Environmentalists and Sportsmen working together

[Washington Hunter]

I found a good article on the Sierra Club website by Ted Williams. Everybody should read it. This quote pretty much sums up what it's about:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If only hunters, anglers, and environmentalists would stop taking potshots at each other, they'd be an invincible force for wildlands protection.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

To read the article go to www.sierraclub.org/sierra/199609/allies.asp

It is a rather long article but worth the read.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Wash., You can tell where the problem is by the attitude many SI posters have about environmentalists. You can sure see who the problem posters are here! Unfortunately, they don't seem to understand the link between the environment and our hunting and fishing. They're more concerned about letting the resource extraction industry and welfare ranchers do whatever they want!

 

[Washington Hunter]

Yes I know, and it seems to always come down to the so called "property rights" issue. What a load of crap that is.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Property rights and never having to get off their ATV!

Freedom to destroy the environment and public land.

 

[MarlandS]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Property rights and never having to get off their ATV! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> always come down to the so called "property rights" issue. What a load of crap that is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the lessons on potshots guys , great examples.

You guys mean to tell me that you follow zoning laws to the letter on your homes? OR that you've never said " *uck it, it's mine and I'll do as I please"? Even if it's something that no one but you would notice. Come on now be honest.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Actually, I don't have much choice about obeying the zoning laws in my neighborhood. It's never been a problem.

OK, why does anyone else think so many hunters have such a poor attitude about the environment? Is it because so many of them are uneducated rednecks?

Mars, It sure has been dead here in SI for the last week or so! Any idea what the problem is?

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 03-09-2003 14:22: Message edited by: Ithaca 37 ]</font>

 

[Washington Hunter]

Marland, the point is sportsmen and environmentalists should work together to protect the environment and wildlife habitat. Without a healthy environment and wildlife habitat there wouldn't be any hunting. And no, I have never violated any environmental regulations for my own personal gain (if that's what you meant by your question.) But I can't think of any time when I would have had a reason for doing so, either.

 

[Muledeer4me]

"OK, why does anyone else think so many hunters have such a poor attitude about the environment? Is it because so many of them are uneducated rednecks? "

I dont think most hunters have a bad attitude about the environment or fall under "uneducated redneck ".
From observing some of the post's on here I would say the problem come's in because some people are so quick to call names and try to make believe that everyone who doesnt follow their line of thinking must be uneducated rednecks .
The hunters and environmental groups that are getting along are not the one's that are trying to position themselfs as (WE ARE ALWAYS RIGHT ,IN ALL THINGS),instead they are the people that are willing to work with all types of people and that understand the need to get people to pull together , not push them apart by trying to break them down into little groups .
Ill take an uneducated redneck anytime over a pompass ass elitist that would think they are the only ones educated enough to understanding it all.
"Mars, It sure has been dead here in SI for the last week or so! Any idea what the problem is?"

"OK, why does anyone else think so many hunters have such a poor attitude about the environment? Is it because so many of them are uneducated rednecks? "
Could it be post's like this?
Im sure we have all types of folks reading this forum, from the well educated to the not so well educated

maybe they are as tired as I am of seeing such nasty remarks and put downs of fellow hunter's.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 03-09-2003 15:00: Message edited by: Muledeer4me ]</font>

 

[Washington Hunter]

Muledeer4me,
I would have to agree with Ithaca that "many hunters have a poor attitude about the environment?" I don't know why that is but it really seems to be true. One example is how many hunters do you know that care if spotted owls go extinct? Most hunters I know couldn't care less about the spotted owl. Basically, if it's not something that benefits them directly (meaning they can hunt it), then it is not worth protecting. Many hunters seem to be against anything environmental groups are in favor of. And they have no reason for their stance on a particular issue, they just figure if environmentalists are for it, then they are against it. That is what is sad. People just don't use their heads, and they form opinions on issues without even taking the time to learn about it. And, many people are very selfish. They see anything that might have a negative affect on them financially, as a bad thing. Protecting the environment and wildlife habitat does cost money, and people are going to have to learn to sacrifice a little if they want their children and grandchildren to have the same hunting and fishing opportunities that they grew up having.

 

[MarlandS]

No WH, I was speaking of property rights that seem to be regarded so lightly by some here. Generally by those who don't own land, note I said generally.

For example, here, you aren't supposed to do hardly anything to the exterior of your house without a building permit. Even something as harmless as adding storm windows. That is what I was getting at in my first post abou property rights.

Same goes for property rights on a larger scale. The Founders intended for citizens to be able to make a living off their land, they called it "the aquisitions of our own industry"

"The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen in his person and property and in their management." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:36

"A right to property is founded in our natural wants, in the means with which we are endowed to satisfy these wants, and the right to what we acquire by those means without violating the similar rights of other sensible beings." --Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816. ME 14:490

"[We in America entertain] a due sense of our equal right to... the acquisitions of our own industry." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801. ME 3:320

"Our wish... is that... equality of rights [be] maintained, and that state of property, equal or unequal, which results to every man from his own industry or that of his fathers." --Thomas Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME 3:382

 

[Washington Hunter]

Marland, I'm all for property rights, but I don't agree with the way some people who feel they can do anything on their property, regardless of how it affects their neighbors or the environment in general. Mostly I'm thinking of elk farms here, but I'm sure there are many other examples.

