Kerry hunting comments.

[Tom]

John Kerry, Hunter?

By Harold Hough
web posted May 24, 2004

Remember the two pheasants picture? ... "While Kerry was shooting to the right of the picture, Buck, the bird dog, was behind and facing left. Why wasn't Buck in front and facing the birds?"

... about varmints "There may be the odd pelt to be gained from this type of hunting, but few people resort to eating them. Kerry's statement does not ring true to real hunters."

"The second Kerry decoy is that he only needs a 12 gauge for hunting and that "assault rifles" have no place in the hunter's arsenal. ... but the gun control group wants to include any semi-automatic rifle in that category."

... "Talking about dove, he said, "You clean them. Let them hang. It takes three or four birds to have a meal. I love dove." "... "no one I know recommends cleaning and hanging dove."

... "If Kerry was a real hunter, he would have found time to hunt every year, especially with that nice mansion he owns in Idaho."

... "Nope. Kerry may be able to play the hunter with big city journalists who think bagging two pheasants makes one an accomplished hunter. However, in Heartland America, where hunting is a serious 12 month a year sport, Kerry's hunting credentials sound like a cheap decoy to snare the votes of unsuspecting hunters."

the NRA sent the story today.

 

[BuzzH]

NRA glib for dumbbells...

 

[Tom]

here's a statement from someone who lives in Missoula, "intelligence capital of MT", about Bush:

"It was a distinct honor to not only meet with the President again, but to actually see how much he cares about the land and its wildlife," Model said. "It reminded me of a time when America was lead by another President (Theodore Roosevelt) who was a hunter, a fisherman, and a conservationist and set into motion the most successful conservation system in history."

Thats from the B&C web site on Bush. They saw the conservation efforts Bush puts into his ranch in Crawford while at the ranch. I'm not sure who said that about Bush, it might have been,

Bob Model of Cody, WY, for example, the president of the local Boone and Crockett Club, he was also very impressed with Bush's conservation work at the Crawford ranch.

 

[BuzzH]

Tom,

Ask Model how he likes Bush's proposal to mine the living shit out of the Front in MT, where the Boone and Crockett club owns a big ranch. Is that a good "conservation" effort?

Too bad Bush doesnt treat MY PUBLIC LANDS like he does his own...

 

[Tom]

He's trying to get energy for the US, but he does both, get energy and do conservation improvements. He's not picking on our public lands, I don't think. Getting energy is a hard business, the other Roosevelt is the one who first got us hooked up with the Saudi's, he beat Churchill to make a deal with them around WW II, I read.

 

[BuzzH]

Tom, you're wrong, he is picking on PUBLIC LANDS.

Did you look at the picture of the Green River Basin or not?

Have you observed who he's picked to head up our Natural Resource Departments?..conservation is the last thing he's concerned with. You need to read Bush's energy plan, in particular where the new energy is coming from.

Also, you cant have both conservation and the type of development Bush is proposing on the Front and many other areas.

How many miles of roads, gas wells, and powerlines does Bush have on his conservation-minded ranch?

You dont improve conservation efforts with roads, drill pads, powerlines, pipelines, etc. etc. etc.

The only conservation effort required on the Front is leaving it like it is, period.

 

[Tom]

A picture, doesn't do me a lot of good, nor do blanket statements about what you think. What is the relevance of that picture? I saw it, but I don't know where it is now to go see what else was said about it. I don't even remember the name of the thread, it was so uninformative when I read it. Ok, he's picking on public lands, but for the public good, so I don't use the phrase picking on. If you want to convince people of anything, you need some good data. You need solutions, not coplaints, if you're a biologist and you just say don't do anything, its not a very convincing argument that the public good is served at all. You need a marketing guy or a PR guy, those people know more about convincing people of something. I couldn't believe it when I read that news you gave where the Montana senator wouldn't even listen to Kerasote. What did he have to tell her, that was so uninformative? More PR is needed with the good stuff, whatever it is.

Are there any joint meetings of environmentalists and energy developers to find good solutions? Or do people just shout at each other?

 

[BuzzH]

Tom,

Theres been all sorts of meeting over the Front and Dubyas drilling plans, all of which are in support of leaving the Front alone.

The thing I find so ridiculous is that once again, the only compromise is the compromising of quality habitat, quality wildlife, and the aesthetic qualities of the Front.

The Front is, without question, the only intact reach of the Rocky Mountain Front from Canada to Mexico that isnt severely developed. Its the last place in the lower 48 that grizzly bears wander onto the plains, it supports the second largest herd of wild elk in the U.S., and also supports the largest Rocky Mountain Bighorn herd in Montana. That herd has provided the stock for transplanting efforts all over Montana.

For those reason alone, its pretty apparent drilling wont fit in. Most Montana Residents agree, including long-time Republican Ranchers, who are now full-fledged Democrats. They dont like Bush or his policy on the Front. The Federal representatives from Montana also oppose drilling the front, and they are making some serious noise to stop it.

As far as data goes, theres mountains of data (no pun intended) on the Front and what it provides. Including things like Gloria Floras decision to cease all development on the Lewis and Clark NF portion.

If you've ever seen it...you'd never have to ask for "proof" of why you leave it alone.

