Free: Contests & Raffles.
Quote from: JasonG on May 25, 2016, 06:01:40 PMStrange BHA anti Gun, They give you one when you become a life member! I was just about to join BHA years ago. I figured they would've been more the advocacy I would've preferred. At about the same time I heard of the group, there was an issue that popped up near the coast called the Wild Olympics Campaign. The campaign was trying to shift a bunch of acreage to the national park (unhuntable). BHA was along with the campaign, being touted along as how it was going to be a great deal for all the forest, fish, wildlife and animals and even hunters and anglers were supporting the cause. But it would've eliminated HUNTING !!! on a lot of land. I just can't seem to want to back a group that makes bed fellows with the left.
Strange BHA anti Gun, They give you one when you become a life member!
BTW- the fact that Land Tawney supports President Obama is fine with me. I do too. The fact that we supported Tester in Mt is GREAT with me. Otherwise there would be more flammable water pouring into rural residents kitchen sinks.... seriously- we need to have some hunters that care about the environment.
I'm sorry, but what in the world does it matter if you are liberal or conservative? Didn't know protecting public lands, gun rights, hunting rights, etc., was exclusive to one party
This is an interesting topic and very frustrating. My money sits on the sidelines because it takes so much work to find a place to spend it that actually supports my beliefs. Just my hunting group alone has a ton of money going nowhere.NRA - No thanks. They hung Washington out to dry to sell membership in less liberal places IMO. The send more trash junk mail than a membership is worth asking for more. Done with them for now.RMEF - Do they still support wilderness expansion?? Didn't they partner up with the Sierra club on a few projects only to have the Sierra club claim RMEF supporters as members way back? BHA - LOL! Fools.. We have enough wilderness!! It's the gateway drug to "Park" = No hunting. You're naïve to think anything else IMO. SCI - I have no clue but the (I) really bothers me. It should be (L) for local. I need to research them, ignorance on me here.Bottom line is thanks to all in the know in this thread. I need a place to spend some money for the cause and so does my hunting group and you have inspired me to get back involved. We gave up.
Here's our problem as I see it, SCI is incorrectly perceived as being a club for rich white guys that go on safari hunts in Africa.
Quote from: bearpaw on May 26, 2016, 07:25:24 AMQuote from: WAcoyotehunter on May 26, 2016, 07:07:21 AMQuote from: bearpaw on May 25, 2016, 05:36:39 PMQuote from: WAcoyotehunter on May 25, 2016, 04:24:02 PMI wasn't being coy, I was being honest. The timber industry can't access much of the proposed land anyway and has supported the wilderness. The conservation groups have also fought for increased yield on the forest. That is the point of a collaborative effort.Dale can you explain how and where BHA is "very close" to CNW? It's untrue. Some local people do want more wilderness... remember that I live and work here too. We also want more logging and industry. We can have both, and more trails and recreation opportunity. There is enough forest for everyone. For decades green groups have been stopping logging, mining, public access, and forcing more and more wilderness on Americans, this is no secret, it needs to stop. "We have enough land of no use".Thankyou for agreeing that we need more logging. Green groups have caused logging to be almost non-existent on federal lands this has hurt rural Washington. I honestly know of very few local residents who want more wilderness. Most of that seems to come from groups like CNW and BHA!If you do a google search this is some of what you find about BHA:http://libertynews.com/2016/01/exposed-backcountry-hunters-who-protested-standoff-and-ripped-down-temporary-sign-at-oregon-refuge-are-bankrolled-by-big-foreign-special-interest-money/QuoteIn this case, the money trail leads us to a nasty reality. While it’s likely that a vast majority of the members of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers don’t support policies and regulations that give the federal government more extraordinary power, they need to know the organization itself is completely bankrolled by billionaires who want government control over all backcountry land.And yes, even foreign billionaires.How do we know? Simple. Just take a look at their financial disclosures.The most recent financial disclosure reveals an avalanche of money that starting flowing in back in 2011. In 2011 the organization had only $30,000 coming in from grants. In 2013, just two years later, the group took in a haul of $492,000 in grant money.Wyss Foundation – $300,000 (Additional $50,000 from Wyss Action)The Wyss Foundation exists thanks to 79 year old Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss. To date the Wyss Foundation has dropped a stunning $350 million into various