groups have in all the lower 48 combined over the last two years. And there's no sign of it slowing down.

As planned by BHA. Good luck getting BHA to reveal who their real funding comes from.