Conservation NW and BHA

[dwils233]

Radical environmentalist corporations according to this thread:
Sitka
mystery ranch
STone Glacier
Danner
Cooper firearms
Kimber
Ferderal Premium
First Lite
Weatherby
Onx Hunt
gohunt
Leupold

Also radical environmentalists who guide BHA on the board of directors
Ryan Callaghan
t, Edward Nickens (editor at large field & stream)

and holds the radical environmentalists as prominent life members
Steve Rinella
Donald Trump Jr
Randy Newberg



but because they might ocassionally agree on a policy issue with a environmental group, or win a grant from a trust that also gives money to a group we don't like, BHA is out to destroy and end hunting! I just don't understand this view, I'm yet to hear a strong explanation of this concept

[idahohuntr]

Do we abort the Mule Deer Foundation because CNW partners with them too?

The examples are literally endless if we fall for this insanity that you can not ever agree on anything with another group because then it means you are aligned on everything else with them.

[jackelope]

Do we abort the Mule Deer Foundation because CNW partners with them too?

Are they going to have the owner of Patagonia come speak at their annual meeting?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No idea, Grundy.

[andersonjk4]

While I may not agree with every aspect of BHA and every member, I still feel they do a very good job in their stated mission. They do not claim to be a group that is going to go out and fight for hunting. But does that make them anti-hunting. Yes some of their members/leaders may not be the best for hunting, but they must bring something else to the table that helps further their mission. Does everyone here who is a member and/or supporter of the NRA agree with every position that organization takes, or agree 100% with every member/leader/donor? NRA is notoriously silent when it comes to a lot of hunting issues. Does that make them Anti-hunting? I don’t agree with a lot of the stuff the NRA puts out and I’m sure if I dig into their list of leadership and donors I would find a lot of people and organizations I don’t agree with, does that mean I shouldn’t support them even though I think they do a good job at pursuing their overall mission? I support the NRA and I support BHA even though I don’t agree with 100% of what they both do. If we only support those groups we agree 100% with, the resources will be spread out so thin over so many little groups that the big issues will be lost to those who are more organized.

Here is a link to the BHA board of directors. Most of them are hunters and a few of them are very serious hunters. How can a company be anti-hunting when it’s board of directors is full of hunters?

https://www.backcountryhunters.org/board_of_directors

(Note: this post is not directed at anyone in particular. I am offering my thoughts on this issue as I have thought long and hard about this issue before choosing to support BHA. Every group has its “less than desirables”. It doesn’t mean the entire group reflects those same traits. Look no further than hunters as a group, a few bad apples sure gave give the whole group a black eye in a hurry).

[grundy53]

Radical environmentalist corporations according to this thread:
Sitka
mystery ranch
STone Glacier
Danner
Cooper firearms
Kimber
Ferderal Premium
First Lite
Weatherby
Onx Hunt
gohunt
Leupold

Also radical environmentalists who guide BHA on the board of directors
Ryan Callaghan
t, Edward Nickens (editor at large field & stream)

and holds the radical environmentalists as prominent life members
Steve Rinella
Donald Trump Jr
Randy Newberg



but because they might ocassionally agree on a policy issue with a environmental group, or win a grant from a trust that also gives money to a group we don't like, BHA is out to destroy and end hunting! I just don't understand this view, I'm yet to hear a strong explanation of this concept

Those companies have conservation NW spokesman on their boards?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[idahohuntr]

but because they might ocassionally agree on a policy issue with a environmental group, or win a grant from a trust that also gives money to a group we don't like, BHA is out to destroy and end hunting! I just don't understand this view, I'm yet to hear a strong explanation of this concept

Same here...I've yet to hear even a single reasonable explanation.  Just fear mongering innuendo by people who will never hold a candle to BHA members who are some of the biggest public land hunter advocates the world has ever known. 

[KFhunter]

I provided plenty of examples in the other thread which you promptly ignored, then buried under an avalanche of garbage posts and personal attacks.

[grundy53]

While I may not agree with every aspect of BHA and every member, I still feel they do a very good job in their stated mission. They do not claim to be a group that is going to go out and fight for hunting. But does that make them anti-hunting. Yes some of their members/leaders may not be the best for hunting, but they must bring something else to the table that helps further their mission. Does everyone here who is a member and/or supporter of the NRA agree with every position that organization takes, or agree 100% with every member/leader/donor? NRA is notoriously silent when it comes to a lot of hunting issues. Does that make them Anti-hunting? I don’t agree with a lot of the stuff the NRA puts out and I’m sure if I dig into their list of leadership and donors I would find a lot of people and organizations I don’t agree with, does that mean I shouldn’t support them even though I think they do a good job at pursuing their overall mission? I support the NRA and I support BHA even though I don’t agree with 100% of what they both do. If we only support those groups we agree 100% with, the resources will be spread out so thin over so many little groups that the big issues will be lost to those who are more organized.

Here is a link to the BHA board of directors. Most of them are hunters and a few of them are very serious hunters. How can a company be anti-hunting when it’s board of directors is full of hunters?

https://www.backcountryhunters.org/board_of_directors

(Note: this post is not directed at anyone in particular. I am offering my thoughts on this issue as I have thought long and hard about this issue before choosing to support BHA. Every group has its “less than desirables”. It doesn’t mean the entire group reflects those same traits. Look no further than hunters as a group, a few bad apples sure gave give the whole group a black eye in a hurry).

