Elitist Hunters

[Ben Lamb]

Ladies & Gentlemen,

Apparently you are an elitist hunter if you want to walk in to hunt.

Theodore Roosevelt Republican indeed.

WASHINGTON – Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.), President-elect Trump’s nominee for secretary of the Interior, told senators he supports a “multiple use” approach to federal lands because a lack of access to certain areas has resulted in “elitism” in hunting and fishing.

Zinke said during his confirmation hearing on Tuesday that as a hunter and fisherman he understands some areas should be set aside for man to solely observe, but a generous amount of land should be open to outdoor sports and activities with the proper permits.

“It doesn’t have to be in conflict if you have recreation over mining. You just have to make sure that you understand what the consequences of each of those uses are. It’s our public land. What I’ve seen most recently is our access is being shut off – roads are being shut off,” Zinke said before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

“I mean, we’re all getting older, and when you don’t have access to hunting areas, traditional fishing areas, then it makes it an elite sport,” he added. “I’m particularly concerned about the elitism of our traditional hunting, fishing, snowmobiling, making our public lands accessible in the spirit of multiple use.”

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politi...-fishing-elitism-by-restricting-public-lands/

 

[beginnerhunter]

Wow, I didn't read it that way at all. Is it possible, given the way the article is composed, we are mixing two ideas?
I thought he was talking about access/roads being shut off DUE to mining, etc, and that being a bad thing.
However, if we are talking about putting millions more miles of roads (or opening wilderness areas for roads) so it's easier to road hunt...not for it.

 

[Goatshoes]

I too read that differently. It sounds to me that due to lack of access only the elite (the financially well to do) can afford to buy access.

 

[beginnerhunter]

Of course, my thoughts on what it means to be elitist (euro aristocratic private reserve model) may be coloring the way I am reading that. Maybe he really does mean athletically elite?

 

[LuketheDog]

I'm getting a different message than you Ben...

 

[elkantlers]

If a guy wants to walk into an area that is already vehicle restricted to hunt that is fine. But to close off areas that have previously, or currently, have roads or atv trails, I don't agree with that. There are people that think that anything whatsoever that has to do with vehicle access is bad, or Lazy, or any number of things. I have ATV's and I use them to get to areas that otherwise would be inaccessible to me, or that would take twice as long to get there in a pickup. I Rode my ATV to an area this year and then hiked into a canyon about a mile and killed an elk with my muzzleloader. I spent the rest of the day, by myself, packing the elk back to the ATV. Does that make me any less of a hunter? I don't think so. but some people would think less of me cause I used and ATV. I saw that Randy Used an ATV on his Elk hunt last year to access some country that had bad roads. He killed that huge bull and then spent days packing it back to the ATV. Was his hunt somehow cheapened because of the ATV use? I don't think so and I bet Randy doesn't think so. We also have to remember that there are alot of people that are out enjoying the mountains on their ATV's that are not even hunting. They are just going for a ride sightseeing or fishing, or picking berrys or whatever. Doesn't really matter. Are we as hunters entitled to shut down existing roads that would limit these peoples access just cause we want the place to ourselves?

 

[Ben Lamb]

It's the same language used by the motorized crowd and the transfer crowd about how shutting down logging roads, etc has led to a lack of motorized access.

Zinke's take is straight out of the ALC and Blue Ribbon Coalition handbook. It may be slightly more nuanced, but the goal is the same: More roads in areas that don't need them under the guise of adding access for the elderly. It also is an argument for the Forest Service, which is administered by the Department of Ag, so I'm not entirely sure he understands what his Cabinet post will entail. It's certainly mixing the two. BLM has a ton of roads on them, most of them open for motorized use.

His take on infrastructure spending is correct however. What should worry all sportsmen is his views on oil and gas drilling and their compatibility with wildlife. One only needs to look at the last boom and see what rampant development did to the Wyoming Range mule deer herd.

A silver tongued devil is still the devil.

 

[Straight Arrow]

"Access" is a term relative to perspective. For most sportsmen, access to public lands is the issue, particularly because of trails or roads historically used to get to public lands being gated for private access. For others it is the corner crossing issue. For Montana CBU (Citizens for Balanced Use or Abuse, imo) it's motorized access to every desired place on the map. On one hand CBU and similar groups advocate for less government and decreased revenue for federal public land managers, but at the same time criticize land managers for closing roads which can no longer be maintained due to lack of funding and lesser priority in travel plans.

