Daines calls local hunter/angler groups "green decoys"

[airlocksniffer]

http://missoulian.com/news/state-an...629bcf0b.html#tracking-source=home-the-latest

Boy I thought we may have moved past the bullshit Green Decoy's moniker but Senator Daines seems to think that discrediting actual Montana sportsmen and sportswomen with a Potus-esque smear is building support for removing WSA designations in the state. Guess the folks who have contacted the Senator in support of the WSA designations are just hired liberal crisis actors.

 

[Big Fin]

I get some laughs out of this Green Decoy stuff that seems to be the rage among politicians. Back in the 2016 election, one of the MT groups I co-founded, and of which some Hunt Talkers are members, ended up on the Green Decoy list. Since then, I have got a good laugh out of it and I have used the #RealGreenDecoy on many social media posts.

Looking at the growing list of groups, including those in the article you linked, I have some personal observations of their work as Green Decoys. I watched some of these groups get the Montana Stream Access Law codified. I watched them work for changes in laws related to State Trust Lands, where we now can hunt those 5.2 Million acres that were previously off-limits to hunting and angling, and in the process we pay a reasonable fee that helps fund MT schools. I watched them work on some great lands swaps and land exchanges that did remarkable benefit for wild lands, wildlife, and hunting access. I watched (insert beneficial action here).

Along the way, I've had times when I disagreed with their position on some topics, maybe even found myself in the crosshairs of some of the groups also labeled as Green Decoys. That said, it is hard to imagine recreation in Montana without some of the accomplishments they have made happen

Considering most all the informed people in DC agree this WSA release bill, S.2206, is DOA, no matter who is in control, I struggle to understand that political logic behind these efforts. Also scratch my head at the continual use of the Green Decoy tag by Montana leaders, when the Green Decoy program that is a product of a DC consulting firm who has not a single accomplishment that compares with list of accomplishments by those on whom they want to hang the Green Decoy tag. Guess it is not my job to explain or rationalize the use of that term, rather laugh at the irony when I consider where/who the term came from, those who seem willing to use it as a trendy label, and compare the two prior comments to the work of those who get tagged as such.

I received the email quoted below, earlier today. Damn Green Decoys and their logical questions. #RealGreenDecoy

For immediate release: February 21, 2018

Contacts:

Alec Underwood, Montana Wildlife Federation: (406) 303-0494

Chris Marchion, Anaconda Sportsmen’s Group and Our Land, Our Legacy: (406) 560-1592

Kit Fischer, Hellgate Hunters and Anglers: (406) 241-3121

Pat Tucker, Army veteran and wildlife biologist: (406) 360-5472

Sen. Daines Holds Invitation-Only Meetings to Discuss His
Anti-Wilderness Study Area Bill​

Hunters, anglers, hikers, horseback riders, skiers, and others that make up majority of public land users were not invited, then insulted by Sen. Daines

Bozeman, MT – Today, Senator Steve Daines held two invitation-only meetings, one in Phillipsburg and another in Hamilton, with hand-picked public land users to discuss S. 2206, his bill that would remove protection from five wilderness study areas (WSAs). Sportsmen and women, backcountry horsemen, and representatives from nearly every public land user group were not invited to these meetings.

A group of 15 opposed to Sen. Daines’ bill appeared anyway at the meeting the senator held at Granite Sportland in Phillipsburg. Daines told Alec Underwood, western field representative for Montana Wildlife Federation, that the Anaconda Sportsmen’s Club and Hellgate Hunters and Anglers are “green decoys” when Underwood told Daines these two groups oppose his bill.

Invented by Washington, D.C. public relations firm Berman & Company, the term “green decoys” is meant to smear hunting organizations that are opposed to transferring and selling off public lands, suggesting these organizations do not represent actual hunters.

Anaconda Sportsmen’s Club was founded in 1948 and currently has nearly 500 members, almost all of whom live and hunt in Montana.