Bush will learn this lesson...at the polls.

 

[BuzzH]

Tom, for your reading pleasure.

The latest on the Front...

“Montana Wildlife Federation Resolution
to Protect the Rocky Mountain Front Endorsed by 45 Wildlife Conservation Organizations From Across the Country”

St. Louis Missouri - Wildlife conservation organizations from 47 states came together in St. Louis, Missouri last week to exchange ideas and strategies of how to ensure high quality hunting and fishing opportunities be protected for future generations nation wide. During the event Montana Wildlife Federation (MWF) successfully enlisted the support of hunters and anglers from around the country for a resolution which calls for legislation to protect what is considered to be a national treasure, Montana's Rocky Mountain Front. The area needed little explanation to a group of people who know where world
class hunting can be found. They also agree with MWF that there are other places more suited to energy development than a place known as one of the last best pieces of wildlife habitat left unprotected in the nation.

Former Forest Service Chief and BLM Director Mike Dombeck PhD who now serves as University of Wisconsin GEM Pioneer Professor and is a UW System Fellow of Global Conservation, was pleased to hear that sportsmen from across the country had supported Montana Wildlife Federation's resolution. As chief of the Forest Service Dombeck supported the 1997 decision by then Lewis and Clark Forest Supervisor Gloria Flora which placed a 15 year moratorium on the granting of any new oil and gas leases on Forest Service land along the Rocky Mountain Front.

"This is one of the last great wild places," Said Dombeck. "In my book the conservative approach is to save some resources and wild places for future generations. The greatest good for the greatest number of people over the long haul will be achieved by maintaining the quality waters and wildlife habitat rather than by the short-term gain from drilling for little energy that may only meet the needs of the U.S. for a few weeks or even days."

It was no surprise to David Stalling, MWF board president, that a resolution to support legislation that would prohibit energy exploration and development on public lands, as well as require a study of options, costs and recommended next steps needed to ensure a fair and equitable process for compensation of willing lease holders who wish to forfeit or trade existing oil and gas leases on public lands along the Front, was easily passed with overwhelming support.

"It's not a surprise that this resolution received strong, unanimous approval from hunters, anglers and other conservationists from throughout the United States," says David Stalling, the president of Montana Wildlife Federation. "More and more, hunters and anglers throughout Montana and from across the country are speaking out in defense of our public lands, leading efforts to protect significant national treasures like the Rocky Mountain Front."

For Choteau native and well known Front hunter and wildlife enthusiast Roy Jacobs the news of national support was no surprise either. "The Front is
just as important and just as threatened as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. Maybe even more important because of the Front's historical and cultural significance as well as its unparalleled wildlife diversity." Jacobs understands well the threats posed to the Front and that is why he is happy to see hunters from across the nation support the efforts to protect it. "Its good to see a Montana conservation organization push the issues surrounding the Front into the national spotlight. We need all the help we can get."

The resolution details the importance of public lands in the area as critical habitat for over 290 species of wildlife and describes the region as one of the wildest places left in the state. The resolution also illustrates the importance of Montana's billion dollar hunting, fishing and wildlife-related recreation based industries that will provide steady, stable economic growth for future generations and how a "wild Rocky Mountain Front is a strong and crucial economic asset to local businesses and the state of Montana."

 

[Nemont]

The Rocky Mountain front is unique in so many ways that it would be a true tragedy to have development on the public lands there.

I usually agree with the President but this area is just too important to rip up for short term gain. The gas field that is proposed would require roads. Roads grizzly bears do not mix well. I think there are many other, more suitable, places to drill or better yet encourage fuel conservation first.

 

[Rogue 6]

Wow, a Prof from Wisconsin, how unbiased.

 

[BuzzH]

Rougue 6, I mean this, really, you need to learn how to read...

In particular, that the "prof from Wisconsin" was the Chief of the United States Forest Service and also was the Director of the BLM prior to that. In case you dont know, those positions would be the highest position attainable in the two largest Public Land Management agencies in the United States. You'd be hard pressed to find a more qualified person on the planet to express their views on the Front, than the "prof from Wisconsin".

Dombeck has, without doubt, forgotten more about land management than you'll ever know.

Also, note that hunters and conservation groups from only 47 states showed unamious support.

I'd tell you to leave Southern Oregon and check out the Front some time...but on second thought, stay there, I doubt you'd "get it".

Apparently eating spotting owls fried in Exxon oil has taken its toll...it shows, big-time.

 

[Tom]

Its definitely something to protect, but its not clear to me, that the choice is to rip it up versus, leave it for hunting and fishing only.

Are you biology guys saying their is no way to responsibly get oil and gas out of the ground there on the front or just that you don't like it? I don't like the idea, but I'm hoping there is a responsible way to do it, if they do it.

I don't know how much oil and gas they are talking about there, but people here can retire on their mineral rights to land and spend a bunch of money on habitat improvement and wildlife and really enjoy watching the oil and gas wells pump while they do it.

The democrat who tried to get elected as governor down here last time, has one oil well in the middle of a state park that pays him like $25,000/day. He probably gave the state, the park land around it, I don't know, but his democratic primary oponent tried to use that well against him, it didn't work. The oil well democrat won the primary, but lost the election.