radical environmentalist groups, most of which is designed to mold land use policy in Washington, D.C., and Western states.What kind of policy? The kind that keeps Americans from farming, ranching, building or conducting commerce on backcountry land. The kind that makes for certain the government is constantly gaining more land and more control over land.Wilburforce Foundation – $30,000It’s important to note that Wilburforce Foundation gave Backcountry Hunters & Anglers their first infusion of cash back in 2011. The Wilburforce 2011 grant of $30,000 was the first grant the group ever had and the only grant they received in 2011.What is the agenda of Wilburforce? If you guessed keeping humans away from large swaths of land by keeping it in control of the fed, you would be correct.Backcountry Hunters and Anglershttps://www.greendecoys.com/decoys/backcountry-hunters-and-anglers/Here are more numbers regarding BHA's major donors. What's important is to look at who is being funded by who: BHA, Earthjustice, Greenpeace, just to name a few! Read and watch for yourself: QuoteAlong with receiving nearly $280,000 in 2011 and 2012 from the Western Conservation Foundation—which also funds Natural Resources Defense Council and Earthjustice (the “law firm of the environment”)—BHA has received $165,000 from the Wilburforce Foundation in recent years, a Seattle group that also funds Greenpeace, the Sierra Club Foundation, and others. BHA also received $100,000 from the wealthy, radical, San Francisco-based Hewlett Foundation and nearly $60,000 from the environmentalist Pew Charitable Trusts for “policy” in 2012/13.“Backcountry Hunters and Anglers is just one of several groups funded by Big Green that trips over itself to brag about its ‘sportsmen’ credentials while advocating left-wing interests,” said Coggin. “BHA is nothing more than a new shade of camo to hide an environmentalist agenda.”BHA is one of several “sportsmen” groups that takes substantial money from Big Green. The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) gets 77% of its contributions from just 8 donors, much of it from San Francisco-area environmentalist foundations. Trout Unlimited, which helped form TRCP, has taken tens of millions of dollars from San Francisco-area foundations that want to shut down major energy sources in America. The Izaak Walton League of America, meanwhile, has taken millions from anti-energy activists, including the anti-gun, Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, on whose board President Barack Obama sat for 8 years.To learn more about environmentalist front organizations and their wealthy funders, visit www.GreenDecoys.com. To schedule an interview, please contact Alex Fitzsimmons at (202) 420-7875 or fitzsimmons@environmentalpolicyalliance.orgRead more: http://www.ammoland.com/2014/08/irs-complaint-targets-backcountry-hunters-anglers/#ixzz49iNN3xLX I answered your questions. Please answer these three questions:If this land we speak about in NE WA is already off limits to development then why does it need to become wilderness?Do you agree with closing the roads that are proposed to be closed as part of the wilderness deal in NE WA?How much wilderness is enough?Of course industry wants to discredit BHA. Who do you suppose put the Green Decoy stuff together? See if you can find much about that group.... you won't, because it's Rick Berman, a 'hired gun' for big industry that wants to develop everything. BHA has taken an open position about protecting public lands from unsustainable development. We support timber/mining/liquid mineral when it's done properly. Industry could absolutely not care less about wildlife or our hunting; BHA took a position against that and stepped on their toes. They hired Berman to discredit us among hunters and appear to be "antis" in some way. The funding sources are interested in protecting public land too. I'm not sure that it's a terrible thing that HUNTERS align some with CONSERVATIONISTS.... after all, without habitat we won't be hunting at all. If BHA gathers 500k from a group that might otherwise give it to some anti hunting group, I guess that should go in the 'win category'.Thank you for your response. We have established where large parts of BHA funding comes from and it's known that Land Tawney (representing BHA) openly supports Barack Obama (who wants to take away our guns) and other left wing politicians who's policies would likely limit hunting, I'm sorry but this is why I can't get on the BHA bandwagon. If these green groups are supporting BHA then it appears BHA is aligned with them enough to cause concern and appears to be a green decoy as charged in the video.UNANSWERED QUESTIONS:If this land we speak about in NE WA is already off limits to development then why does it need to become wilderness?Do you agree with closing the roads that are proposed to be closed as part of the wilderness deal in NE WA?How much wilderness is enough?Just curious. What is the primary reason you're opposed to this piece of land becoming wilderness?