“Anaconda Sportsmen’s Club was founded almost 15 years before Sen. Daines was even born,” says Chris Marchion, a longtime leader of Anaconda Sportsmen’s Club and Montana Outdoor Hall of Famer. He’s currently a representative of Our Land, Our Legacy, a diverse group of Montanans defending Montana’s WSAs. “His comments, and his WSA bill, demonstrate that Sen. Daines is sadly out of touch with Montana’s hunters and anglers.”

Hellgate Hunters and Anglers was founded in 2005 and currently has 400 members and supporters, almost all of whom are residents of Montana. Last month, Hellgate Hunters and Anglers President Kit Fischer requested a meeting with Sen. Daines to discuss S. 2206. His request was not granted.

“So Sen. Daines took time today to meet with snowmobilers but refused our request to talk about how his bill will impact Montana’s fish and wildlife,” says Fischer. “He then suggests our members aren't real sportsmen. I can guarantee our members don’t hike mountains, cross frozen rivers, and spend countless hours in the field all so they can pose as hunters opposed to an anti-conservation agenda. It’s clear why Montana’s hunters and anglers oppose this bill, because Sen. Daines refuses to consider our values.”

Sen. Daines then traveled to Hamilton and began a meeting at around 12:15, an hour earlier than a press release sent from his office had indicated. He gave a speech then left through the back door at 1:15, the time the meeting was supposed to begin. Nearly 60 people opposed to Sen. Daines’ bill showed up at around 1:15 in an effort to have Sen. Daines listen to their concerns about his bill.

His appearance in Hamilton comes two weeks after the Ravalli County commission held a meeting to discuss the bill, at which 153 people signed in as opposed to Sen. Daines’ bill and 41 in support and 52 people testified against the bill and 20 in favor. Moreover, 78 people sent the commission emails opposing the bill, compared to 20 people who emailed supporting the bill.

“Today, Sen. Daines demonstrated that he’s not only ignoring but also avoiding the vast majority of his constituents who want a say on how our wilderness study areas are managed over the long haul,” said Pat Tucker, a Ravalli County resident, Army veteran, and wildlife biologist who was at the Hamilton meeting and hikes and backpacks in the Sapphire and Blue Joint WSAs. “We are the people who use and cherish these areas. Why is he ignoring us? Why won’t he listen to what we have to say?”

Sen. Daines drafted and introduced S. 2206 without holding a single public meeting or town hall, nor did he solicit comments from the public to gauge how Montanans would like wilderness study areas managed. The bill targets the Big Snowies, Middle Fork Judith, West Pioneer, Sapphire, and Blue Joint Wilderness Study Areas, together totaling 450,000 acres. If passed, it would be the single biggest rollback of public lands protections in Montana history.

“This bill, and these meetings Sen. Daines held today, is an affront to every Montanan who believes we should have an inclusive, transparent, and balanced approach to solving management challenges on our public lands,” says Marchion. “That’s why we’re now calling on Sen. Daines to abandon this bill and work with the rest of the congressional delegation in taking a measured approach to our WSAs and start engaging with the broad spectrum of people who have a stake in these areas.”

 

[onpoint]

Watt21, hope you're reading this one and can make the connection. Straight from one of the politicians cut from the same mold as the "Land Board 3" - elections matter........

 

[Trial153]

More than politicians. You can find the same nonsense being spouted by hunters as well. Take a trip over to bowsite and watch the GDek moniker get tossed around along daily. Hell the president of pope and young made references to it in regards to BHA .

 

[MTGomer]

Kit could show Daines a thing or two about hunting and being a sportsman, that is for sure.

Green Decoy

 

[onpoint]

Old news, but not fake.
Steve Daines campaign commercial:
Daines and family standing on the shore of an urban Bozeman pond, casting their fresh out of the clam wrap Walmart special fish poles - while Daines claims ( using that 3 second film bit to illustrate) that he's a sportsman.
That, I would argue, falls in line more with the definition of a "green decoy" than any other I have heard so far.
From Buzz on another topic
"You can bullchit the fans, but not the players".

