ALERT - ACTION REQUIRED: Sportsmen’s Act Will Soon Face A Vote

[bearpaw]

I am fed up with government expanding spending and control, so I have a very hard time with this bill when I hear it’s going to cost money and there is talk about a new commission. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the bill, I have been too busy to take the time to read this bill. If any of you have read it maybe you can help me understand why I should support more spending and control?

-  Why is there a $140 million price tag for this bill?
-  Where is the $145 million in funding coming from?
-  What is the $140 Million being used for?
-  Who is paying the $145 Million and how?
-  What new government commissions is being created?
-  What will the new government commission be regulating?

Can anyone please explain why I should bite the carrot being dangled in my face and support this bill, thanks in advance for any help in understanding this bill better?

[JLS]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3525/text


Link to the bill.

[JLS]

I am fed up with government expanding spending and control, so I have a very hard time with this bill when I hear it’s going to cost money and there is talk about a new commission. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the bill, I have been too busy to take the time to read this bill. If any of you have read it maybe you can help me understand why I should support more spending and control?

-  Why is there a $140 million price tag for this bill?
-  Where is the $145 million in funding coming from?
-  What is the $140 Million being used for?
-  Who is paying the $145 Million and how?
-  What new government commissions is being created?
-  What will the new government commission be regulating?

Can anyone please explain why I should bite the carrot being dangled in my face and support this bill, thanks in advance for any help in understanding this bill better?

Because it appropriates money for 1) public land access easements, 2) new shooting ranges and/or expanding rebuilding old ones.

The 145 million is projected to come from increased price of the federal duck stamp.

As I said in other thread on this, if you have the opportunity to spend money to make money you should.  Particularly when there are benefits to be had from doing so. 

Rejecting "government" just because it's government is silly.  This does not expand government, it simply creates some really good opportunity for the sportsmen of this country.

[JLS]

More updates:

PUBLIC LANDS:
Proposed budget fix could revive Tester sportsmen's package
Phil Taylor, E&E reporter
Published: Friday, November 30, 2012
A Montana senator has proposed adding a crop insurance provision to his sportsmen's bill to bring it into compliance with budget law.

Democrat Jon Tester has offered to add a "sodsaver" amendment to S. 3525, a package of 17 bills that would conserve wetlands, expand funding for shooting ranges and increase recreational access to public lands, among many other provisions.

According to a Senate aide, Tester made the offer to Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who on Monday raised a point of order blocking the bill, arguing that it violates the Budget Control Act of 2011 (E&E Daily, Nov. 27).

Tester said Monday he would have to find an additional $140 million to offset the bill's duck stamp provision, even though the Congressional Budget Office found that the bill would reduce the deficit by $5 million over the next decade.

Tester's proposal, according to the aide, would add a sodsaver provision that was included in the Senate's farm bill by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) before it was marked up last April by the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee.

The amendment, which is supported by sportsmen and conservationists, would reduce insurance premium supports and other subsidies when farmers kill off native grasslands to turn them into production. It would save about $175 million, more than enough to make up for the duck stamp costs, the aide said.

A Sessions aide last night said he had not seen the sodsaver proposal but that the senator remains committed to working with Tester to fix the bill.

Tester last night filed a placeholder amendment to the fiscal 2013 defense authorization bill. If Sessions agrees to the fix, the amendment would be swapped out with the revised sportsmen's bill.

The National Audubon Society, National Rifle Association and National Catholic Rural Life Network supported the sodsaver language when it was offered as an amendment to the House farm bill by Reps. Tim Walz (D-Minn.) and Kristi Noem (R-S.D.).

"I have guns, Gods and greens all behind this one," Walz said at the time, though he later withdrew the amendment amid opposition from Texan and Oklahoman representatives.

Supporters say the provision is particularly important for habitat vulnerable to crop conversions in the Northern Plains' prairie pothole region, including much of the Dakotas, eastern Montana, Iowa and Minnesota, which provides important nesting grounds for ducks and other birds.