Quote from: WAcoyotehunter on May 26, 2016, 07:07:21 AMQuote from: bearpaw on May 25, 2016, 05:36:39 PMQuote from: WAcoyotehunter on May 25, 2016, 04:24:02 PMI wasn't being coy, I was being honest. The timber industry can't access much of the proposed land anyway and has supported the wilderness. The conservation groups have also fought for increased yield on the forest. That is the point of a collaborative effort.Dale can you explain how and where BHA is "very close" to CNW? It's untrue. Some local people do want more wilderness... remember that I live and work here too. We also want more logging and industry. We can have both, and more trails and recreation opportunity. There is enough forest for everyone. For decades green groups have been stopping logging, mining, public access, and forcing more and more wilderness on Americans, this is no secret, it needs to stop. "We have enough land of no use".Thankyou for agreeing that we need more logging. Green groups have caused logging to be almost non-existent on federal lands this has hurt rural Washington. I honestly know of very few local residents who want more wilderness. Most of that seems to come from groups like CNW and BHA!If you do a google search this is some of what you find about BHA:http://libertynews.com/2016/01/exposed-backcountry-hunters-who-protested-standoff-and-ripped-down-temporary-sign-at-oregon-refuge-are-bankrolled-by-big-foreign-special-interest-money/QuoteIn this case, the money trail leads us to a nasty reality. While it’s likely that a vast majority of the members of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers don’t support policies and regulations that give the federal government more extraordinary power, they need to know the organization itself is completely bankrolled by billionaires who want government control over all backcountry land.And yes, even foreign billionaires.How do we know? Simple. Just take a look at their financial disclosures.The most recent financial disclosure reveals an avalanche of money that starting flowing in back in 2011. In 2011 the organization had only $30,000 coming in from grants. In 2013, just two years later, the group took in a haul of $492,000 in grant money.Wyss Foundation – $300,000 (Additional $50,000 from Wyss Action)The Wyss Foundation exists thanks to 79 year old Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss. To date the Wyss Foundation has dropped a stunning $350 million into various radical environmentalist groups, most of which is designed to mold land use policy in Washington, D.C., and Western states.What kind of policy? The kind that keeps Americans from farming, ranching, building or conducting commerce on backcountry land. The kind that makes for certain the government is constantly gaining more land and more control over land.Wilburforce Foundation – $30,000It’s important to note that Wilburforce Foundation gave Backcountry Hunters & Anglers their first infusion of cash back in 2011. The Wilburforce 2011 grant of $30,000 was the first grant the group ever had and the only grant they received in 2011.What is the agenda of Wilburforce? If you guessed keeping humans away from large swaths of land by keeping it in control of the fed, you would be correct.Backcountry Hunters and Anglershttps://www.greendecoys.com/decoys/backcountry-hunters-and-anglers/Here are more numbers regarding BHA's major donors. What's important is to look at who is being funded by who: BHA, Earthjustice, Greenpeace, just to name a few! Read and watch for yourself: QuoteAlong with receiving nearly $280,000 in 2011 and 2012 from the Western Conservation Foundation—which also funds Natural Resources Defense Council and Earthjustice (the “law firm of the environment”)—BHA has received $165,000 from the Wilburforce Foundation in recent years, a Seattle group that also funds Greenpeace, the Sierra Club Foundation, and others. BHA also received $100,000 from the wealthy, radical, San Francisco-based Hewlett Foundation and nearly $60,000 from the environmentalist Pew Charitable Trusts for “policy” in 2012/13.“Backcountry Hunters and Anglers is just one of several groups funded by Big Green that trips over itself to brag about its ‘sportsmen’ credentials while advocating left-wing interests,” said Coggin. “BHA is nothing more than a new shade of camo to hide an environmentalist agenda.”BHA is one of several “sportsmen” groups that takes substantial money from Big Green. The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) gets 77% of its contributions from just 8 donors, much of it from San Francisco-area environmentalist foundations. Trout Unlimited, which helped form TRCP, has taken tens of millions of dollars from San Francisco-area foundations that want to shut down major energy sources in America. The Izaak Walton League of America, meanwhile, has taken millions from anti-energy activists, including the anti-gun, Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, on whose board President Barack Obama sat for 8 years.To learn more about environmentalist front organizations and their wealthy funders, visit www.GreenDecoys.com. To schedule an interview, please contact Alex Fitzsimmons at (202) 420-7875 or fitzsimmons@environmentalpolicyalliance.orgRead more: http://www.ammoland.com/2014/08/irs-complaint-targets-backcountry-hunters-anglers/#ixzz49iNN3xLX I answered your questions. Please answer these three questions:If this land we speak about in NE WA is already off limits to