Gastro Gnome - Eat Better Wherever

Sportsman Protest Energy Plan

BHR

New member
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
307
Location
T Falls, MT
Good read. Any comments?

Paul

Hunters, anglers protest energy plan in Washington, D.C.
By MICHAEL JAMISON of the Missoulian



KALISPELL - A handful of hunters and anglers from throughout the West stomped into Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, carrying the message that the nation's proposed energy bill will be bad news for the hook and bullet crowd.

"I would say it's been very interesting," said Ryan Busse, who grew up ranching, hunting and fishing and now lives in Kalispell. "We met with a very cold shoulder in Senator Burns' office. It certainly was a warmer reception in Max Baucus' office; I think he's committed to the Rocky Mountain Front."

The Front, that great reef that rises straight up off the eastern prairie, stretching the length of the Rockies, is ground zero in this struggle between hunters and energy companies. Busse, a self-described "hard-core conservative," has something of a love-affair with the Front and the animals he hunts there.



"Anybody who wants to take that away and loosen the protections of such a pristine country is an enemy of me and every hunter and fisherman I know," he said in a phone conversation from the capital Wednesday.

"Look," he said, "I voted for President Bush and Mr. Burns. I'm a lifelong Republican. I'm on the team. But our quarterback's heading us the wrong way down the field. At some point, we have to change the play calling, or we have to change the quarterback."

Busse is vice president for sales at Kimber Manufacturing Inc., one of the nations leading gun manufacturers. He's also a member of the National Rifle Association, and a lifelong card-carrying member of the GOP.

But his party, he said, needs a new focus, specifically a commitment to wilderness and wildlife conservation. Busse is particularly taken with a 1910 quote from fellow Republican Teddy Roosevelt: "I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use the natural resources of our land; but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob, by wasteful use, the generations that come after us."

He and the other hunters and anglers who met in Washington on Wednesday were organized by Trout Unlimited. The visit was timed to coincide with Trout Unlimited's release of a 35-page study exploring the impacts of proposed oil and gas development on the Front.

Already, the report says, oil and gas development is occurring throughout the West at an "unprecedented rate." The new energy bill, according to the report, would increase that rate.

In fact, the report shows that more than 15 percent of western Montana's trout habitat falls within the area pegged for oil and gas production in the proposed bill, which has Trout Unlimited worried.

Specifically, the group is worried that the energy bill, as proposed, would exempt companies from portions of the Clean Water Act; would diminish public participation in decisions involving public lands; would weaken regulations that protect fish and wildlife; would place oil and gas extraction above all other considerations; and would pave the way for pipelines and other infrastructure to sprawl across wilderness and national parks.

For months, sportsman opposition to the bill has been growing.

"We have way more questions than we have answers," said David Stalling, a hunter, former Marine and Missoula-based Trout Unlimited staffer who helped coordinate Wednesday's event in the Capitol.

According to the report released Wednesday, 32 million acres of public lands are currently under lease for oil and gas development. There are about 110,000 permitted wells scattered on those acres. The Bureau of Land Management has approved 10,000 new wells in just the past three years.

Yet in the five Western states represented at Wednesday's Capitol meetings - Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico - some 9 million people spend some $5 billion a year hunting, fishing and watching wildlife.

Busse started his day Wednesday with a presentation at the National Press Club, followed by meetings with Senate staffers.

"We met with Senator Burns' aide," Stalling said. "It didn't go well. We came away from that meeting feeling that Senator Burns was simply not interested at all in hearing our concerns. They made it very clear that he will vote in favor of the energy bill. They did not want to hear from us, period."

Burns released a statement after the meeting defending the energy bill.

"Most people know that I am a hunter and a fisherman, and I wouldn't support this bill if it hurt Montana," Burns said in the statement. "Here's the simple truth: without it, we will continue to face soaring natural gas prices and limited access to affordable energy."

His staffers were quick to mention the senator's work over the years to conserve hunting areas and to secure public access to favorite hunting and fishing spots in Montana.

Burns went on to say that "with today's technology there's no reason to choose between energy production and recreation - we can do both."

But Busse wonders why, if industry can do it so clean and modern, an exemption from the Clean Water Act is needed.

Burns also said he was proud of his work on the energy bill, as a member of the Senate Energy Committee, and felt it would increase energy production, lower energy rates and reduce dependence on foreign oil.

The Trout Unlimited report, however, cited studies by the U.S. Energy Information Administration showing that "streamlining" environmental review and increasing access for oil and gas companies will increase natural gas supplies by less than 1 percent and will save the average household just $15 per year through 2020.

"It might be worth it for the oil and gas companies," Busse said, "but it's not worth it for Montana."

The report released Wednesday cites Columbus University research indicating coalbed methane discharges could eliminate up to 30 aquatic species in just 20 years. Already, populations of some aquatic insects along Montana's Tongue River have dropped by as much as 70 percent, the report said.

Numbers like those drove more than a dozen groups to sign onto a Trout Unlimited letter to Congress opposing the energy bill. The groups included political lightweights such as the Campfire Club of America and the Mule Deer Foundation, groups not known for their active lobbying.

Together, however, they represent millions of hunters and anglers.

"People need to know what's going on before they go to the polls," Stalling said. "They need to know how their senators voted on issues as fundamental as hunting and fishing."

"We had a good meeting with Senator Baucus' aide," Stalling said. "It was good, but it was also frustrating. She didn't come right out and say it, but there were some indications that he could support this bill. If he's leaning toward supporting it, then he needs to hear from sportsmen at home."
 
Definitely one man who's not willing to sit on the sidelines. If the reports from TU are correct, I'd more than pay an extra $15/yr for gas to protect those places.

I also found it interesting that he makes it clear that he is a Rep, but that if GW doesn't serve them well he's ready to try a different 'QB'! That I like!
 
I think it's good to see that some sportsmen are waking up to the realization of what's going on with this administration. Some are blinded by things they like about Bush, and fail to admit to the things he's doing that threaten our hunting and fishing. Like pointer said, if those numbers are right, I'd be more than willing to pay the $15 a year in difference to save some of these areas. Oil and natural gas are available in other places now, but wildlife and habitat is limited here. Why not get it from somewhere else if we can?

Before anyone says anything, I know that this is a bit of a romanticized view...but not too much.
wink.gif


Oak
 
This article definately puts the spot light on Old Conrad. I think we will be hearing more from him after this write up. I think that was the intent of this. Get the debate out into the public. Good!

Young Idealists,

Would you two be interested in kicking in a few extra dollars of your money to help with the 80 year old grannies on a fixed income's heat bill? I would. I think the Sportsmen need to put our money where our mouth is on this one.

Paul
 
Actually Paul, we have a program here that lets you donate on every bill you get for just such a thing. We donate to that, as well as to a group that works on developing alternative forms of energy (added in to our monthly bills). Who knows if it's doing any good, but I'm willing to try.

Oak
 
Paul, I'll put in some money for Granny's gas bill right after she puts some money in for conservation in my state, or many other states across this country that are funded SOLELY by the dollars of sportsmen.
tongue.gif
Sportsmen been giving everyone else a free ride for a long, long time; they have every right to ask for a little consideration in return.
 
No I won't kick in for Granny's gas bill, unless it's my Granny. I'm 25 and already planning for when I'm that old and on a fixed income, she could have done the same.
 
PEAX Trekking Poles

Forum statistics

Threads
113,586
Messages
2,026,029
Members
36,238
Latest member
3Wapiti
Back
Top