Sportsmen and conservation groups continue to lobby hard for Tester's package, which is backed by the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, the National Rifle Association, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, the Nature Conservancy and dozens of other organizations.

"Senators should take advantage of this rare opportunity to act on a bill that has bipartisan and broad support," said Bob Bendick, director of U.S. government relations for the Nature Conservancy.

The bill is opposed by the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, the Humane Society of the United States and some Democrats who have opposed language prohibiting U.S. EPA from regulating lead ammunition and for allowing a few dozen polar bear carcasses to be imported into the United States (Greenwire, Nov. 26).
__________________

[bearpaw]

Rejecting "government" just because it's government is silly.  This does not expand government, it simply creates some really good opportunity for the sportsmen of this country.

I would suggest that rejecting "government" just because it's government is "prudent thinking". Anyone with an inkling of finanacial wisdom can see the mess that "government" has gotten this country into. 

With that said, thanks for providing the info that you did. I took the time to briefly look at the bill's language. I see they are creating a National Fish Habitat Board. That concerns me but is not a deal killer. I am concerned that the amount of price increase on duck stamps is not specified. Overall, after reading the language I am more optimistic about the bill and could support it after reading it. There are several very good things in the bill, I am anxious to see the revised language before jumping on it blindly.

[JLS]

I would suggest that rejecting "government" just because it's government is "prudent thinking". Anyone with an inkling of finanacial wisdom can see the mess that "government" has gotten this country into. 

I hope that people that don't like hunting don't reject my thoughts and ideas simply because I'm a hunter.  I'd like them to hear them and judge them on merit, not my associations.

I see rejecting government in the same manner as counterproductive.  YMMV.

[huntrights]

 
This just in from the NRA-ILA:

http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2012/act-now-to-stop-epa-from-regulating-your-ammunition.aspx

"You Must Act Now to Stop the EPA from Regulating Your Ammunition

Posted on November 30, 2012

Just over two weeks ago, the U.S. Senate voted 84-12 to advance S. 3525, "The Sportsmen's Act of 2012."  However, this week, by a 50-41 vote, the bill suffered a setback when the Senate failed to clear a procedural hurdle and move on to finish work on the bill.  There is still time to get this critically important legislation passed, but you must act now!

S. 3525 is an essential piece of legislation focused on the expansion and enhancement of hunting, recreational fishing and shooting on federal public land.  But it's more than that.

Of critical importance is the fact that, in addition to promoting land access, S. 3525 would amend the "Toxic Substances Control Act" to prevent this and future administrations from using the Environmental Protection Agency to eliminate the right of hunters, shooters and anglers to use traditional ammunition and fishing tackle.  The bill would amend the law to clarify that the EPA does not have the authority to regulate shot, bullets or sport fishing equipment.

The bill also allows for the importation of polar bears legally taken from approved populations in Canada before the 2008 ban.

S. 3525 could come up for a vote at any time, so please act now to secure support for this critically important bill that would prevent the EPA from regulating your ammunition!  Please contact your U.S. Senators TODAY and ask them to support S. 3525.

You can find contact information for your U.S. Senators by using the "Write your Representatives" tool at www.NRAILA.org. You may also contact your Senators by phone at (202) 224-3121."

[SCRUBS]

I wasn`t speculating anything so I fixed it for ya

I received no replies from Cantwell or Murray (again I didn`t request one either).

I can speculate.

Murray urges passage of Sportsmen’s Bill, Calls on Republicans to Follow Rhetoric with Real Proposals

(Washington, D.C.) – Today, Wednesday, November 28th, U.S. Senator Patty Murray delivered a speech on the Senate floor to call on her colleagues to pass Senate Bill 3525, the Sportsmen’s Act of 2012. The bill would enact a series of measures designed to ease restrictions on hunters and sportspeople throughout the United States.

