I was just reading my current copy of Safari News from SCI. One of the articles talks about supposedly hunter friendly groups that are funded by anti-hunting money. The group they talk about in this issue is Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. Does anyone have any more insight to this situation? I had not thought that I would be funding someone who wanted to take my hunting rights away.

quote:

Backcountry Hunters and Anglers

Every thing I seen from them is anti.

They are very sneaky about it.

They couch it environmental terms but they are really an anti group.

They are big on limiting access like being very pro national monuments. Areas that don't allow hunting.

this is news to me that i need to look into more. people like steve rinella seem very pro BHA, and those guys have been on the Meateater podcast several times.

That article caught me by surprise. It gets rather detailed and makes their case against BHA. I get things from BHA quite often as well as e-mails. The article indicates their are several so-called pro-hunter groups that are in fact funded by, or their mission is anti-hunter. I try to be careful where my money goes as far as contributions is concerned. I wonder who else fits in this category?

I had never heard of them until two days ago. Facebook page here shows them hunting and give aid to Florence victims.

Would like to know more.

I just got an e-mail newsletter from Steve Rinella about folks he's added as regular contributors to his company. One of them is a member of the Board of Directors for Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. If any of the comments about BHA prove correct, that will be it as far as I'm concerned about the Meateater program. I wish I could find out more about what the Safari newspaper was talking about.

Do a search on 24hourcampfire about BHA.

Bring the popcorn, waders and chaff separator.

Green Decoys come in several "flavors", there are anti-gun organizations with pro-gun or pro-hunting names and "conservation" organizations of various name variations. The one thing they have in common is they ALWAYS endorse Democratic candidates for office. They always endorse "reasonable" restriction of guns or access restrictions to "preserve hunting opportunities" The League or Conservation Voters is one of the worst, should just change their name to "League of Communist Voters".

Another thing to look for is how they handle access to potential hunting areas. They all endorse "traditional" access, foot or horse only, even if the areas are currently open to motorized use. I know of several areas here in Montana that had been open to ATV's etc for decades that were closed down by "wilderness study" designation. They endorse and lobby heavily for "wilderness study areas", bureaucratic closure designations that greatly limit access without any legislative input.

This is one of the chief signs that "Backcountry Hunter and Anglers" is a bullshit organization.

Montana Senator Daines along with several other western states Senators has introduced legislation to get rid of this toxic bureaucratic gimmick that serves only the interests of the anti-crowd.

Tragically, they have been aided by surrounding private landowners, with leased hunting and hunting outfitters who see the "wilderness study" designation as a benefit to their business model. I know of one area where the adjacent land owner regularly drives into the so-called no motor vehicle area with hunting clients using his "agricultural access" due to leasing the area for grazing. Yeah, I reported it, nothing happened as even the idiots at the USFS can't get to the area except on foot and the landowner has a permit, bla, bla bla etc...

quote:

Tragically, they have been aided by surrounding private landowners, with leased hunting and hunting outfitters who see the "wilderness study" designation as a benefit to their business model. I know of one area where the adjacent land owner regularly drives into the so-called no motor vehicle area with hunting clients using his "agricultural access" due to leasing the area for grazing. Yeah, I reported it, nothing happened as even the idiots at the USFS can't get to the area except on foot and the landowner has a permit, bla, bla bla etc...

I hunted next to an area like that closed to motor vehicle traffic but the Leasing rancher who ran outfitted hunts ran all over.

quote:

Originally posted by Heeler75:
Do a search on 24hourcampfire about BHA.

Bring the popcorn, waders and chaff separator.

I did the search you suggested. I did not realize what was going on. Thanks for the suggestion.

Want to really throw up?

https://www.greendecoys.com

One of the groups listed under Montana "endorsed" Kathleen Williams, F rated by the NRA and bullshit "hunter" has her picture taken with a rifle and states she wants to "preserve access". Exactly who would be getting this "access" is a bit vague.

Just one more thing. Let's not leave the biggest green decoy of all, the USFS, out of this. Their benign (some say malicious) neglect of forest roads necessary for access is amazing. Locally, the Willow Creek forest road on the Livingston side and the Jackson Creek forest road on the Bozeman side are nightmares. these are the main public access roads to the south end of the Bangtails. USFS excuse that they don't have the road budget to maintain them rings hollow when they spend a fortune literally back filling roads with tens of thousands of tons of rock and dirt in the Mill Creek drainage to "prevent illegal road use". The BS is un-ending...