 

[Nameless Range]

I think worthwhile conversation could be had about some aspects of the bill, but when it comes to Steve Daines, the guy is a dum dum and no friend of hunters. Has been and will continue to be. As Randy pointed out, look at all the things these groups have done for all Montanans, not just hunters and fishermen.

Steve Daines fought Jon Tester's FJRA simply because he couldn't stand to see his counterpart be successful. In 2015 he tried to hold LWCF funding hostage. A couple years ago he voted for the Murkowski Amendment on a bill, which would have opened the door to PLT.

The man is a political hack. For him to criticize these groups as being Green Decoys, it's like someone who has never been in a fight criticizing Mike Tyson on his punching form.

 

[bigsky2]

Last night I attended a public comment meeting with the county commissioners on removing the designation on our local WSA's. It was a packed house, and a lot of people spoke up. I would say about 70% of the people in attendance were in favor of removing the designation. It's a tough issue for me, I love spending time in the WSA and the last thing I want to see is the trails opened for motorized use. The main reason most people want to remove the designation is because it's such a fire hazard, and it's hard to argue with them. It is so overgrown that there is hardly any feed on the forest floor for wildlife. I wish there was a way to do some selective harvest of timber, without removing the protections, but it seems like it's either one or the other though. There are a few places where they did some logging on the private land that adjoins the NF and the elk were in there instantly. Some timber harvest on the NF would do wonders for the wildlife. It seems like hardly any logging happens on NF in this part of the state anyways though, so even if it came out of wilderness protection I don't know that any logging would take place. If I knew there would be selective timber harvest but the trails would remain closed to motorized and bicycle use, then I might be ok with removing the wilderness protection. It is the unknown that makes me hesitate to support removing the designation.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I find it interesting that all the pro-transfer politicians representing MT were born in California; Daines and Gianforte.

 

[shoots-straight]

[h=2]

[/h]

I get some laughs out of this Green Decoy stuff that seems to be the rage among politicians. Back in the 2016 election, one of the MT groups I co-founded, and of which some Hunt Talkers are members, ended up on the Green Decoy list. Since then, I have got a good laugh out of it and I have used the #RealGreenDecoy on many social media posts.

Looking at the growing list of groups, including those in the article you linked, I have some personal observations of their work as Green Decoys. I watched some of these groups get the Montana Stream Access Law codified. I watched them work for changes in laws related to State Trust Lands, where we now can hunt those 5.2 Million acres that were previously off-limits to hunting and angling, and in the process we pay a reasonable fee that helps fund MT schools. I watched them work on some great lands swaps and land exchanges that did remarkable benefit for wild lands, wildlife, and hunting access. I watched (insert beneficial action here).

Along the way, I've had times when I disagreed with their position on some topics, maybe even found myself in the crosshairs of some of the groups also labeled as Green Decoys. That said, it is hard to imagine recreation in Montana without some of the accomplishments they have made happen

Considering most all the informed people in DC agree this WSA release bill, S.2206, is DOA, no matter who is in control, I struggle to understand that political logic behind these efforts. Also scratch my head at the continual use of the Green Decoy tag by Montana leaders, when the Green Decoy program that is a product of a DC consulting firm who has not a single accomplishment that compares with list of accomplishments by those on whom they want to hang the Green Decoy tag. Guess it is not my job to explain or rationalize the use of that term, rather laugh at the irony when I consider where/who the term came from, those who seem willing to use it as a trendy label, and compare the two prior comments to the work of those who get tagged as such.

I received the email quoted below, earlier today. Damn Green Decoys and their logical questions. #RealGreenDecoy​

This comment is really close to being a really good LTE opinion piece. Just saying you know from one "GREEN DECOY" to the other.

