Thoughts on the anti-hunting movement

[Deleted member 28227]

Which party put the trapping and no bear hunting and no dog running on the ballot! Or at least 90% of the time the democratic party did.
Which party proposes some form of gun control 90% of the time. The democratic party.
The anti hunting movement is political> I am not making it political it is a political argument.
People want to soften hunting and gun ownership so it more aligns with the core of the democratic partys new core. Im sorry, thats whats at play here.

This is incorrect.

Trap and hunting bans in the west, are mostly ballot initiates and not driven by a particular party but rather special interest groups. Formal opposition is rarely made by the Dems or the Reps but by other special interest group. The fight is typical PETA/Human society etc versus RMEF, NRA, various hunting orgs, etc.

Example:
MT Trapping ban was put forth by Montanans for Trap-Free Public Lands

If you are curious:

Hunting and fishing on the ballot

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

The original assault weapon ban was fairly bipartisan for its time, in our current political climate extremely bipartisan... honestly you would be hard pressed to find a major bill with as much bipartisan support in the last 10 years.

Voting yes for the ban
188 Dems
46 Rep
1 Indepent

Voting no
64 Dems
131 Rep

235 to 195 so 57% of the vote.


Hunting is not a party line vote, parties are rarely involved. The gun debate is a different conversation, as is public lands.

 

[BuzzH]

Alienate people?...heck, his post made me feel like I need to get off my ass, and I do advocate...different strokes I guess.

Lobbyists don't represent votes as much as they do money...Someone at a meeting with standing room only or overflowing crowds from all the people who do show up, and who are constituents carries more weight than you seem willing to give it credit for. When the people who elect these officials write letters, make calls, show up, make their voices heard...that's impactful. Finding some way to see it as advantageous to not be a part of that is not.

Correct, lobbyist's largely represent money. Legislators get tired of the lobbyists shit and why comments and communication with their constituents hold sway, in particular on GF/wildlife issues.

 

[RockinU]

Randy also says that conservation will never be comfortable or convenient. Rather applicable here I think.

 

[RockinU]

Please do read what I write before you comment.

Read it? Hell, I quoted it...

 

[Gila]

Read it? Hell, I quoted it...

Well then you didn't comprehend it. Form letters work. You want to make it as easy as possible for people. A form letter also gets the message across better. You will get more correspondence going that way.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Well then you didn't comprehend it. Form letters work. You want to make it as easy as possible for people. A form letter also gets the message across better. You will get more correspondence going that way.

No, form letters do not work. They are thrown away and only counted as 1 comment submitted X number of times. There is far more weight given to the individual phone call, letter or personal interaction,

Signed, a money-grubbing lobbyist who has worked professionally in conservation for 17 years.

 

[RockinU]

Well then you didn't comprehend it. Form letters work. You want to make it as easy as possible for people. A form letter also gets the message across better. You will get more correspondence going that way.

I think my comprehension is fine, your quoted post was in the same vein as most of your contributions on this subject.

A form letter gets what message across better? Don't misunderstand, I've signed plenty of form letters, and I usually get form letters in reply. I can send you a few as examples. In contrast, when I looked Congressman Bill Flores in the eye, shook his hand and told him how important the Public Lands Bill was to me and my family, and how important it was to us that the LWCF be fully funded, he couldn't just give me some boilerplate canned response, he had to interact with me, and acknowledge what I said. I'm not looking for correspondence, I'm looking for interaction that will influence results.

 

[88man]

While I won't disagree with that, you can't make that point and then ignore that when public land transfer discussions happen, it's always brought to the table by the GOP...hell, it's a plank (or at least it was) in their national platform. Transfer may not be openly anti-hunting, but it is without question hostile to public land hunting, which many on this site feel is important. You have to see the whole picture.

I know the GOP scares me to on the Public land transfer topic, ask 100 strangers about Public land transfer tell us if 5 ever heard of it. Ask all your local politicians except in the following states, WY/MT/UT/NV/NM/ID/CO I bet you would be lucky if 10% ever heard of it.
But in every state the demicratic party is the party of gun control and the party that wants to limit and make new laws limiting hunting.

 

[RockinU]

I know the GOP scares me to on the Public land transfer topic, ask 100 strangers about Public land transfer tell us if 5 ever heard of it. Ask all your local politicians except in the following states, WY/MT/UT/NV/NM/ID/CO I bet you would be lucky if 10% ever heard of it.
But in every state the demicratic party is the party of gun control and the party that wants to limit and make new laws limiting hunting.