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

Tragically, they have been aided by surrounding private landowners, with leased hunting and hunting outfitters who see the "wilderness study" designation as a benefit to their business model. I know of one area where the adjacent land owner regularly drives into the so-called no motor vehicle area with hunting clients using his "agricultural access" due to leasing the area for grazing. Yeah, I reported it, nothing happened as even the idiots at the USFS can't get to the area except on foot and the landowner has a permit, bla, bla bla etc...

I hunted next to an area like that closed to motor vehicle traffic but the Leasing rancher who ran outfitted hunts ran all over.

I own land in Colorado that border Natl Forest; is landlocked by private landowners. The Forest Service tried to get local landowners to grant access and when they refused, the Forest Service closed the area to motorized vehicles (there was only a small part open anyway). I have not seen anyone driving the road since then, and there are no fresh tracks.

Personally, one thing I HATE about the National Forests in Arizona is that you can't walk a mile without hitting another road, the exception being the desert (which for the most part is Nat'l Forest). I am all for closing more roads in the Nat'l Forest, at least in AZ.

That may well be in AZ as I am not familiar with the issues in that state. However; there are plenty of areas in Montana where the next road access is many miles and hours away or simply does not exist. Not every road needs to be open but main access roads, 2 digit and 4 digit designation, these are roads that often extensions of county or state roads at least should be maintained if for no other reason than for fire access! There is also a lot of private land at lower elevations that can not be crossed except on USFS easements. I've heard some landowners state that they should be able to close an access road "because the USFS no longer maintains it" and "nobody uses it".

The BHA didn't necessarily start out as an anti-hunting group, but they have certainly morphed into one. There are still some good guys involved with the organization, trying for change from within, but they are being over run by the leftist crowd.
I stay as far from the BHA as I can.
Bill

You know, the damn Californians keep moving East into Colorado, Montana, Texas, etc. for the lower cost of living, no tax, low tax environment and as soon as they get here they fight to promote a liberal agenda that puts Democrats into office that will turn our states into... California. I don't fucking get it. What idiots.

quote:

The BHA didn't necessarily start out as an anti-hunting group,

I disagree when I first saw them and checking into their founder I said they are anti hunting .

They have use good camo but deep down they are anti's

quote:

Originally posted by bwanamrm:
You know, the damn Californians keep moving East into Colorado, Montana, Texas, etc. for the lower cost of living, no tax, low tax environment and as soon as they get here they fight to promote a liberal agenda that puts Democrats into office that will turn our states into... California. I don't fucking get it. What idiots.

I hear you; they are moving into AZ. In years past Martha McSally would have no trouble winning the Senate seat vacated by Flake but this year she she faces a significant challenge from a woman who used to be far left but is now portraying herself as pro defense, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by llamapacker:
The BHA didn't necessarily start out as an anti-hunting group, but they have certainly morphed into one. There are still some good guys involved with the organization, trying for change from within, but they are being over run by the leftist crowd.
I stay as far from the BHA as I can.
Bill

That seems to be the case with several organizations.

Not everything is black or white and not everything is as it seems to be. Green Decoys is run by Rick Berman, a lobbyist who has contracts with big corporations such as Exxon Mobil. He creates front groups like Green Decoys as a way to attack advocacy groups that get in the way of his client's interests.

He has also attacked Trout Unlimited, TRCP, Izaak Walton, and most of the other big conservation groups. So, he's basically trying to take down anyone that threatens his client's ability to exploit public lands.

quote:

Not everything is black or white and not everything is as it seems to be. Green Decoys is run by Rick Berman, a lobbyist who has contracts with big corporations such as Exxon Mobil. He creates front groups like Green Decoys as a way to attack advocacy groups that get in the way of his client's interests.

He has also attacked Trout Unlimited, TRCP, Izaak Walton, and most of the other big conservation groups. So, he's basically trying to take down anyone that threatens his client's ability to exploit public lands.

Really great response. Sometimes getting people to open their eyes and minds is really hard to do.