 

[Ithaca 37]

MD4M, Did you forget the challenge again?

"I challenge anybody who is willing to participate, to not use insults, personal attacks, derogatory comments, ect, ect. for 2 weeks from the time you anwser this post."

 

[MarlandS]

I'm still not convinced that a PROPERLY run game farm hurts the environment any worse than a properly run cattle operation or hog farm.

And, in the spirit of original intent if what someone did on their property didn't effect you directly it was none of your business. And that is where the entire property rights thing comes into play with Elk. the offending elk farms should have been targetted instead of the "it might happen" BS Just the same as the Offending Ranchers need targeted, or the Offending ATV'ers . Just the same as poachers vs hunters.

Too many are confusing being an environmentalist with being a liberal.
"I don't like it so you shouldn't do it".

 

[Washington Hunter]

Well I guess I didn't word that last post correctly. I wasn't trying to say that elk farms affect the environment. What they do affect is the wild elk in the surrounding areas. It affects wild elk in a negative way, and hunting in general in a negative way, in many ways which I'm not going to go over again. The article by Valerius Geist pretty much covers it all. Anyway this is kind of getting off topic. What we need to realize is that all the environmental and conservation groups have pretty much the same goals, even though some groups have a higher percentage of hunters than other groups. They still are all trying to improve and/or protect the environment and wildlife habitat, so we should support all of them. (as long as they are not openly an anti-hunting group, of course)

 

[MarlandS]

That's right WH, word it correctly or some dumbass (me usually) will take you to task on it

I realize here in the east it's a totally different world that out West , that being said, I find it un**cking believable that we have high fence "trophy" whitetail hunts here in IL. Those things (deer) are getting as thick as coyotes. I can show you large bodied wide and tall antlered 8 points (eastern count) most any day we choose to look, I can do the same with 10 and 12 pts with a little more effort.

The good thing about the canned hunts here is they keep the city boys that don't know a deer from a llama out of the woods.

Also, here atleast, High fence Elk farms make a semblance of sense. There is no idigenous population to cause harm, the cover is usually thick enough to have to work to find them , providing they were raised with minimal human interaction. And to top it off , they keep the non-serious non-residents from snatching up tags where the real hunting happens.

Besides, watch any video by a "real" hunter , Bushman, Jordan, etc. thay PROVE beyond a shadow of a doubt that canned hunts are what the "real" hunters use most of the time

 

[Muledeer4me]

"MD4M, Did you forget the challenge again? "

"I challenge anybody who is willing to participate, to not use insults, personal attacks, derogatory comments, ect, ect. for 2 weeks from the time you anwser this post."

No Ithaca I didnt forget the challange!!!
Did you feel that my post was directed at you?
I didnt see any mention of your name.
I felt that if you can call people uneducated rednecks ,I could like wise use the term pompass ass,if it hits to close to home for you ------Well I think you would be the only one that could change that.
Im confused though on if( once a redneck always a redneck) fits in this case?
Because we know an uneducated redneck can become educated,and we know a pompass ass could became un unpompass ass if they decided to,but can a redneck not be a redneck?
Does being not as educated as the next poster make that poster less of a person?
Or only less educated?
I know some educated people that dont share the same views as Ithaca does,so im confused on how one tells an uneducated redneck from a pompass ass er I mean butt?

 

[Muledeer4me]

"They still are all trying to improve and/or protect the environment and wildlife habitat, so we should support all of them. (as long as they are not openly an anti-hunting group, of course) "


WH ,I agree that we should support alot of them,but in doing so we also need to find out what the main goal of the org. or group is that we are supporting.
I dont think all of them are bad.
I do know from checking web site's and asking more questions that many are very prone to fall under anti-hunting ,anti-use.
I strongly agree with protecting the environment ,its to what degree of use makes it abuse that I differ from some of these groups and org.
From your posts,I get the feeling you also feel that some use is OK ,while other people feel that most use is abuse?Or anything that they dont enjoy is abuse.


I guess it comes down to how we view people in general?
I really see alot of well intentioned people out there,from hunters & ATV rider's to environmenltalist ,there are good and bad in all groups.
Working together shouldnt be that hard as long as all partys are open minded enough to show some type of respect for how the other side see things.

 

[Ithaca 37]

"Did you feel that my post was directed at you?"

Yup, You quoted me at the top and went into your post directing it at what I said in the quote. And you've called me that name before. I wouldn't even call your attempt to slither out of it a good one.

 

[Nut]

I'm still trying to figure out who the "problem posters" are and what was meant by somebody being called that.

 

[Ithaca 37]

In that case I was referring to the ones who always take a negative view of environmentalists--usually referring to them in derogatory terms like "greenies", "anti's" etc.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 03-10-2003 20:44: Message edited by: Ithaca 37 ]</font>