High Time for Outdoor Recreation Industry & Non-Hunting Public Land Users to Step Up

[hunterconservationist]

High Time for Outdoor Recreation Industry & Non-Hunting Public Land Users to Step Up

http://hunterconservationist.com/2016/03/01/step_up/

New blog post on the subject. Please give it a read. Let me know your thoughts.

Thanks!

 

[Hunting Wife]

Ok, I'll bite. Decent blog post, though nothing that hasn't been said before elsewhere. If I remember correctly (and I've been wrestling with data and maps all day, so admittedly my brain is drained) several states and agencies have proposed a variety of fees, permits, taxes, what have you to get the "non-consumptive" users to foot part of the conservation bill and that idea has almost universally been met by backlash from sportsmen who are afraid of other stakeholders having a say in conservation. Yes, what we do and have done for conservation its great, but it soon isn't going to be enough. I think we need to take a hard look at what road we are headed down and what we want our collective future to look like.

 

[dannyb278]

I totally see the benefit of extra dollars for habitat, but I also see a huge quagmire for groups like Mountain Bikers who will demand to have access to wilderness areas, by using the argument (understandably) that their dollars are now funding something they don't get to utilize as they want.

Its a tough situation that calls for the kind of "level headedness" that is so often absent from discourse today.

 

[hunterconservationist]

When I try and look above the weeds at the bigger picture, I think we need non-hunting public land users to step up, especially given the current political climate and considering our dwindling numbers, on public land transfer and conservation funding. Long term, as we become more marginalized, this isn't a fight we'll be able to win alone. Today, probably. 50 years from now?

Hunting Wife, you're spot on regarding previous efforts at the state level but what I'm suggesting is that this has to be driven by the outdoor recreation for-profit industry, from the top down. Like any good idea - it has to be their idea.

Danny, excise tax contributions would certainly come with some expectations of input from the outdoor industry sect, but I think your point regarding the "level headedness" is well put. It is largely absent but sorely needed.

 

[Ben Lamb]

There's been a lot of movement on this issue over the last year or so.

A couple of examples:
http://fwp.mt.gov/doingBusiness/insideFwp/commonGround/

http://blog.trcp.org/2016/03/02/thi...rom-development-could-help-fish-and-wildlife/

Hunting Wife is correct as well. Anytime there is discussion about including non-consumptive or recreational users in the state funding model, the less than enlightened show up screaming about Agenda 21 and chemtrails.

And so their voters.