development then why does it need to become wilderness?Do you agree with closing the roads that are proposed to be closed as part of the wilderness deal in NE WA?How much wilderness is enough?Of course industry wants to discredit BHA. Who do you suppose put the Green Decoy stuff together? See if you can find much about that group.... you won't, because it's Rick Berman, a 'hired gun' for big industry that wants to develop everything. BHA has taken an open position about protecting public lands from unsustainable development. We support timber/mining/liquid mineral when it's done properly. Industry could absolutely not care less about wildlife or our hunting; BHA took a position against that and stepped on their toes. They hired Berman to discredit us among hunters and appear to be "antis" in some way. The funding sources are interested in protecting public land too. I'm not sure that it's a terrible thing that HUNTERS align some with CONSERVATIONISTS.... after all, without habitat we won't be hunting at all. If BHA gathers 500k from a group that might otherwise give it to some anti hunting group, I guess that should go in the 'win category'.Thank you for your response. We have established where large parts of BHA funding comes from and it's known that Land Tawney (representing BHA) openly supports Barack Obama (who wants to take away our guns) and other left wing politicians who's policies would likely limit hunting, I'm sorry but this is why I can't get on the BHA bandwagon. If these green groups are supporting BHA then it appears BHA is aligned with them enough to cause concern and appears to be a green decoy as charged in the video.UNANSWERED QUESTIONS:If this land we speak about in NE WA is already off limits to development then why does it need to become wilderness?Do you agree with closing the roads that are proposed to be closed as part of the wilderness deal in NE WA?How much wilderness is enough?
Quote from: bearpaw on May 25, 2016, 05:36:39 PMQuote from: WAcoyotehunter on May 25, 2016, 04:24:02 PMI wasn't being coy, I was being honest. The timber industry can't access much of the proposed land anyway and has supported the wilderness. The conservation groups have also fought for increased yield on the forest. That is the point of a collaborative effort.Dale can you explain how and where BHA is "very close" to CNW? It's untrue. Some local people do want more wilderness... remember that I live and work here too. We also want more logging and industry. We can have both, and more trails and recreation opportunity. There is enough forest for everyone. For decades green groups have been stopping logging, mining, public access, and forcing more and more wilderness on Americans, this is no secret, it needs to stop. "We have enough land of no use".Thankyou for agreeing that we need more logging. Green groups have caused logging to be almost non-existent on federal lands this has hurt rural Washington. I honestly know of very few local residents who want more wilderness. Most of that seems to come from groups like CNW and BHA!If you do a google search this is some of what you find about BHA:http://libertynews.com/2016/01/exposed-backcountry-hunters-who-protested-standoff-and-ripped-down-temporary-sign-at-oregon-refuge-are-bankrolled-by-big-foreign-special-interest-money/QuoteIn this case, the money trail leads us to a nasty reality. While it’s likely that a vast majority of the members of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers don’t support policies and regulations that give the federal government more extraordinary power, they need to know the organization itself is completely bankrolled by billionaires who want government control over all backcountry land.And yes, even foreign billionaires.How do we know? Simple. Just take a look at their financial disclosures.The most recent financial disclosure reveals an avalanche of money that starting flowing in back in 2011. In 2011 the organization had only $30,000 coming in from grants. In 2013, just two years later, the group took in a haul of $492,000 in grant money.Wyss Foundation – $300,000 (Additional $50,000 from Wyss Action)The Wyss Foundation exists thanks to 79 year old Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss. To date the Wyss Foundation has dropped a stunning $350 million into various radical environmentalist groups, most of which is designed to mold land use policy in Washington, D.C., and Western states.What kind of policy? The kind that keeps Americans from farming, ranching, building or conducting commerce on backcountry land. The kind that makes for certain the government is constantly gaining more land and more control over land.Wilburforce Foundation – $30,000It’s important to note that Wilburforce Foundation gave Backcountry Hunters & Anglers their first infusion of cash back in 2011. The Wilburforce 2011 grant of $30,000 was the first grant the group ever had and the only grant they received in 2011.What is the agenda of Wilburforce? If you guessed keeping humans away from large swaths of land by keeping it in control of the fed, you would be correct.Backcountry Hunters and Anglershttps://www.greendecoys.com/decoys/backcountry-hunters-and-anglers/Here are more numbers regarding BHA's major donors. What's important is to look at who is being funded by who: BHA, Earthjustice, Greenpeace, just to name a few! Read and watch for yourself: QuoteAlong with receiving nearly $280,000 in 2011 and 2012 from the Western Conservation Foundation—which also funds Natural Resources Defense Council and Earthjustice (the “law firm of the environment”)—BHA has received $165,000 from the Wilburforce Foundation in recent years, a Seattle group that also funds Greenpeace, the Sierra Club Foundation, and others. BHA also received $100,000 from the wealthy, radical, San Francisco-based Hewlett Foundation and nearly $60,000 from the environmentalist Pew Charitable Trusts for “policy” in 2012/13.