“I am disappointed that my Republican colleagues have chosen to ignore an overwhelming number of Americans who support the reasonable, common sense proposals in this bill. Because Democrats are strongly in favor of passage, we will continue to fight for the hard working gun owners, hunters, and sportspeople in our country, and ask the Republicans to do the same. Unfortunately, Republicans have once again chosen to pander to the wealthiest Americans and right wing supporters including Bain Capital, Mitt Romney, George Bush, and Sarah Palin in an effort to divide our country.”

[huntrights]

Because of some of the concerns raised in this forum post, Senator Tester's office was contacted directly to ensure the information was straight from the source.  Here are the applicable parts of the responses from Senator Tester's Press Secretary:

"... We appreciate you pushing back against the falsehoods about the bill.  The fact of the matter is that the bill saves money.  Negotiations are still going on ..."

"... As far as costs, there is no truth whatsoever to the claims about $140 million taxpayer liability.  The duck stamp provision is expected to raise $132 million, but of course that is done by voluntary purchases.  Additionally, the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act Reauthorization saves $5 million...."

Please refer to the attachments to gain a better understanding of what this Bill means to us.

[bearpaw]

JLS, I asked some rather important questions regarding this bill and had hoped for some simple answers. A couple of your replies were probably not the most productive replies to build my support for the bill.


jshunt maybe you can help, I cannot remember once that Cantwell & Murray have agreed with or supported any request that I have sent them asking for their support of any hunting or firearms issue. The fact they are reportedly supporting this bill raises red flags. Why are they supporting this bill and why are republicans who normally support hunting and firearms not actively supporting this bill? I think this is a fair question to ask.

I quickly read through the bill online and on the surface there are a number of positives, I have said I might support this bill, but I would also like to know how much they plan to charge for duckstamps to fund this bill and the new Fish Habitat Board? Thanks for any info you can provide.

[JLS]

JLS, I asked some rather important questions regarding this bill and had hoped for some simple answers. A couple of your replies were probably not the most productive replies to build my support for the bill.


jshunt maybe you can help, I cannot remember once that Cantwell & Murray have agreed with or supported any request that I have sent them asking for their support of any hunting or firearms issue. The fact they are reportedly supporting this bill raises red flags. Why are they supporting this bill and why are republicans who normally support hunting and firearms not actively supporting this bill? I think this is a fair question to ask.

I quickly read through the bill online and on the surface there are a number of positives, I have said I might support this bill, but I would also like to know how much they plan to charge for duckstamps to fund this bill and the new Fish Habitat Board? Thanks for any info you can provide.

Why?  Because I pointed out an anti-government bias in your logic that we shouldn't spend money to make money, while at the same time reaping benefits as sportsment?

Look at the groups that have worked to lobby for and support this bill.  It is an ecclectc mix to say the least.  John Tester has a strong record of supporting hunters and fishermen.  I for one do not believe for a second that he would sell us a wolf in sheep's clothing.

I believe the increase on the duck stamp is ten bucks.

Before the election, this bill received overwhelming support across the Senate.  It is partly line politics pure and simple.

[bearpaw]

JLS, I asked some rather important questions regarding this bill and had hoped for some simple answers. A couple of your replies were probably not the most productive replies to build my support for the bill.


jshunt maybe you can help, I cannot remember once that Cantwell & Murray have agreed with or supported any request that I have sent them asking for their support of any hunting or firearms issue. The fact they are reportedly supporting this bill raises red flags. Why are they supporting this bill and why are republicans who normally support hunting and firearms not actively supporting this bill? I think this is a fair question to ask.

I quickly read through the bill online and on the surface there are a number of positives, I have said I might support this bill, but I would also like to know how much they plan to charge for duckstamps to fund this bill and the new Fish Habitat Board? Thanks for any info you can provide.

Why?  Because I pointed out an anti-government bias in your logic that we shouldn't spend money to make money, while at the same time reaping benefits as sportsment?

Look at the groups that have worked to lobby for and support this bill.  It is an ecclectc mix to say the least.  John Tester has a strong record of supporting hunters and fishermen.  I for one do not believe for a second that he would sell us a wolf in sheep's clothing.

