BHA Supports an Eco-Terrorist to Head BLM

[Scooter90254]

I’m 50/50 on BHA at this point.
Clearly Land is the issue not so much the groups itself.

That being said this nominee doesn’t seem to bad. She openly supports hunting. 30 years is a long time.

I would say she is a win considering the current administration. We are lucky we don’t end up with the PITA president.

 

[chasewild]

Here is a list of the eco-terrorist organizations that signed a letter to Manchin requesting her confirmation by expedited:

American Woodcock Society
Archery Trade Association
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
Bear Trust International
Boone and Crockett Club
Camp Fire Club of America
Catch-A-Dream Foundation
Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation
Conservation Force
Council to Advance Hunting and the Shooting Sports
Dallas Safari Club
Delta Waterfowl
Ducks Unlimited
Houston Safari Club
Izaak Walton League of America
Masters of Foxhounds Association
Mule Deer Foundation
National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative
National Deer Association
National Shooting Sports Foundation
National Wild Turkey Federation
National Wildlife Federation
North American Falconers Association
North American Grouse Partnership
Orion: The Hunter’s Institute
Pheasants Forever
Pope & Young Club
Quail Forever
Ruffed Grouse Society
Texas Wildlife Association
The Conservation Fund
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
Wildlife Forever
Wildlife Management Institute
Wild Sheep Foundation

Sorry to some of you who have a hard on over this, but I place far more trust in these organizations than I do your ability to appropriately analyze this situation.

Hell, some of you don't even know what meme is.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://congressionalsportsmen.org/uploads/home/AWCP_Support_of_Tracy_Stone-Manning.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiP3O-yz6LxAhWF_54KHYCdBDEQFnoECBgQAg&usg=AOvVaw1igSlH-EXjPTwh7dUrUTsZ

Thanks for doing more than the OP did.

 

[mtwarden]

yeah I'd sure hate to be associated with that list of organizations!

 

[Travis Hobbs]

I’d love to see a press release, social media post, or anything DIRECTLY from the lips of RMEF or MDF publicly supporting Stone-Manning as BHA did.

I called BHA out, directly, because they went out of their way to make it known they support a nut job with former ties to a ecoterrorist organization. If MDF or RMEF did as they had done, they would be included in my original post as well with pictures/links to their posts. It’s insane. Millions of people in this country and we can’t find someone without radical history and support of violence to lead the Bureau of Land Management.

 

[Travis Hobbs]

And…. Before anyone posts a link to Congressional Sportsman Foundation letter, I’d like to explain I’m fully aware of the letter and what groups “signed support” of Manning-Stone

Congressional Sportsman Foundation takes what I would call a 10,000 ft approach on things like this. A lobbying group that unites Sportsmans groups in Washington.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say more than a few of these groups that “support” her might be surprised who she is and what they support when they dig into this.

I have a few contacts that are pretty high up in a few of these organizations that were quite surprised to learn the names of organizations they represent were on a letter of support for a candidate with history like Manning-Stone.

Again, a letter from the Congressional Sportsman Foundation, that these groups are members of, in support of a candidate is quite a different thing than multiple public press releases IMO.

 

[Marble]

Just a thought... are most nominees universally supported by all of these organizations?

Might be a case where they have no choice but to endorse because of the fall out if they don't. I've seen that too. Don't have anything to say that's the case here but it's not a crazy thought.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

 

[String&stick]

But BHA members drink those fancy beers on their sissy pint nights, listen to the liberal Meateater podcast, and wear funny hats. That makes a manly fella like me uncomfortable.

I bet a few have long hair . . . Or man buns! Bunch of commies!

 

[Okhotnik]

When BHA starts opening up large properties like Bosque Del Oso SWA etc, it will be relevant in an access and conservation discussion. As of right now they are not a conservation or access group.

Many in the upper level in BHA are involved in gun bans. You see banning guns opens up more access to public lands. Are you too dumb to understand this? Please attend more pint nights!!!!

 

[MattB]

And…. Before anyone posts a link to Congressional Sportsman Foundation letter, I’d like to explain I’m fully aware of the letter and what groups “signed support” of Manning-Stone

Congressional Sportsman Foundation takes what I would call a 10,000 ft approach on things like this. A lobbying group that unites Sportsmans groups in Washington.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say more than a few of these groups that “support” her might be surprised who she is and what they support when they dig into this.

I have a few contacts that are pretty high up in a few of these organizations that were quite surprised to learn the names of organizations they represent were on a letter of support for a candidate with history like Manning-Stone.

Again, a letter from the Congressional Sportsman Foundation, that these groups are members of, in support of a candidate is quite a different thing than multiple public press releases IMO.

