Do your research before joining "sportsmens conservation" type groups...

[Bonedalien]

the OP clearly has an agenda.
this thread is clearly a train wreck

 

[dotman]

The OP is also pushing the source as a valid good source, maybe he works in energy.

 

[Eric Bailey]

Just joined BHA. There is nothing more important to me than hunting, fishing, and backpacking on public land.

 

[Mike21]

The OP is also pushing the source as a valid good source, maybe he works in energy.

When one can't dispute facts they often resort to vilifying, marginalizing ( see comment above) etc, common tactic of the anti gun lobby actually.

work for a federal land management agency in charge of preserving resources in Perpituity and believe in the mission. Also believe in the stated mission of BHA just don't want my donation going to support national anti sec amend pols; that's my agenda for the hundredth time, no need to make it something it's not.

 

[dotman]

Well guess BHA isn't for you. You may want to stop supporting most sponsors/highend hunting companiess, also you may want to skip over most sponsors here because most support BHA.

Hopefully you don't support Kifaru, seek outside, first lite, Exo etc etc, all members and large $$ supporters of BHA.

It would be great to have Rokslide bring BHA on.

Here is the list of sponsors.

https://www.backcountryhunters.org/index.php/who-we-are/friends-and-links/our-sponsors

 

[Mike21]

Well guess BHA isn't for you. You may want to stop supporting most sponsors/highend hunting companiess, also you may want to skip over most sponsors here because most support BHA.

Hopefully you don't support Kifaru, seek outside, first lite, Exo etc etc, all members and large $$ supporters of BHA.

It would be great to have Rokslide bring BHA on.

So your moving on from me working for the evil energy industry? Next argument since that one didn't work huh?

Those are free enterprise companies selling a product who can do what ever they want with their profits. Not 501c, No merit to your argument at all.

 

[Bonedalien]

Once again this is fyi only not an attack on anyone's political beliefs. I still might join BHA........

/[/url]

after your 16 or so rebuttals to Roksliders questioning you, I realy find this hard to believe. Those are the actions of a man in defense of something.

 

[dotman]

So your moving on from me working for the evil energy industry? Next argument since that one didn't work huh?

Those are free enterprise companies selling a product who can do what ever they want with their profits. Not 501c, No merit to your argument at all.

No, just stating if you support the sponsors, you indirectly support BHA, I'm fine with how BHA spends their funds. You just come off with an agenda to blackball a good org same as that article did.

 

[Mike21]

believe in the stated mission of BHA just don't want my donation going to support national anti sec amend pols; that's my agenda for the hundredth time, no need to make it something it's not.

“There’s a lot of talk about Obama and guns, and — I’ll be honest with you — a lot of fear,” said Tawney. “But at least he’s not trying to fake it. Not like John Kerry with a dead goose over his shoulder and new hunting outfit one month before the election.”

Nothing but the facts, sorry they don't match your opinion which you are entitled to.

Happy hunting

 

[gmajor]

“There’s a lot of talk about Obama and guns, and — I’ll be honest with you — a lot of fear,” said Tawney. “But at least he’s not trying to fake it. Not like John Kerry with a dead goose over his shoulder and new hunting outfit one month before the election.”

Nothing but the facts, sorry they don't match your opinion which you are entitled to.

Happy hunting

Perhaps I'm missing something, but that quote does not threaten me, as a gun owner, in the slightest. It also doesn't strike me as meeting any sort of criteria to be considered a "fact" of anything. Assuming Obama's personal beliefs support way more regulations than you find acceptable does not speak for every Democratic politician (like Jon Tester, for example). That the Democrats are "openly anti-gun" is a subjective assessment. I have no problem with you interpreting the regulations that their party platform supports as "anti-gun" (the assault weapon ban, etc). Many people do. No surprises there. But there are also many gun owners who are ok with their platform, and don't view it as anti-gun. It just doesn't conflict with how they view gun ownership and the 2nd amendment. Before anyone jumps in to support or attack these gun owners: whether they are right or wrong has no bearing on the purpose of this thread, but serves as a reminder that different gun owners have different views on what it means to be "pro" and "anti" gun.

That BHA's Executive Director campaigned for Obama, a member of a party with politicians on all sides of the gun issue, cannot be used as a wholesale "fact" that BHA supports "anti-gun" groups. You are completely entitled to believe that, of course. Many people would feel that way, I imagine. But, I look at it like this: the BHA is supporting a hugely important issue - the protection of wild lands. There are many groups who are successfully keeping gun ownership, and all the details that entails, legal. I cannot fathom a scenario where the BHA undermines the efficacy of the gun lobby in any way. Everything they do is public, and it would be plain as day. And it's been said before: giving away guns is probably as good a sign as you could ask for. I'm sorry they're not the "ar 15s with hi cap mags" that might sway you to join them, but it's a hunting group. That really wouldn't make any sense. Bolt actions certainly seem more appropriate to me. And this is ignoring the cc pistols they're giving away.

Sorry if this was rambling. I didn't really want to jump into this thread but I care so much about our public lands (like most of us) that I really couldn't help it. I care deeply about the environment and hunting. I am also gun owner. I don't think the latter has any serious relevance to my support for BHA. I see gun-ownership as a wedge issue that has successfully fractured the environmental movement and reduced our collective power. And Mike, I do hope you are still considering joining BHA, I would be happy to hear if you did.

 

[lak2004]

Just joined BHA after reading this whole thread, first time in a while i have even logged onto rokslide. This one made me laugh.

 

[dotman]

Just remember all democratic politicians lobbied for Obama but when Obama tried to ban AR's (remember the 2013 scare) a large number of them voted against Obama. A large number of democrats do own guns, don't let the far left make you think otherwise. Many democrats are members of the NRA and do not agree with 100% of what the current admin wants.

 

[Mike21]

I see gun-ownership as a wedge issue that has successfully fractured the environmental movement and reduced our collective power.

Wow

 

[avodude]

Mike21,

Since you so clearly have an agenda. Are you getting paid to troll this forum? Or are you doing it for free?

 

[gmajor]

Wow

Surprised that shocked you. Anecdotally, I think we would all agree that Teddy Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold were fantastic environmentalists/conservationists/term-you-prefer and had a huge positive impact on wild lands in the US. In their day, I think most people concerned about protecting land felt about them as we do. Today, however, I think you would find a significant segment of environmentalists that look back at those gun-toting hunters and put them in a different category that surely can't be environmentalism. I think the increasing divisiveness of gun ownership has a significant effect on this phenomenon. Obviously I strongly support gun ownership. I'm a gun owning hunter who frequents Rokslide, lol. I just think about ethical hunting as environmentalism/conservationism/term-you-prefer, and am saddened not everyone identifying as an environmentalist feels this way.

 

[realunlucky]

Think to remember is there is more than one issue. Sure you have a priority list but you still have to weight the good and bad. I worry about gun control too but it's not an end all be all issue for me. I have trouble trusting any lobby group but its how the game is played. Why not rant about changing the rules of the game.

 

[dotman]

I agree there isn't just one issue that is the most important, there are many issues all the same in importance to me. To me just having the right to own a gun isn't enough if I don't have a right to take it anywhere. Just think if all federal lands or public grounds have a firearm ban or were sold off to big business that closed them off to public use. The big picture on many fronts is what is important and the sucky thing is far right republicans have wanted to sell off our public lands for years and far left democrats have wanted to take away our guns. Good thing is the majority of Americans are moderates no matter what party they follow.

So yes when it comes to protecting our public lands I'm gonna probably side with some left leaning individuals, when it comes to guns im probably not. In the last campaign the republicans were pushing selling off our federal lands big time, do you really think the head guy of an organization to protect our public lands and keep them public is going to support these candidates? Do you also really think a gun ban will happen? Obama got shot down hard, in CO elected officials were thrown out of office (and that was in the liberal front range). When gun ownership becomes a far right only thing is when we'll see a ban, good thing many others are open minded and not on the far left or right and can also care about many other issues that are just as important.

 

[Matt Cashell]

How the hell did I get back in this thread? It was about BHA right?

Somebody mentioned it was a train wreck. Yep, guys with 99% of things in common are at each other's throats now.

I really just want to point out the obvious:

Green Decoys would like to skew the conversation away from conservation and public access, and towards partisanship and gun control.

They are slick, well funded (anonymously), and obviously VERY good at what they do.

I support BHA, and encourage anyone interested to contact a board member in their state to find out what the organization is really about. Sometimes a real person can be a really good source.

 

[pete]

Just joined BHA after reading this. This is my new favorite conspiracy theory.

 

[Jason Snyder]

Surprised that shocked you. Anecdotally, I think we would all agree that Teddy Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold were fantastic environmentalists/conservationists/term-you-prefer and had a huge positive impact on wild lands in the US. In their day, I think most people concerned about protecting land felt about them as we do. Today, however, I think you would find a significant segment of environmentalists that look back at those gun-toting hunters and put them in a different category that surely can't be environmentalism. I think the increasing divisiveness of gun ownership has a significant effect on this phenomenon. Obviously I strongly support gun ownership. I'm a gun owning hunter who frequents Rokslide, lol. I just think about ethical hunting as environmentalism/conservationism/term-you-prefer, and am saddened not everyone identifying as an environmentalist feels this way.

I could not agree more. Very well said.