“Backcountry Hunters and Anglers is just one of several groups funded by Big Green that trips over itself to brag about its ‘sportsmen’ credentials while advocating left-wing interests,” said Coggin. “BHA is nothing more than a new shade of camo to hide an environmentalist agenda.”BHA is one of several “sportsmen” groups that takes substantial money from Big Green. The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) gets 77% of its contributions from just 8 donors, much of it from San Francisco-area environmentalist foundations. Trout Unlimited, which helped form TRCP, has taken tens of millions of dollars from San Francisco-area foundations that want to shut down major energy sources in America. The Izaak Walton League of America, meanwhile, has taken millions from anti-energy activists, including the anti-gun, Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, on whose board President Barack Obama sat for 8 years.To learn more about environmentalist front organizations and their wealthy funders, visit www.GreenDecoys.com. To schedule an interview, please contact Alex Fitzsimmons at (202) 420-7875 or fitzsimmons@environmentalpolicyalliance.orgRead more: http://www.ammoland.com/2014/08/irs-complaint-targets-backcountry-hunters-anglers/#ixzz49iNN3xLX I answered your questions. Please answer these three questions:If this land we speak about in NE WA is already off limits to development then why does it need to become wilderness?Do you agree with closing the roads that are proposed to be closed as part of the wilderness deal in NE WA?How much wilderness is enough?Of course industry wants to discredit BHA. Who do you suppose put the Green Decoy stuff together? See if you can find much about that group.... you won't, because it's Rick Berman, a 'hired gun' for big industry that wants to develop everything. BHA has taken an open position about protecting public lands from unsustainable development. We support timber/mining/liquid mineral when it's done properly. Industry could absolutely not care less about wildlife or our hunting; BHA took a position against that and stepped on their toes. They hired Berman to discredit us among hunters and appear to be "antis" in some way. The funding sources are interested in protecting public land too. I'm not sure that it's a terrible thing that HUNTERS align some with CONSERVATIONISTS.... after all, without habitat we won't be hunting at all. If BHA gathers 500k from a group that might otherwise give it to some anti hunting group, I guess that should go in the 'win category'.
Quote from: WAcoyotehunter on May 25, 2016, 04:24:02 PMI wasn't being coy, I was being honest. The timber industry can't access much of the proposed land anyway and has supported the wilderness. The conservation groups have also fought for increased yield on the forest. That is the point of a collaborative effort.Dale can you explain how and where BHA is "very close" to CNW? It's untrue. Some local people do want more wilderness... remember that I live and work here too. We also want more logging and industry. We can have both, and more trails and recreation opportunity. There is enough forest for everyone. For decades green groups have been stopping logging, mining, public access, and forcing more and more wilderness on Americans, this is no secret, it needs to stop. "We have enough land of no use".Thankyou for agreeing that we need more logging. Green groups have caused logging to be almost non-existent on federal lands this has hurt rural Washington. I honestly know of very few local residents who want more wilderness. Most of that seems to come from groups like CNW and BHA!If you do a google search this is some of what you find about BHA:http://libertynews.com/2016/01/exposed-backcountry-hunters-who-protested-standoff-and-ripped-down-temporary-sign-at-oregon-refuge-are-bankrolled-by-big-foreign-special-interest-money/QuoteIn this case, the money trail leads us to a nasty reality. While it’s likely that a vast majority of the members of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers don’t support policies and regulations that give the federal government more extraordinary power, they need to know the organization itself is completely bankrolled by billionaires who want government control over all backcountry land.And yes, even foreign billionaires.How do we know? Simple. Just take a look at their financial disclosures.The most recent financial disclosure reveals an avalanche of money that starting flowing in back in 2011. In 2011 the organization had only $30,000 coming in from grants. In 2013, just two years later, the group took in a haul of $492,000 in grant money.Wyss Foundation – $300,000 (Additional $50,000 from Wyss Action)The Wyss Foundation exists thanks to 79 year old Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss. To date the Wyss Foundation has dropped a stunning $350 million into various radical environmentalist groups, most of which is designed to mold land use policy in