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

[Jason Snyder]

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.

You nailed it right there.

 

[MattB]

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.

Fortunately almost every Rokslider posting on this thread understands that.

 

[T43]

Almost...

 

[Ryan Avery]

I went to the BHA Brewfest last night. I walked by Land(with my Rokslide Hoodie), he did a 180 and came and talked to me about this thread. He explained himself on many of the topics that have been discussed, he also answered many of the questions that I had...... I don't agree with all of their endeavors but I do agree with most of them.

 

[weaver]

After doing some more research I just became a member today.

I am also a member of NRA SCI and RMEF. I don't 100% agree all the time with any of these organizations but I believe the overall cause is worthwhile.

 

[dotman]

I went to the BHA Brewfest last night. I walked by Land(with my Rokslide Hoodie), he did a 180 and came and talked to me about this thread. He explained himself on many of the topics that have been discussed, he also answered many of the questions that I had...... I don't agree with all of their endeavors but I do agree with most of them.

How was the Brewfest?

 

[Nateinia]

Is the kimber deal still on? The website said 2014. Anyone know?

 

[MTbowhunter36]

Is the kimber deal still on? The website said 2014. Anyone know?

It expired at the end of 2014. Assuming you mean the lifetime membership deal with the Kimber.

 

[dotman]

It is still on their website though, just says new in 2014 https://www.backcountryhunters.org/...vbj1jb21fY29tcHJvZmlsZXImdGFzaz11c2Vyc2xpc3Q=

I bet they just have changed year. Give them a call to make sure though.

 

[OBP]

I went to the BHA Brewfest last night. I walked by Land(with my Rokslide Hoodie), he did a 180 and came and talked to me about this thread. He explained himself on many of the topics that have been discussed, he also answered many of the questions that I had...... I don't agree with all of their endeavors but I do agree with most of them.

Ryan if you have the time to type it out I'd be curious what he had to say. I've been a member of BHA for about a year but unfortunately I wasn't able to make it down to the rendezvous this weekend.

 

[Ryan Avery]

Ryan if you have the time to type it out I'd be curious what he had to say. I've been a member of BHA for about a year but unfortunately I wasn't able to make it down to the rendezvous this weekend.

I will try to get this done tonight!

 

[2ski]

I kind of want to become a member just to spite the OP. How many of his, what, 30-some post are on this thread. That's a dude with an agenda. I notice he's become very good at deflecting. Its like he came here for one reason. Its very refreshing to find so many Roksliders are level headed on this.

I don't really have anything to add. Just wanted to point out that you CANNOT be a politician elected statewide in MT and be anti-gun. Ain't gonna happen. So if a dude stumped for Jon Tester in MT, know that Jon Tester is not anti-gun.

If a group's agenda fits your own agenda 100%, its because you either started the group, or you are a sheep. Noone should be 100% on any group. You and your best friend should not be in 100% agreement on everything in your life.

It really torques me off with how we live in the day and age of the sound bite. Too many people are going to see the Greendecoy ad and not look any further. Its BS, but they're going on the fact that most gun owners, being more likely conservative, might hear the ad and hear the Liberal word, and not support BHA. Oh the horrors of Democrats and Liberals. They are all such terrible evil people. The devil incarnate. Really? Really?

As far as the land ownership that AZVince? brought up, how will the state governments be able to afford to keep up the parking lots at trailheads, fences, ect, when all the sudden they have to find it in their budget to do so? I don't get why people are against Federal land ownership. Its like anything with the word Federal is automatically distrusted. I seriously would be interested to hear what the arguments for state ownership are.

 

[Jason Snyder]

It seems highly counterintuitive to me that the people who embody the Rokslide spirit would not support groups like Backcountry Hunters & Anglers and the Teddy Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. Isn't Rokslide about DIY hunting? Isn't it about the western experience?

I get it if Ryan and Robby want to stay out of the political realm and house a website that is directed more at gear, tips, etc. As members though, if you find yourself agreeing with the Green Decoy propoganda I think you need to take a long and hard look in the mirror. Without public lands, your DIY western adventures are gone and you'll find yourself at home playing Xbox or on the golf course.

It is my opinion that we, as a society are obsessed with trying to fit life into boxes. Just as many liberal leaning persons can and do believe in firearms rights, you too can be very conservative minded yet believe that public land policy and use planning is a core value. Environmental values have somehow evolved into a stigma for many, and that's sad. How can you proclaim to be a conservationist, yet not see the value in things such as responsible energy development, maintaining roadless tracts of land, protecting habitats in their natural state, and working to preserve the entirely unique legacy of public lands and publicly owned wildlife?

If you just flat out distrust and dislike the federal government, that's fine. Just don't cut off your nose to spite your face. If you think the grass is greener, and everything in life would be better if the states owned and managed all public land, more power to you. Just remember that many states manage their state owned lands under school public trust. With that comes a legislative mandate to maximize income off of that land, be it through logging, grazing, farming, etc. Public recreation is not a top player in priorities.