I believe the increase on the duck stamp is ten bucks.

Before the election, this bill received overwhelming support across the Senate.  It is partly line politics pure and simple.

So now you are labeling me as anti-government simply because I want to know how much this bill grows government and what the cost will be?

[huntrights]

JLS, I asked some rather important questions regarding this bill and had hoped for some simple answers. A couple of your replies were probably not the most productive replies to build my support for the bill.


jshunt maybe you can help, I cannot remember once that Cantwell & Murray have agreed with or supported any request that I have sent them asking for their support of any hunting or firearms issue. The fact they are reportedly supporting this bill raises red flags. Why are they supporting this bill and why are republicans who normally support hunting and firearms not actively supporting this bill? I think this is a fair question to ask.

I quickly read through the bill online and on the surface there are a number of positives, I have said I might support this bill, but I would also like to know how much they plan to charge for duckstamps to fund this bill and the new Fish Habitat Board? Thanks for any info you can provide.

When there is such a split down party lines, it would appear to be a play in partisan political football.  One article stated, "... Republicans voted not to move forward on S. 3525 citing they were adamantly against giving the Secretary of the Interior the ability to increase the duck stamp price $10...."

http://dscdaily.com/partisan-politics-wins-sportsmen-lose-sportsmens-act-of-2012-fails-to-advance-senate/

However, I don't know where they got their information.

Negotiations continue, so all of us in the sporting community should continue to push for the passage of S.3525. I say this because at least 46 national sportsmen and conservation organizations that represent millions of hunters, anglers, and wildlife enthusiasts support this Bill.  We need to place some trust in the guidance from these organizations that represent us.  Several of them have been communicating to their members with an urgent request asking the membership to please continue to contact their senators urging them to vote YES on the Sportsmen's Act of 1012 (S.3525).  Here is a list of the organizations I am aware of that support this legislation.

* American Fisheries Society * American Fly Fishing Trade Association * American Sportfishing Association * Archery Trade Association * Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies * B.A.S.S. LLC * Bear Trust International * Berkley Conservation Institute * Boone and Crockett Club * Campfire Club of America * Catch-A-Dream Foundation * Center for Coastal Conservation * Coastal Conservation Association * Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation * Delta Waterfowl Foundation * Ducks Unlimited * International Game Fish Association * International Hunter Education Association – United States of America * Masters of Foxhounds Association * Mule Deer Foundation * National Marine Manufacturers Association * National Rifle Association * National Shooting Sports Foundation * National Trappers Association * National Wild Turkey Federation * North American Bear Foundation * North American Grouse Partnership * Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association * Orion The Hunter’s Institute * Pheasants Forever * Pope & Young Club * Public Lands Foundation * Quail Forever * Quality Deer Management Association * Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation * Ruffed Grouse Society * Shimano * Sportsman’s Alliance for Alaska * Texas Wildlife Association * The Conservation Fund * Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership * Trout Unlimited * Whitetails Unlimited * Wild Sheep Foundation * Wildlife Forever * Wildlife Management Institute *

We may not get another chance like this, so please don't get wrapped up in the political brinkmanship.

"The Sportsmen’s Act of 2012 is a compilation of bills that will expand, enhance and protect America’s hunting, recreational fishing and shooting heritage."

Please contact your senators and urge them pass this legislation. 

Please also reference the attachments in my post from 11-30-12 for further clarification. 

[blackdog]

I support the Bill, with reservations. USFWS has developed a strong anti consumptive user culture and I hope the Bill reins them in somewhat.

[csaaphill]

wow sounds like some on here are the same crowd that helped stop hound hunting. you hunt why would someone not like this bill?
As for me I am Anti Gov, but that doesn't mean I'm all cracked. It just means I'm ever watchfull of Gov, and hate most things that give them more power. Lol links been here since before Reg modern season and is now getting a lot of traffic? This bills good as far as I can see the only reservation I have is the polar bear part, but other than that I see no real issues.