We need to do a better job screaming from the literal mountain top what PLT is, what it represents, and what it would cost us, what you say definitely demonstrates that we need to do a better job getting the message out. As for talking to local politicians, I can't really say, I know that my senators and congressmen are keenly aware of it as I have ample contact with them over the matter (especially Cruz), local, as in county and state, I'm not so sure, as unfortunately public lands aren't really a thing where I live, which has served to motivate me to make sure they are protected in the places they are...which means that I can't vote party lines. I have to take it all into consideration when considering who gets my vote, hunting, guns, lands...I have to think about it all, and that makes it hard to cast a vote in many races.

We've seen a poster say what's the point in public lands if we don't have guns to hunt with, well the counter to that is what good is my elk rifle if all the elk lands have been traded off to the wealthy and industry?

 

[Ben Lamb]

I know the GOP scares me to on the Public land transfer topic, ask 100 strangers about Public land transfer tell us if 5 ever heard of it. Ask all your local politicians except in the following states, WY/MT/UT/NV/NM/ID/CO I bet you would be lucky if 10% ever heard of it.
But in every state the demicratic party is the party of gun control and the party that wants to limit and make new laws limiting hunting.

Nope.

In MT, it's been the GOP that's tried to limit hunting. They've brought forward bills to privatize elk, to end sage grouse hunting, to reduce access programs, eliminate stream access, transfer and sell public lands and to underfund our agency. Only through herculean efforts by grassroots volunteers & lobbyists, have we been able to stem that tide.

That pattern repeats itself in state houses across the west. Sure, Dems offer up some dumb stuff on guns based on Scalia's Heller opionion related to regulaton of firearms (and Beto is the outlier and a chump), but I have a constitutional right to own a firearm. I don't have a right to own public lands.

 

[RockinU]

Nope.

In MT, it's been the GOP that's tried to limit hunting. They've brought forward bills to privatize elk, to end sage grouse hunting, to reduce access programs, eliminate stream access, transfer and sell public lands and to underfund our agency. Only through herculean efforts by grassroots volunteers & lobbyists, have we been able to stem that tide.

That pattern repeats itself in state houses across the west. Sure, Dems offer up some dumb stuff on guns based on Scalia's Heller opionion related to regulaton of firearms (and Beto is the outlier and a chump), but I have a constitutional right to own a firearm. I don't have a right to own public lands.

Dude...I'm always interested in what you have to add to every discussion, but do you really think it's right to denigrate the chumps of this world by lumping them in with freakin Beto?? Come on Ben, you're a better man than that...

 

[88man]

This is incorrect.

Trap and hunting bans in the west, are mostly ballot initiates and not driven by a particular party but rather special interest groups. Formal opposition is rarely made by the Dems or the Reps but by other special interest group. The fight is typical PETA/Human society etc versus RMEF, NRA, various hunting orgs, etc.

Example:
MT Trapping ban was put forth by Montanans for Trap-Free Public Lands

If you are curious:

Hunting and fishing on the ballot

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

The original assault weapon ban was fairly bipartisan for its time, in our current political climate extremely bipartisan... honestly you would be hard pressed to find a major bill with as much bipartisan support in the last 10 years.

Voting yes for the ban
188 Dems
46 Rep
1 Indepent

Voting no
64 Dems
131 Rep

235 to 195 so 57% of the vote.


Hunting is not a party line vote, parties are rarely involved. The gun debate is a different conversation, as is public lands.

From your numbers 80% of the yes votes to ban assault weapons were Democrats
and only 32% of the votes not to ban were Democrats.

From your example what are you saying is 57%%%% Here is what it is 235 infavor and 195 opposed. 80% of the votes to ban were cast by democrats and 68 % of the votes no to ban were cast by republicans

 

[Deleted member 28227]

But in every state the demicratic party is the party of gun control and the party that wants to limit and make new laws limiting hunting.

Any concrete examples of the Democratic party putting forth legislation that's anti hunting? Again not people who caucus with the party, but the actual party. I'm sure there are a couple but not many. Maybe NJ but I'm not sure that was the state Democratic party platform.

The NRA has endorsed and give A ratings to 107 Democrats in either house/senate/and governors races over the last decade, including 8 governors. NM, MT, CO, WV... your statement is kinda wobbly.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

From your numbers 80% of the yes votes to ban assault weapons were Democrats
and only 32% of the votes not to ban were Democrats.

From your example what are you saying is 57%%%% Here is what it is 235 infavor and 195 opposed. 80% of the votes to ban were cast by democrats and 68 % of the votes no to ban were cast by republicans

57% of all votes were yay votes, the point is it was not even close to a party line vote, which is the norm today. Currently, with the exception of fluffy legislation like, let's make Tuesday national dog day, it is extremely rare to find any major bill that has more than an hand full of cross party votes.

 

[88man]

Any concrete examples of the Democratic party putting for legislation that's anti hunting? Again not people who caucus with the party, but the actual party.