 

[sbhooper]

I have always been an advocate of walk-in only areas, as I abhor road hunting. BUT, the other side of that is that the physically challenged hunters are pretty much shut out from enjoying a lot of good areas. I don't really know what the answer is, because the minute you open roads, then the area ceases to be a good area in many instances.

Sometimes there really is not a good compromise.

 

[Ben Lamb]

There are 380,000 miles of roads on Forest Service lands and over 120,000 miles of roads on Bureau of Land Management.

Adding more means less habitat security and more difficult hunting. That also doesn't include roads on private land, or state land. We have a lot of roads, and if you are a conservative who feels we need to save money, adding more roads adds to budgets in terms of maintenance and weed control.

https://www.fs.fed.us/eng/road_mgt/qanda.shtml

https://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/R...ational/travel_management/visitor_safety.html

 

[Ben Lamb]

I'm getting a different message than you Ben...

You will see attempts to eliminate both roadless areas and wilderness study areas in this congress. If the secretary of the interior says we do away with them, then I think I'll be proven correct. If you are correct, I'll gladly send Zinke a sloppy, wet kiss.

 

[Straight Arrow]

...the minute you open roads, then the area ceases to be a good area in many instances.

That is a great point. It seems when considering wildlife habitat, often the value of buffer zones is disregarded, especially when punching in roads through an area which previously had provided security from visual, noise, smell and human pressure for wildlife.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

If his take is that we need to add roads then I would be concerned and disagree with his take. If his take is that we need to be concerned about existing access to public lands being cut off then I would agree with him. From the comment Ben posted I would lean towards the later.

 

[montana_bow]

I don't think shutting down roads is an elitist mentality but some of the people who push for less motorized use, more wilderness, etc absolutely do have an elitist mentality when it comes to land use.

 

[hank4elk]

I hear a lot of nuanced phrasology from him. A politician.

I do not feel slighted by elitist pack in hunters,hell I was a pack in hunter most of my life. Can't really like I did anymore.
I also do not feel slighted by those who use vehicles to hunt or use them to access hunting areas.I use a truck to get there.
But I do take exception to those that abuse the use.And some areas do have too many roads now.Some are just trashed by them.
I rarely see FS working on anything road wise outside of barely keeping them open or passable during a fire or after a washout...maybe. Most of this is due to lack of required funding.
BLM roads are usually OK in my opine,but still no real enforcement of abuse.Even after abuse is reported.

On the flip side maybe some roads are needed to access excess firefuel/lumber removal.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I don't think shutting down roads is an elitist mentality but some of the people who push for less motorized use, more wilderness, etc absolutely do have an elitist mentality when it comes to land use.

Sure. Just like saying everything should be open to dudes with ATV's and snowmobiles is elitist. I can't afford either of those, but I can afford a pair of boots.

Elitism is a popular phrase, but I don't think it means what many think it means.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Wow, I didn't read it that way at all. Is it possible, given the way the article is composed, we are mixing two ideas?
I thought he was talking about access/roads being shut off DUE to mining, etc, and that being a bad thing.
However, if we are talking about putting millions more miles of roads (or opening wilderness areas for roads) so it's easier to road hunt...not for it.

No, Ben has it right.

There are plenty of incidents where roads get OPENED up in non-motorized areas for a mining claim.

Zinke is playing right out of the fat-assed ATV crowd and their need to drive every mile of their hunt.


And, look in this thread, you start seeing the same arguments made...... "what about the old people??" "What about the handicapped people?" etc....

This is what elitest looks like:





This is what non-elite hunting looks like:

 

[VAspeedgoat]

I would be willing to bet his words were chosen carefully so that he could be moved to whatever position seemed the most favorable politically. This of course means monetarily. Concerning to say the least. Optimism is a virtue I don't think we can afford at this time until this administration has proven to be a friend.

 

[Ben Long]

I got tired of arguing about motorized v. non-motorized access a long time ago. After all, we all use motors to some degree. The point is habitat. If you want elk, and you want an elk season and branch antlered bulls, you have to manage traffic. It's not about elitism or style of hunting. It's biology. It's what elk need.

 

[NoWiser]

His comments on this issue caught my attention last night while I was listening to the hearing. I took those comments the same way Ben is taking them in that those who want roadless areas are the elitist hunters.

I don't agree with this, but it does not change my opinion that he is the best we can hope for, given the current administration. My guess is he'll be appointed, so we just need to do our best to work with him for the next few years. While some are looking at the glass as half empty, I'm thankful that we aren't looking at someone a whole lot worse.