Jump to content
Flatlander

Conserve and Protect Meeting 4/23/2018

Recommended Posts

Read that last week, a buddy from Virginia shares links on national conservation issues. Thought some context in the article was topical to this local issue, but nobody seems to want to explore current avenues available. Folks want to invent something new, different, to put their name on.

 

Anyway, the article is about hunter retention and the PR funds. The new language will definitely clear up some gray area, but even now some of the funds should be able to be used in a campaign of public awareness to educate 'potential' new hunters.

 

P-R also requires USFWS to allocate at least $8 million a year for enhanced hunter education programs and public shooting ranges. Yet the segment of P-R allocations dedicated to sustaining the shooting sports is a topic of growing debate, particularly as the number hunters decline.

 

Kent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read that last week, a buddy from Virginia shares links on national conservation issues. Thought some context in the article was topical to this local issue, but nobody seems to want to explore current avenues available. Folks want to invent something new, different, to put their name on.

 

Anyway, the article is about hunter retention and the PR funds. The new language will definitely clear up some gray area, but even now some of the funds should be able to be used in a campaign of public awareness to educate 'potential' new hunters.

 

P-R also [/size]requires USFWS to allocate at least $8 million a year for enhanced hunter education programs and public shooting ranges. Yet the segment of P-R allocations dedicated to sustaining the shooting sports is a topic of growing debate, particularly as the number hunters decline.[/size]

 

Kent[/size]

I agree that the language will definitely clear up some gray areas. Part of the problem, and something that needs to be addressed, is that the plan isn't necessarily about hunter recruitment, but rather educating the 70 percent of Arizona population that has no clue how we all contribute, and how conservation is largely dependant on hunter dollars.

 

The language in HR 2591 would provide a clear path to that type of public education without exposing the department to litigation from animal rights groups that would claim Game and Fish is misusing P and R funds. In essence, this Bill could make this whole conversation go away, and we all get back to hunting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True and I'll be watching the progress of this bill. The 70% of people who are neither anti or actively for hunting, are the potential hunters of tomorrow, and should be targeted for positive exposure to wildlife management by hunting campaigns. Our issues are multifaceted, and hunter decline therefore retention is a bigger part of our conservation/critter org support/G&F support/ballot box support/anti hunter fight... We have to build the base back up or no amount of money from whatever source will buy folks positions.

 

Critter orgs complain few will help them, they can't get volunteers, they can't grow and it's others fault, they need money if they can't get people, money from the people that won't help them.

 

They aren't attractive to people the same way a complaining, blaming, demanding, self absorbed person is. No one owes them anything and there's no deserve in this life. Work hard, be attractive to others and ride out the inevitable hard times with fortitude.

 

The antis will definitely sue the tag money fund, they will want equal access to public funds to educate the public on their version of conserving and protecting wildlife.

 

Kent

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also interested in section (E) of HR 2591 that states "using any other means to ensure the growth of hunting.." Is that to mean that P and R funds could be used in legal battles to combat attacks against hunting? Lots to think about with this Bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am missing the overall tone here but what is the main objective of the education push

So that people know what the G&F actually does and how big of a roll hunters actually play in the conservation of animals. Hopefully then the voting public that doesn't hunt or know hunters won't fall for the humane society lies.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am missing the overall tone here but what is the main objective of the education push

the objective is to educate the masses on how hunter dollars are directly responsible for conservation in Arizona, and how Game and Fish uses those funds. As it is, Arizona has the second largest urban population in the nation, and is estimated that 70 percent have no clue of the relationship between hunter dollars and conservation.

 

That is how groups like HSUS are able to prey upon social ignorance with terms like "trophy hunting". The general public has no idea, and even some hunters. Polling from HSUS revealed public sentiment is not on our side, and that needs to be reversed if we ever hope to attempt another Constitutional right to hunt and fish, like we did in 2010 and it failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those last two posts are the BS being spread by people who want tags sold to the highest bidder.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading so much BS over the past 2 weeks I'm ready for hsus to take hunting away and I'll support them to spite nefarious red

I'm sure you would. But I'm not quite ready to let HSUS take away any more of our heritage over difference of opinion or the inability to come up with reasonable solutions. If you are serious about continuing to act like a petulant child instead of helping, I can give you Kellye Pinkleton phone number and you can get signed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok my thread, so you guys need to contribute or post elsewhere.

 

This thread is for information and or solutions. Dont bother telling us what you wont do. Bring something to the table.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×