 

[jryoung]

Kit could show Daines a thing or two about hunting and being a sportsman, that is for sure.

Green Decoy

No joke, I wonder if Daines has any Outstanding Achievement awards from any respectable conservation group.

https://www.wildsheepfoundation.org/awards/service/outstanding-achievment

 

[Irrelevant]

I find it interesting that all the pro-transfer politicians representing MT were born in California; Daines and Gianforte.

It still slays me that being born in any other state besides MT is not an instant dis-qualifier in a state that seems to hate outsiders.

 

[Sytes]

What were the results of the five year study on the five WSA's? I think it was prudent to start the WSA areas though what happened? The Forest Service, I believe, felt the Eureka Ten Lakes area was not necessary for wilderness protection.

I know this is about Daines though involves his push to remove the Study areas. Seems there is some reasoning to his constituents complaining about these outstanding WSA's as it has been long over due to conclude the study.
I'm in favor of evaluating the studies to determine which, if any or all, need to be removed from Wilderness protection.

One side of the WSA debate.
https://www.google.com/amp/missouli...e9792c96-1eba-5f76-b363-5398b6d4c719.amp.html

 

[Schaaf]

need to be removed from wilderness protection

I don’t think many of them have wilderness protection. Most WSA’s I know of and I believe several that he’s targeting still have grazing. I don’t think anyone is against approaching the WSA issue but Daines’ cherry picked WSA’s from buddies of his is a problem. Each WSA should be treated independently and should include the public. Montana’s a far different state now than when these WSAs were put in place. Public input is such an outdated idea.

 

[Sytes]

I don’t think many of them have wilderness protection. Most WSA’s I know of and I believe several that he’s targeting still have grazing. I don’t think anyone is against approaching the WSA issue but Daines’ cherry picked WSA’s from buddies of his is a problem. Each WSA should be treated independently and should include the public. Montana’s a far different state now than when these WSAs were put in place. Public input is such an outdated idea.

Thanks for clarifying whether the wilderness protections are in action within the WSA's, Shaaf. My impression was during this study, they had the Wilderness protections.

I also appreciate your manner of conversation. Thanks.

 

[BigHornRam]

Here is a link to information about the Blue Joint WSA, the one of the WSA in question I'm most familiar with.

http://missoulian.com/bluejoint-wilderness-study-area/pdf_6a7787bd-c9bb-53fe-8e08-1677ac4ed94a.html

 

[dannyb278]

I get some laughs out of this Green Decoy stuff that seems to be the rage among politicians. Back in the 2016 election, one of the MT groups I co-founded, and of which some Hunt Talkers are members, ended up on the Green Decoy list. Since then, I have got a good laugh out of it and I have used the #RealGreenDecoy on many social media posts.... #RealGreenDecoy

#RealGreenDecoy would make a great BHA shirt for this years Rendezvous!

 

[Straight Arrow]

Here is a link to information about the Blue Joint WSA, the one of the WSA in question I'm most familiar with.

BHR, what is your position regarding that WSA and the potential for changes such as increased motorized vehicle use, roads, resource extraction and more active forest management?

 

[BigHornRam]

BHR, what is your position regarding that WSA and the potential for changes such as increased motorized vehicle use, roads, resource extraction and more active forest management?

I think the area the forest service earmarked for wilderness makes sense. The part that is not, does not. Motorized use would include snowmobiles and chain saws. Potential to helicopter log near existing roads. A lot of this country has burned and would be low priority for forest management right now.

 

[BigHornRam]

I hunt a lot in this one.

http://missoulian.com/sapphire-wilderness-study-area/pdf_135388d8-96dc-5491-b814-7bb2d2544ab1.html

For some reason, I thought the WSA was north of the pass, not south. I think the big rub here is it used to be open to snowmobiling and mountain biking. Its pretty much burnt over so same as Bluejoint comment reguarding forest management. Trail management allowing use of chain saws would be my top choice.

Here's a pic of this area.