The NRA has endorsed and give A ratings to 107 Democrats in either house/senate/and governors races over the last decade, including 8 governors. NM, MT, CO, WV... your statement is kinda wobbly.

you never answered the question?
Now some new questions>
1. do you support trapping?
2. do you support coyote and wolf hunting and trapping
3. do you support hunting with a semi type rifle or shotgun
4. do you support grizzly hunting in WY
5. is there any type of hunting season or species that we should stop hunting ?

 

[Straight Arrow]

you never answered the question?
Now some new questions>
1. do you support trapping?
2. do you support coyote and wolf hunting and trapping
3. do you support hunting with a semi type rifle or shotgun
4. do you support grizzly hunting in WY
5. is there any type of hunting season or species that we should stop hunting ?

The list reads more like a pre-qualification screening for admittance to your campfire group.

 

[88man]

The list reads more like a pre-qualification screening for admittance to your campfire group.

good one, no really, pretty much all welcome at my fire unless their heart is evil. Im 99% sure we are all here because of the love and protection of public lands. However, I do believe a few on here have motives and endorsements far beyond public land hunting. They are here to see what you and I are willing to compromise on and give up> whats "not needed".
Why?? its more than their personal beliefs.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

you never answered the question?
Now some new questions>
1. do you support trapping?
2. do you support coyote and wolf hunting and trapping
3. do you support hunting with a semi type rifle or shotgun
4. do you support grizzly hunting in WY
5. is there any type of hunting season or species that we should stop hunting ?

Not sure why I'm under fire lol, I'm just saying politics isn't as simple as us and them and national parties are not synonymous with special interest groups. The NRA is in fact not the republican part, and PETA is not the Democrats

1.


2. I sucked at coyote and at wolf trapping and never got one... I'm a beginner... plus I'm kinda a bear guy much to my wife's dismay... she isn't happy about 4 bear rugs... but yeah I've purchased a pocket full of wolf tags.


3. Was looking at a getting a semi Beretta yesterday... but I love the look of an O/U... hmmmm decisions, oh sorry got distracted thinking of fine grain wood. Um yeah whatever gun you wanna hunt with

4. Well I applied for the tag... so... unless I'm fighting a major case of cognitive dissonance...

5. I don't think the open season on people that think differently than us is particularly helpful or constructive.

 

[88man]

Not sure why I'm under fire lol, I'm just saying politics isn't as simple as us and them and national parties are not synonymous with special interest groups. The NRA is in fact not the republican part, and PETA is not the Democrats

1.
View attachment 115811View attachment 115812

2. I sucked at coyote and at wolf trapping and never got one... I'm a beginner... plus I'm kinda a bear guy much to my wife's dismay... she isn't happy about 4 bear rugs... but yeah I've purchased a pocket full of wolf tags.
View attachment 115814

3. Was looking at a getting a semi Beretta yesterday... but I love the look of an O/U... hmmmm decisions, oh sorry got distracted thinking of fine grain wood. Um yeah whatever gun you wanna hunt with

4. Well I applied for the tag... so... unless I'm fighting a major case of cognitive dissonance...

5. I don't think the open season on people that think differently than us is particularly helpful or constructive.

good to see & hear. IMO I love the beretta semis for everything NON goose type hunting then I like the Benelli non gas for a goose gun. All other the beretta is the bomb, my girlfriend just bought the explor 400 in 12ga and I think it kicks less than a 20ga. Trap/sporting clays/skeet go with the OU. If your a big guy over 6 foot 1 brownings fit best, under 5 10 berettas seem to fit best.
I have friends that love bear hunting over all else.
enjoy!

 

[Deleted member 28227]

good to see & hear. IMO I love the beretta semis for everything NON goose type hunting then I like the Benelli non gas for a goose gun. All other the beretta is the bomb, my girlfriend just bought the explor 400 in 12ga and I think it kicks less than a 20ga. Trap/sporting clays/skeet go with the OU. If your a big guy over 6 foot 1 brownings fit best, under 5 10 berettas seem to fit best.
I have friends that love bear hunting over all else.
enjoy!

Good to know, seems like I'm probably in the beretta category...

Bears are my, "if you could only hunt one thing for the rest of your life species", love the meat, the hides, skulls, the diversity of their habitats high alpine, sea side, deserts, just a cool critter. I love my time behind the glass checking them out.

Check out most recent podcast, with Yvon Chouinard... that podcast is specifically what I'm driving at, I bet Yvon tends to caucus with the dems... but damn if his relationship with wildlife and the environment is't as complicated and nuanced as everyone else on the forum. The small buckets of our political parties just don't hold the ocean of human experience.