Dubya to End Elk Hunting in Wyoming

[Toonces]

If I am going to give money to an organization for the purposes of protecting hunting I would want that organization to have a policy supportive of hunting.

Earth Justice has purposely taken no position on hunting which I find troublesome, especially considering the vested interest hunters have in protecting the environment.

I also did a quick read the bios of most of the attorney's on staff at EarthJustice and couldn't find any of them that said they were hunters.

That is not to say that they don't do some good things for the environment, but they are not getting a donation from me.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Toonces,

Can you provide any links of "pro-hunting" groups that will take positions on improving hunting and fishing by removing roads, increasing Wilderness, removing fish killing dams, suing to stop practices that harm wildlife?

I would love to support them, but I have yet to find any that will work toward real, immediate, and effective change. They are all too worried about losing their corporate contributors and donors who work in industry that is anti-hunting and fishing.

Don't you think it would be more effective for hunters to join the groups who are leading the charge in protecting our public lands for the betterment of all? Why not say "Good work, here is a check, and by the way, I hunt"?

 

[Toonces]

EG,

To answer your first question, No, that is why I was dissapointed to learn more about Earthjustice. My checkbook was open, now its closed. You had me interested when you first stated that EarthJustice was a pro-hunting group.

To your second point,

Isn't what your suggesting we do the exact thing your critisizing the pro-hunting groups for. You want us as hunters to attempt to buy influence in otherwise non committed environmented groups. Isn't this the same thing the corporate donors are doing?

Why not give to pro hunting groups and say, here is my check, and by the way I am pro the environment.

I don't want to spend my money to try to influence people to my way of thinking (bribery), I would rather my money be immediately directed toward pro hunting results.

Also just because we give them money and say we are hunters, these groups are under no obligation to use our money for pro-hunting causes. Given the EarthJustice client list our dollars could go to support the HSUS. That is just not something I will knowingly risk doing.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Toonces,

I assume EarthJustice does their own fundraising, and then provides counsel to the Plantiffs that are carefully selected. This then allows them to choose what cases they take and what impact they have. I think there are many actions that could be taken that would be neutral on hunting rights, but very Pro-Hunting on actually providing animals and places to hunt. How can you not support those?

I think their "no position" is smart, as they are choosing to avoid that issue as not being relevant to their mission.

I don't think there is anything wrong with telling them that you will cease funding if they sign on HSUS for any action that hurts hunting. (I think, but not sure, HSUS shoots at many issues beyond single-issue NO HUNTING). And since you were unable to provide a case with HSUS being involved, I am a bit skeptical as to the "depth" of that relationship.

I would also think you could designate funds to a specific issue/case, and they would be happy to take the money to improve our hunting and fishing in the face of continued attacks by Dubya/Cheney/Halliburton.

Don't assume that Environmental groups want to end hunting. For the most part, their missions are very complementary with hunting.

 

[Toonces]

While their "no position" may not be relevant to their mission, it is very relevant to my mission.

I don't assume anything, but I also have a healthy amount of distrust for any organization who chooses not take a specific position on an issue that is important to me.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Toonces,

Are you going to allow cobwebs to form in your checkbook, while waiting for an organziation to appear???

Is doing nothing to protect the places and animals we love better than becoming an activist?

What is the number thrown about, 80% are apathetic to hunting??? To me that looks like an opportunity to spred the "gospel" to the 80% and show that hunters care even MORE than environmentalists. If you haven't noticed in my posts, all the redneck, bigoted, racist comments that I see, I attack, as that is not the image that will win ANY of the 80%.

I spent a week rafting with some of the most effective (and some would say rabid) environmentalists in the State of Idaho at the beginning of August. And I assure you, every one of the LOVED the Venison Curry I cooked in the Dutch Oven.

I also bend their ears on what direction I think they need to go to improve my hunting and fishing.

Am I missing something here???

 

[Toonces]

What your missing are differing priorities.

You would rather support environmental groups to take pro hunting positions. Supporting these groups will favor the environment and may or may not favor hunters.

Your priority is the environment.

I would rather support pro-hunting groups to take environmental positions. Supporting these groups will favor hunting and may or may not favor the environment.

My priority is hunting.