Washington, D.C., and Western states.What kind of policy? The kind that keeps Americans from farming, ranching, building or conducting commerce on backcountry land. The kind that makes for certain the government is constantly gaining more land and more control over land.Wilburforce Foundation – $30,000It’s important to note that Wilburforce Foundation gave Backcountry Hunters & Anglers their first infusion of cash back in 2011. The Wilburforce 2011 grant of $30,000 was the first grant the group ever had and the only grant they received in 2011.What is the agenda of Wilburforce? If you guessed keeping humans away from large swaths of land by keeping it in control of the fed, you would be correct.Backcountry Hunters and Anglershttps://www.greendecoys.com/decoys/backcountry-hunters-and-anglers/Here are more numbers regarding BHA's major donors. What's important is to look at who is being funded by who: BHA, Earthjustice, Greenpeace, just to name a few! Read and watch for yourself: QuoteAlong with receiving nearly $280,000 in 2011 and 2012 from the Western Conservation Foundation—which also funds Natural Resources Defense Council and Earthjustice (the “law firm of the environment”)—BHA has received $165,000 from the Wilburforce Foundation in recent years, a Seattle group that also funds Greenpeace, the Sierra Club Foundation, and others. BHA also received $100,000 from the wealthy, radical, San Francisco-based Hewlett Foundation and nearly $60,000 from the environmentalist Pew Charitable Trusts for “policy” in 2012/13.“Backcountry Hunters and Anglers is just one of several groups funded by Big Green that trips over itself to brag about its ‘sportsmen’ credentials while advocating left-wing interests,” said Coggin. “BHA is nothing more than a new shade of camo to hide an environmentalist agenda.”BHA is one of several “sportsmen” groups that takes substantial money from Big Green. The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) gets 77% of its contributions from just 8 donors, much of it from San Francisco-area environmentalist foundations. Trout Unlimited, which helped form TRCP, has taken tens of millions of dollars from San Francisco-area foundations that want to shut down major energy sources in America. The Izaak Walton League of America, meanwhile, has taken millions from anti-energy activists, including the anti-gun, Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, on whose board President Barack Obama sat for 8 years.To learn more about environmentalist front organizations and their wealthy funders, visit www.GreenDecoys.com. To schedule an interview, please contact Alex Fitzsimmons at (202) 420-7875 or fitzsimmons@environmentalpolicyalliance.orgRead more: http://www.ammoland.com/2014/08/irs-complaint-targets-backcountry-hunters-anglers/#ixzz49iNN3xLX I answered your questions. Please answer these three questions:If this land we speak about in NE WA is already off limits to development then why does it need to become wilderness?Do you agree with closing the roads that are proposed to be closed as part of the wilderness deal in NE WA?How much wilderness is enough?
I wasn't being coy, I was being honest. The timber industry can't access much of the proposed land anyway and has supported the wilderness. The conservation groups have also fought for increased yield on the forest. That is the point of a collaborative effort.Dale can you explain how and where BHA is "very close" to CNW? It's untrue. Some local people do want more wilderness... remember that I live and work here too. We also want more logging and industry. We can have both, and more trails and recreation opportunity. There is enough forest for everyone.
In this case, the money trail leads us to a nasty reality. While it’s likely that a vast majority of the members of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers don’t support policies and regulations that give the federal government more extraordinary power, they need to know the organization itself is completely bankrolled by billionaires who want government control over all backcountry land.And yes, even foreign billionaires.How do we know? Simple. Just take a look at their financial disclosures.The most recent financial disclosure reveals an avalanche of money that starting flowing in back in 2011. In 2011 the organization had only $30,000 coming in from grants. In 2013, just two years later, the group took in a haul of $492,000 in grant money.Wyss Foundation – $300,000 (Additional $50,000 from Wyss Action)The Wyss Foundation exists thanks to 79 year old Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss. To date the Wyss Foundation has dropped a stunning $350 million into various radical environmentalist groups, most of which is designed to mold land use policy in Washington, D.C., and Western states.What kind of policy? The kind that keeps Americans from farming, ranching, building or conducting commerce on backcountry land. The kind that makes for certain the government is constantly gaining more land and more control over land.Wilburforce Foundation – $30,000It’s important to note that Wilburforce Foundation gave Backcountry Hunters & Anglers their first infusion of cash back in 2011. The Wilburforce 2011 grant of $30,000 was the first grant the group ever had and the only grant they received in 2011.What is the agenda of Wilburforce? If you guessed keeping humans away from large swaths of land by keeping it in control of the fed, you would be correct.