The one I posted the link to on Friday?

Dumb question, but if you were aware of it why did you single out BHA? I am no BHA supporter and not a member, but I feel like that group has fallen prey to the sheeple group think this site is prone to so people who post garbage against it get a pass from a lot of members.

 

[Marbles]

So what are they using funds for then? They don’t do habitat restoration on a large scale, mainly volunteer only, they don’t acquire land to open up access to land locked ground.

I have no problem at all with orgs doing only work that requires a payments only for salary or payment third parties, never said I did.

Personally in my view BHA is nothing but talking heads for public land, I wouldn’t expect them to take any stance on wildlife management like some do. But let’s not act like they are putting all their money into opening up public lands other then talking and their main spending could purely be in marketing to hunters to join their cause.

Maybe they are just a big go fund me situation, where they talk a good game to get people on board but what do they really do, what have they improved for public lands that wasn’t already there or that larger conservation orgs didn’t support?

Fair enough. I don't know enough about BHA to address most of that. Sounds like I miss interpreted your intent.

For clarity, my primary thrust is that there is no substance to the accusation that BHA is a grift bassed on available data. Of course, I don't have access to all their books and even if I did I'm not an accountant, much less a forensic accountant. However, I have not seen substantive evidence (well, any evidence, weak or otherwise) presented to indicate that their financials cannot be taken at face value. Combined with a the thread title that targets one organization out of over a dozen, the appearance is that BHA is just a convenient wipping boy for those who are light on facts and heavy on ideology.

For someone who wants their money to be directly spent on land, there are other organizations they should contribute to. RMEF has tax categories for "land protection," "conservation easements," and "conservation projects." However, plenty of outdoor organizations do not (Dallas Safari Club, WSF to name 2, I'm too lazy to pull tax returns on more) do not. So, it again feels like BHA is being singled out for attack without valid cause on this.

 

[Travis Hobbs]

The one I posted the link to on Friday?

Dumb question, but if you were aware of it why did you single out BHA? I am no BHA supporter and not a member, but I feel like that group has fallen prey to the sheeple group think this site is prone to so people who post garbage against it get a pass from a lot of members.

Again

I singled BHA out for one reason. They posted multiple times in support of HER specifically, not only support, but go out of their way to do it, every chance they get.

Show me a place where MDF, RMEF, WSF posted in support of her besides this “group” support letter from Congressional Sportsman Foundation. A foundation that drafts hundreds of letters a year.

I’ll wait.

If you fail to see the difference, I can’t make it any more clear and give up.

I also don’t post this for BHA koolaid drinkers.

I post stuff like this for the kids/uninformed sitting on the fence on BHA wondering if they really represent their values/views.

If supporting a former radical, eco-terrorist to lead the BLM represents your values and wishes…..Back Country Hunters and Anglers is perfect for you.

 

[HaydenLane]

I singled BHA out for one reason. They posted multiple times in support of HER specifically, not only support, but go out of their way to do it, every chance they get.

Show me a place where MDF, RMEF, WSF posted in support of her besides this “group” support letter from Congressional Sportsman Foundation. A foundation that drafts hundreds of letters a year.

I’ll wait.

If you fail to see the difference, I can’t make it any more clear and give up.

I also don’t post this for BHA koolaid drinkers.

I post stuff like this for the kids/uninformed sitting on the fence on BHA wondering if they really represent their values/views.

If supporting a former radical, eco-terrorist to lead the BLM represents your values and wishes…..Back Country Hunters and Anglers is perfect for you.

Threads like this are the reason I joined BHA. I’m not taking anyone’s word for it, I went to find out for myself. Nothing but positive interactions with my local chapter, and I won a gun in a raffle. Thanks!

 

[Marbles]

And…. Before anyone posts a link to Congressional Sportsman Foundation letter, I’d like to explain I’m fully aware of the letter and what groups “signed support” of Manning-Stone

Congressional Sportsman Foundation takes what I would call a 10,000 ft approach on things like this. A lobbying group that unites Sportsmans groups in Washington.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say more than a few of these groups that “support” her might be surprised who she is and what they support when they dig into this.

I have a few contacts that are pretty high up in a few of these organizations that were quite surprised to learn the names of organizations they represent were on a letter of support for a candidate with history like Manning-Stone.

Again, a letter from the Congressional Sportsman Foundation, that these groups are members of, in support of a candidate is quite a different thing than multiple public press releases IMO.

You do realize that a very limited number of organizations that are affiliated with the Congressional Sportsmen's Society. This means every organization on that letter specifically chose to sign it. The letter is not signed by the Congressional Sportsmen's Association, it is signed by the individual organisations.

So, lets be cristal clear, you are fine with organizations that support an "eco-terrorist" so long as they keep a low profile while doing so. If they go out of their way to state where they stand, well how dare they be upfront about such things.

Again

I singled BHA out for one reason. They posted multiple times in support of HER specifically, not only support, but go out of their way to do it, every chance they get.

Show me a place where MDF, RMEF, WSF posted in support of her besides this “group” support letter from Congressional Sportsman Foundation. A foundation that drafts hundreds of letters a year.

I’ll wait.

If you fail to see the difference, I can’t make it any more clear and give up.

I also don’t post this for BHA koolaid drinkers.

I post stuff like this for the kids/uninformed sitting on the fence on BHA wondering if they really represent their values/views.

If supporting a former radical, eco-terrorist to lead the BLM represents your values and wishes…..Back Country Hunters and Anglers is perfect for you.

Again, the other organizations on that list specifically chose to be on that letter. So, if you support a sing one of them, than "supporting a former radical, eco-terrorist to lead the BLM represents your values and wishes" and the fact that you know people high up in the organizations who have not resigned over that confirms the fact.

Your argument for why that is not the case is like arguing cheating on ones wife is only wrong if the man publicly states he has been cheating.

 

[cnelk]

I wonder how much time the Mods are spending on this thread....

Probably the same amount as the Memes threads

 

[Southforkguy]

Steve Rinella and Janis Putelis support BHA and therefore support eco terrorism?

Is that what I am hearing?

 

[mtwarden]

^ yes, as do all the other organizations that have signed on in support of here nomination

but BHA is particularly bad as they went out their way in her support; I think I'm getting that right

 

[Schaaf]

We're supposed to believe that because Tracy Stone-Manning made a shitty decision and sign off on an Earth First Letter when she was 23 and in college is the worst thing imaginable and should disqualify her from this nomination.

We aren't supposed to look at the fact that she was one of the key people that was able to secure congressional wolf delisting in the Simpson-Tester Rider for Idaho and Montana.

Or the fact that she was the main writer of the Rocky Mountain Front Heritage Act of 2012.

Or the fact that she was the head of Montana DEQ when Montana approved the Black Butte Copper Mine at the headwaters of the famed Smith River.

Or the fact that she was instrumental in removing the Milltown Dam that has been vitally important in rejuvenating the Blackfoot River fish populations.

I'm glad that she will be in front of the Senate and able to answer questions for the bad decisions she made in college having questionable friends. As for me I will judge her for the actions she has taken in the 30 years since. Good on BHA for being outspoken in their support.

 

[Middleofnowhere]

I would be much happier if conservation orgs supported or opposed “policy”, not people or politicians. This lady is a straight up political appointee, many in the Biden admin are anti gun and anti hunting. I don’t see them as ever nominating someone who doesn’t have the same “left” leaning world view as them.

 

[Poser]

We're supposed to believe that because Tracy Stone-Manning made a shitty decision and sign off on an Earth First Letter when she was 23 and in college is the worst thing imaginable and should disqualify her from this nomination.

We aren't supposed to look at the fact that she was one of the key people that was able to secure congressional wolf delisting in the Simpson-Tester Rider for Idaho and Montana.

Or the fact that she was the main writer of the Rocky Mountain Front Heritage Act of 2012.

Or the fact that she was the head of Montana DEQ when Montana approved the Black Butte Copper Mine at the headwaters of the famed Smith River.

Or the fact that she was instrumental in removing the Milltown Dam that has been vitally important in rejuvenating the Blackfoot River fish populations.

I'm glad that she will be in front of the Senate and able to answer questions for the bad decisions she made in college having questionable friends. As for me I will judge her for the actions she has taken in the 30 years since. Good on BHA for being outspoken in their support.

No, we are supposed to pick one thing and cling to it for dear life and no matter how bad that decision may turn out, never admit that we were wrong in our original assessment, hold on tighter and go down with our ideological ship out of principle.

 

[Dos Perros]

How many of y'all would let Mike Tyson be your 17 y/o daughter's boxing coach?

She might be qualified, but perhaps this sentiment is: surely we can do better than this? (<- admittedly my thoughts with pretty much every bureaucrat)

Of course we could do worse, but I get tired of the "I'll eat this shit sandwich because at least it's not a double shit sandwich."

The OP has made some good arguments and subsequent posts. And some here are strawmanning his statements to be things he didn't even say. He was clear in his criticisms. Why do some feel the need to put words in his mouth? Can't we have an honest discussion anymore?