Since the last Trump-public land thread went south, all the way fro sexual orientation to religion, I thought I would post this here in hopes we can keep it on topic.
This is Trump and his sons at the SHOT Show. Even if you don't like him and don't intend to vote for him, giving him some positive feedback for taking this position would probably give him more incentive to raise the volume on the topic and probably force his opponents to make their position clear.
To me, this is the opportunity hunters have been waiting for in this Presidential cycle. I have contacted my friends with platforms and asked them to make sure we use this opportunity to leverage the topic to a higher priority with all Presidential these candidates. No longer can they use it to froth the foam at fringe meetings, then act like they are our friends somewhere else.
http://www.outdoorlife.com/articles...-hunting-and-conservation?LOF1m5a4qBv6QrkZ.01
Some excerpts:
Keep it on track to the topic of public lands and Presidential candidates, or your account will just get toasted, rather than locking another post.
This is Trump and his sons at the SHOT Show. Even if you don't like him and don't intend to vote for him, giving him some positive feedback for taking this position would probably give him more incentive to raise the volume on the topic and probably force his opponents to make their position clear.
To me, this is the opportunity hunters have been waiting for in this Presidential cycle. I have contacted my friends with platforms and asked them to make sure we use this opportunity to leverage the topic to a higher priority with all Presidential these candidates. No longer can they use it to froth the foam at fringe meetings, then act like they are our friends somewhere else.
http://www.outdoorlife.com/articles...-hunting-and-conservation?LOF1m5a4qBv6QrkZ.01
Some excerpts:
AL: I’d like to talk about public land. Seventy percent of hunters in the West hunt on public lands managed by the federal government. Right now, there’s a lot of discussion about the federal government transferring those lands to states and the divesting of that land. Is that something you would support as President?
DT: I don’t like the idea because I want to keep the lands great, and you don’t know what the state is going to do. I mean, are they going to sell if they get into a little bit of trouble? And I don’t think it’s something that should be sold. We have to be great stewards of this land. This is magnificent land. And we have to be great stewards of this land. And the hunters do such a great job—I mean, the hunters and the fishermen and all of the different people that use that land. So I’ve been hearing more and more about that. And it’s just like the erosion of the Second Amendment. I mean, every day you hear Hillary Clinton wants to essentially wipe out the Second Amendment. We have to protect the Second Amendment, and we have to protect our lands.
AL: Let me ask you this—back to conservation and access for hunters’ rights to get on public land. One of the things that we’ve found is so much of this campaign—not your campaign, but this election cycle—has talked about cutting budgets and reducing the federal government. And what the budget is for managing public lands right now is at one percent. In 1970, it was two percent. Would you continue to push that number down for wildlife conservation or would you look to invest more?
DT: I don’t think there’s any reason to. And I will say—and I’ve heard this from many of my friends who are really avid hunters and I’ve heard it from my sons who are avid hunters—that the lands are not maintained the way they were by any stretch of the imagination. And we’re going to get that changed; we’re going to reverse that. And the good thing is, I’m in a family where I have—I mean, I’m a member of the NRA, but I have two longtime members of the NRA. They’ve been hunting from the time they were five years old and probably maybe even less than that. And they really understand it. And I like the fact that, you know, I can sort of use them in terms of—they know so much about every single element about every question that you’re asking. And one of the things they’ve complained about for years is how badly the federal lands are maintained, so we’ll get that changed.
Donald Trump Jr.: It’s really all about access. I mean, I feel like the side that’s the anti-hunting crowd, they’re trying to eliminate that access—make it that much more difficult for people to get the next generation in. For me, hunting and fishing kept me out of so much other trouble I would’ve gotten into throughout my life. It’s just so important to be able to maintain that, so that next generation gets into it. And it’s the typical liberal death by a thousand cuts: “We’ll make it a little harder here. Make it a little harder here. We won’t spend the money there.” And it’s not just about hunting—it’s about fishing; it’s about hiking; it’s about access; it’s about being able to get in there and enjoy the outdoors and enjoy those great traditions that are so, you know, so much the foundation of America. And we’d be against anything like that. And frankly, it’d be about refunding those—making sure those lands are maintained properly; making sure they’re not going into private hands to be effectively walled off to the general public. And that’s something really important to us.
Keep it on track to the topic of public lands and Presidential candidates, or your account will just get toasted, rather than locking another post.