To further what 2ski said, at times I absolutely despise the rhetoric and actions of the NRA. Yet, I realize the important they play in Washington DC. As such, I provide them with money because the bigger picture is more important than me liking everything they do. In the same vein, I will gladly support BHA because I feel their body of work is very important to my values. The best politicians in the world know how to work with those that SHOULD be considered the enemy in order to accomplish their goals. Read about any of the great leaders in world history and you will see what I am talking about.

Being proud of your conservation ethic, and being willing to side with those who are a little different than yourself will go a long ways in helping others outside of the hunting community truly understand how passionate and dedicated many hunters are in protecting and perpetuating the North American model of wildlife conservation, and the future of public land management.

 

[Stid2677]

I'm a member of the Alaska chapter of BHA, good friends with Mark Richards who is the Co-Chair, who has been working hard to protect the Alaskan back country. Do I agree with all, no, but I do agree with most of what they stand for and for me we share enough common ground for me to both be a member and provide financial support to help protect pubic lands.

Steve

 

[airlocksniffer]

Well said Jason.

 

[Mike21]

I kind of want to become a member just to spite the OP. How many of his, what, 30-some post are on this thread. That's a dude with an agenda. I notice he's become very good at deflecting. Its like he came here for one reason. Its very refreshing to find so many Roksliders are level headed on this.

I don't really have anything to add.

17 post by the OP so far (this is 18), hey you were only off by 43% but who's counting. I guess I am not allowed to clarify or defend myself or my views? "troll" is the new word to silence debate.

"I don't really have anything to add." Isnt that the definition of trolling?

I have yet to see anyone "square the circle" that supporting national politicians who are open anti 2nd amend is a good thing for sportsmen. Why does a post that encourages "research" be done to see were your money is going become so threatening? Must be a conspiracy...backed by "dark money" come on guys lets not get all black helicopter here. Why are we still talking about "green decoys" why dont we talk about Land's quote to the NY times? Why is nobody discrediting that as a source? Interpret that quote the way you want but dont refuse to even think about it.

And on a final "troll" note if we as hunters went to the supreme court and told the most conservative judge that our hunting weapons "cannot be taken away because we hunt with them" we would be laughed out of the place. The right to bear arms for hunting is a bi product of "necessary to the security of a free state". Much like having vast un developed public land to hunt is a bi product of the wilderness act of 1964. The only constitutional argument that supports us as hunters is the context in which the sec amend was written. That might make you uncomfortable because your buddies back east will think your a conservative but its our only argument. I suggest "compromising" on this subject as much as you compromise on public land going back to the states; not at all.

Maybe the Feds should take over the state run game agencies too? There doing a great job with the land. Since the states are doing such a bad job managing wolves? (tongue in cheek)

 

[realunlucky]

Mike I can appreciate your passion. Your argument and rebuttal are the same. Thus makes it easier to be dismissive of your comments. This isn't negative just my perspective on this thread. Perspective is everything in these types of discussions. I agree research who you give money too. I also agree make sure your research includes the truth and isn't being spun to influence the issue.

 

[Matt Cashell]

Mike,

Here are the issues.

1. Your OP was disingenuous. You tried to make it sound like you were researching the issue, and interested in joining BHA. You clearly were not.

2. Your post advises to research political group funding, quoting propaganda from a dark money group. This is problematic on every level because the group they (and you) are trying to smear are a non-profit that openly reports their funding. Yet you haven't taken your own advice and not researched the dark money's funding in any sort of way, and still consider them reliable. BHA's openly available list of donors includes an impressive list of companies from the hunting industry.

3. You have expressed a concern that BHA is anti-gun, to which many posters have disproved with verifiable information. You have provided no information that BHA is antigun.

4. You have posted a quote from 2008 from BHA's director, where he indicated that he thought there was a lot of fear surrounding Obama and gun control. You have extrapolated from that that:

a. Land Tawney supports gun control.
b. That the organization BHA therefore supports gun control.

Any 9th grade debater can explain the problems with making these types of conclusions.

5. You ignore the facts and cling to conspiracy. The facts are:
a. BHA has never supported a gun control ISSUE, ever.
b. BHA gives away guns and has gun company executives on its board.
c. BHA works tirelessly on issues important to hunters like conservation and public access.


You must understand that BHA represents a lot of people, not just Land Tawney.

I don't like dark money groups from either side including the far right (Koch) and far left (Soros). Dark money conspiracies are more than theories.

I posted that I thought this thread was a wreck. Now though, I really think it has been overall quite positive, and most readers can find some good information here. Judging from the PMs I have received, it also seems like BHA has had a nice boost in membership.

 

[Mike21]

These people aren't anti gun necessarily, they just are members of and/or donate to a party whose platform is openly anti 2nd amendment. They believe guns only have a place in shooting sports and hunting not for self defense or protection of liberty. It behooves them to found and become members of organizations that support hunting just as it be hooves politicians to dress up in camo and play hunt for a photo op. It also gives them cover so people like those on this thread can support them and claim they aren't anti gun (forget it being a known fact that the people they support and the party they belong to are openly anti gun).

This guy said it best.....

 

[Matt Cashell]

This guy said it best.....

I disagree. I'll be the 9th grader: That is an ad hominem attack and a straw man fallacy rolled into one post. Besides it is off-topic and ignores anything that BHA does.

What do you have to say about any of the issues I posted?