If the NRA had a spokesman from the Brady campaign on their board I would question them too. I was a member of BHA but decided to let my membership lapse. I just never felt comfortable with them. To me they just give off a con man vibe.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[grundy53]

Radical environmentalist corporations according to this thread:
Sitka
mystery ranch
STone Glacier
Danner
Cooper firearms
Kimber
Ferderal Premium
First Lite
Weatherby
Onx Hunt
gohunt
Leupold

Also radical environmentalists who guide BHA on the board of directors
Ryan Callaghan
t, Edward Nickens (editor at large field & stream)

and holds the radical environmentalists as prominent life members
Steve Rinella
Donald Trump Jr
Randy Newberg



but because they might ocassionally agree on a policy issue with a environmental group, or win a grant from a trust that also gives money to a group we don't like, BHA is out to destroy and end hunting! I just don't understand this view, I'm yet to hear a strong explanation of this concept

Those companies are making way more money off of BHA members than they are donating.  It's business.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[KFhunter]

Randy Newberg and Steve Rinella are great hunters and advocates for hunting, that said they are also elite hunters that need big wild open spaces to make great TV, that doesn't necessarily align with multiple use public lands for the average hunter and outdoor recreationist...it just wouldn't do to have a truck or ATV drive through the set would it? 

I also think they like the idea of more wilderness, they don't run cattle, or mine for minerals, or work in the logging industry.  They want to reach as many people as possible and sell their TV for the most amount of money possible..aligning with various groups like BHA, RMEF, SCI and others helps achieve those financial goals. 

I don't take my voting que's from hollywood actors or NFL players. 

[dwils233]

Radical environmentalist corporations according to this thread:
Sitka
mystery ranch
STone Glacier
Danner
Cooper firearms
Kimber
Ferderal Premium
First Lite
Weatherby
Onx Hunt
gohunt
Leupold

Also radical environmentalists who guide BHA on the board of directors
Ryan Callaghan
t, Edward Nickens (editor at large field & stream)

and holds the radical environmentalists as prominent life members
Steve Rinella
Donald Trump Jr
Randy Newberg



but because they might ocassionally agree on a policy issue with a environmental group, or win a grant from a trust that also gives money to a group we don't like, BHA is out to destroy and end hunting! I just don't understand this view, I'm yet to hear a strong explanation of this concept

Those companies are making way more money off of BHA members than they are donating.  It's business.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

until BHA succeeds in its mission to end hunting...then they make no money. The logic doesn't hold. it would be like a for profit energy company creating and giving away cold fusion....

[grundy53]

Radical environmentalist corporations according to this thread:
Sitka
mystery ranch
STone Glacier
Danner
Cooper firearms
Kimber
Ferderal Premium
First Lite
Weatherby
Onx Hunt
gohunt
Leupold

Also radical environmentalists who guide BHA on the board of directors
Ryan Callaghan
t, Edward Nickens (editor at large field & stream)

and holds the radical environmentalists as prominent life members
Steve Rinella
Donald Trump Jr
Randy Newberg



but because they might ocassionally agree on a policy issue with a environmental group, or win a grant from a trust that also gives money to a group we don't like, BHA is out to destroy and end hunting! I just don't understand this view, I'm yet to hear a strong explanation of this concept

Those companies are making way more money off of BHA members than they are donating.  It's business.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

until BHA succeeds in its mission to end hunting...then they make no money. The logic doesn't hold. it would be like a for profit energy company creating and giving away cold fusion....

Never said it was their mission to end hunting. But I guess if you are too busy having pint nights and discussing how you are going to save the wilderness from those evil Republicans you might not actually get much done.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[grundy53]

but because they might ocassionally agree on a policy issue with a environmental group, or win a grant from a trust that also gives money to a group we don't like, BHA is out to destroy and end hunting! I just don't understand this view, I'm yet to hear a strong explanation of this concept

Same here...I've yet to hear even a single reasonable explanation.  Just fear mongering innuendo by people who will never hold a candle to BHA members who are some of the biggest public land hunter advocates the world has ever known.

Don't hurt your shoulder patting yourself on the back...

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[KFhunter]

Huh?

No,  BHA's mission is to gather up as many names as they can to throw behind legislation they support, like the quite waters initiative blocking access to waterfowlers and hunters alike who used the river system to access hunting areas. 

If BHA had been successful this hunt would be illegal.

[idahohuntr]

but because they might ocassionally agree on a policy issue with a environmental group, or win a grant from a trust that also gives money to a group we don't like, BHA is out to destroy and end hunting! I just don't understand this view, I'm yet to hear a strong explanation of this concept

Same here...I've yet to hear even a single reasonable explanation.  Just fear mongering innuendo by people who will never hold a candle to BHA members who are some of the biggest public land hunter advocates the world has ever known.

Don't hurt your shoulder patting yourself on the back...

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Talking about Rinella and Newberg in case that wasn't crystal clear.