Along with receiving nearly $280,000 in 2011 and 2012 from the Western Conservation Foundation—which also funds Natural Resources Defense Council and Earthjustice (the “law firm of the environment”)—BHA has received $165,000 from the Wilburforce Foundation in recent years, a Seattle group that also funds Greenpeace, the Sierra Club Foundation, and others. BHA also received $100,000 from the wealthy, radical, San Francisco-based Hewlett Foundation and nearly $60,000 from the environmentalist Pew Charitable Trusts for “policy” in 2012/13.“Backcountry Hunters and Anglers is just one of several groups funded by Big Green that trips over itself to brag about its ‘sportsmen’ credentials while advocating left-wing interests,” said Coggin. “BHA is nothing more than a new shade of camo to hide an environmentalist agenda.”BHA is one of several “sportsmen” groups that takes substantial money from Big Green. The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) gets 77% of its contributions from just 8 donors, much of it from San Francisco-area environmentalist foundations. Trout Unlimited, which helped form TRCP, has taken tens of millions of dollars from San Francisco-area foundations that want to shut down major energy sources in America. The Izaak Walton League of America, meanwhile, has taken millions from anti-energy activists, including the anti-gun, Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, on whose board President Barack Obama sat for 8 years.To learn more about environmentalist front organizations and their wealthy funders, visit www.GreenDecoys.com. To schedule an interview, please contact Alex Fitzsimmons at (202) 420-7875 or fitzsimmons@environmentalpolicyalliance.orgRead more: http://www.ammoland.com/2014/08/irs-complaint-targets-backcountry-hunters-anglers/#ixzz49iNN3xLX
I don't know how much wilderness is enough. it's not up to me to decide. you seem to think that we have enough.... i can walk across the Salmo Priest in one day (and have). So i can tell you that we currently do not have enough.
Sorry, but I continue to disagree. Plenty of liberal minded folks that hunt and fish and shoot.
I agree with Allen 100% regarding groups, if you own guns and hunt he has it exactly right. 1. NRA2. SCI3. Your favorite specialty group(s)I fully support keeping all our public lands publicly accessible as they currently are. I do not support expanding wilderness as it limits too many recreational users from using public land that they used to have access to. Every time you create new wilderness you force more users into a smaller accessible area. The problem with BHA, it was established by other left leaning groups who needed to figure out a way to get some hunters and anglers to support their underlying agenda. They came up with a catchy name and well meaning hunters have signed on not knowing the potential underlying ramifications. BHA wants to expand wilderness, sounds great but that really limits most Americans for the benefit of a few who most likely will never even see all of this wilderness in their lifetime. We have almost 110 million acres of wilderness in the US that most people can't or don't have the ability to access! How much wilderness do we need? I'd like to hear an honest answer to that question, "How much wilderness do we need?"It seems much wiser to carefully manage all the wild areas that we currently have and maintain access as we know it now with the current opportunities for all Americans to continue enjoying the outdoors the way we do now. I hate to see a bunch of physically fit young guys who are well intentioned, but who simply are not considering, realizing, or caring how their actions will impact millions of other Americans, many who are older or physically limited.Washington’s 31 wilderness areasWhen the Wilderness Act passed in 1964, three areas in Washington were awarded the status. Fifty years later, the state has 31 Wilderness Areas totalling 4.5 million acres.Read more here: http://www.thenewstribune.com/outdoors/article25878187.html#storylink=cpyList of U.S. Wilderness AreasFour federal agencies of the United States government administer the U.S. Wildernesses, which includes 759 Wildernesses and 109,754,604 acres (444,161.12 km2). These agencies are:United States Forest ServiceUnited States National Park ServiceUnited States Bureau of Land ManagementUnited States Fish and Wildlife ServiceThis is an area larger than Iraq or the state of California. Read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._Wilderness_Areas
I've really contemplated joining bha. Listening to Randy Newberg, Steve rinella, and the gritty bowman has almost convinced me. I agree with the basic philosophy, but every time I am about to pull the trigger I get uneasy. By the way I'm totally against the transfer of public land.Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk
