Rokcast "end of hunting?"

[bayoublaster7527]

IP3 in Oregon is next level crazy.

“Wisten to the whythmic whythm of the woodwinds as it wowws awound and awound…and it comes out here!” — Elmer Fudd

Yep. It extends beyond just anti-hunting to full blown anti-agriculture.

 

[Tl15]

This thread is eye opening regarding the issues faced by other people in the country. I can’t help feeling like these struggles live mainly in states that have tons of public land the government can really lord over. Here in Texas, over 95% of our state is privately owned. I feel like that protects us from these crazy rules.
I also wish people would quit pushing the Texas is turning purple narrative. It’s flatly incorrect and just a scare tactic to funnel more blue collar money into Republican war chests.

 

[displacedtexan]

I also wish people would quit pushing the Texas is turning purple narrative. It’s flatly incorrect and just a scare tactic to funnel more blue collar money into Republican war chests.

3 of the 4 biggest cities have blue mayors, and the other one has a very progressive independent...

 

[Tl15]

3 of the 4 biggest cities have blue mayors, and the other one has a very progressive independent...

That means nothing when you look at state level elections which clearly show Texas as within its historical voter split, if not moving increasingly red as the minority population has continued to trend toward the Republican Party.

 

[displacedtexan]

That means nothing when you look at state level elections which clearly show Texas as within its historical voter split, if not moving increasingly red as the minority population has continued to trend toward the Republican Party.

But people talk about it turning purple because the population centers are becoming blue...

 

[Arthas]

Wrong. I am friends with plenty of progressives who are gun owners. A couple even have Class III stuff...

Things aren't black and white.

Look at the shades of gray and you'll be better able to understand, act and react.

Anyone with common sense understands the situation. We all understand there are a minor of democratic or progressive voters that are pro hunting and pro fire arm. The problem is that contigent of pro 2a and pro hunting progressives yield nearly 0 political power once progressives or democrats are in political control.

I am glad you like to hunt and like guns. But unfortunately, the trend is obvious. You can call shades of gray all you want. We all understand some progressives and demos like guns. I know some myself. I am not discounting their interests and opinions, but Washington, Oregon, California, Colorado, NY, Illinois are all amongst the most progressive states in the country. Every one of those states can be singled out as exceptionally hostile towards gun owners and hunters. Please direct me to the progressive hunting state that is the hunting and gun owning mecca you are referring to.

 

[Arthas]

That means nothing when you look at state level elections which clearly show Texas as within its historical voter split, if not moving increasingly red as the minority population has continued to trend toward the Republican Party.

This isn't a public land access issue. This is a do you want to be able to hunt certain species as a conservationist tool issue. Or hunt at all issue.

The danger in Washington is that it is deep blue and becoming hyper blue. So the anti hunting ideas being espoused there now will likely not change via the ballot box anytime soon.

 

[displacedtexan]

Anyone with common sense understands the situation. We all understand there are a minor of democratic or progressive voters that are pro hunting and pro fire arm. The problem is that contigent of pro 2a and pro hunting progressives yield nearly 0 political power once progressives or democrats are in political control.

I am glad you like to hunt and like guns. But unfortunately, the trend is obvious. You can call shades of gray all you want. We all understand some progressives and demos like guns. I know some myself. I am not discounting their interests and opinions, but Washington, Oregon, California, Colorado, NY, Illinois are all amongst the most progressive states in the country. Every one of those states can be singled out as exceptionally hostile towards gun owners and hunters. Please direct me to the progressive hunting state that is the hunting and gun owning mecca you are referring to.

So... You are missing my entire point.

 

[Arthas]

So... You are missing my entire point.

I posted at length back on page 3 about an example of the nuisance of the problem. i included exact language feom WA policy. Yet progressives are the very people that continue to push those policies which are an existential danger to conservation in this country and western civilization in general. Do you think those types of policies are good for conservation?

 

[Johnny Tyndall]

National groups have bigger fundraising nets, so all else equal I'd stick with the locals. They also (may) be better attuned to local issues and have local connections to get things done. That said, maybe just split the $ between both? Even if the dollar amount is small, it helps them to take positions "on behalf of our ## members."

Ok, listened to the podcast and I'd misunderstood how HOWL works, mainly that they don't speak on behalf of their members and that their whole deal is watching state-level issues. Seems easy to sign up for free, and a few bucks always helps to keep the lights on.

I'll also encourage people not to fall into black and white partisan thinking on this. I've spent a lot of time around environmental nonprofits, from the majors to the regionals, and I haven't known any of them to be anti-hunting, personally or professionally. There are obviously true anti-hunting groups, but the ones I've talked to see hunting as a way to bridge the partisan divide and find common ground to advance shared interests. I wouldn't write them off as tactical allies.

 

[Stalker69]

Hunting as we know it will come to an end. I would say maybe not in my grandsons life, but I would be willing to bet in his kids life it will no longer exist. They are whittling away at it right now, and to think its going to stop or get better, is wishful thinking. Something as simple as CWD jumping the species barrier to humans, will be fuel to the fire.

 

[eye_zick]

And that is exactly how they get us. "It's less than 10%," so what's the big deal? Are you going to wait to be pissed until they ban fall bear as well? Do you really think they'll stop at the spring season? Doesn't matter if it's 1%, a ban is a ban is a ban.

Same was said here in CA regarding trapping. The excuse to ban was there was only a minute number of trapping licenses sold per year. Maybe so but, it was an important part of those guys hunting/trapping season.

Just wait until it's, "Only a tiny fraction of elk are killed during archery season, so..."

So much complacency, it's really astounding.

I don't get how you can extrapolate "the end of hunting" because of one season being reduced. That doesn't make me complacent. I dont agree with WA state removing the tags, but economically there was little displaced. These facts don't equate the extremism of the phrase, "end of hunting"

Let me guess. You live in either Sun Valley, Boise, or McCall. That's usually where all the liberal transplants end up.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

haha. not even close. SE Idaho born and raised.

If you are trying to make the point that the majority of self-described “liberals”, “progressives” and/or “the left” don’t have an anti-hunting agenda, then I agree.

That's all I've tried to say... obviously the Humane Society, PETA etc have extreme anti-hunting agendas.
but as you stated most dont agree with the agenda. Most still eat meat

These folks are some of the greatest supporters of habitat preservation and improvement. Echo chambers aren’t productive, as hunters we need thoughtful dialogue and engagement. I also agree that it won’t be a single outright ban on hunting; it will be a long, slow erosion of individual big game seasons (predators first) with no science-based justification. But if you cannot see a clear anti-hunting agenda taking root in Washington, Oregon, and Colorado then you are just in denial.

I am well aware as I have many friends who live there. For context - I have previously stated I don't agree with having a FG commissioner appointed by the governor, and commissioners appointed by the director bc of this very thing. but wanting to change that makes me a liberal apparently...

Ban on mountain lion hunting in Colorado was proposed in the legislature but defeated in 2022. It will be proposed again in 2024 with likely more support as Dems increased their majority in the 2022 elections. If defeated they will put a mountain lion (possibly black bear too) hunting ban on the ballot in the fall. This will happen, this is not fear-mongering. Wildlife conservation organizations are already aware of the proposals and ballot initiative filings. A CPW Commissioner even mentioned it in a recent CPW commission meeting, open to the public. In closing, I really hope I am wrong on this and in ten years you can classify me as a full-blown category 5 alarmist, “chicken little”, and fear-monger. Nothing would make me happier.

It's something we should all be concerned with and take active stance against, but certainly isnt an "end of hunting" bc there is a clear agenda that will eliminate all forms of all hunting in 10 years as is alluded to in the podcast OP refers to.

You're all for points systems too, aren't you?

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

oh because hunting is immune to supply and demand issues. Oprahs policy is very sustainable as we continue to have reduction of herds.

I am extremely wary of organizations that collect money to benefit a cause. Whatever cause. Many of them start out with good intentions, but as soon as large sums of money are involved, things tend to get muddy at best. There are numerous organizations out there that have been fraught with corruption on even the noblest of causes. Wounded Warrior foundation comes to mind, American Heart Assocation is another. I tend to keep my circles small, and try to direct my efforts on a personal level.

YES! Question and doubt everything. right? IATA

Eye_zick here is a good analogy that I think may stick for you…

Not all Republicans want to ban abortion.
It doesn’t matter that they have out right bans in several states or they severely limit it in some states. You are still able to do it in a lot of places…. It will never get fully banned. It’s a scare tactic to try and get money “fear mongering” if you will.

Does it start to hit home now?

I think this is a good start to how I see it: not all republicans want to ban abortion, but all republicans still voted for the party that banned abortion, expanded govt, and created a govt policy of dictating your medical rights. But your exactly right, the party dividing on the idea of abortion was a major source of income for both parties.

It also doesnt take a rocket scientist to see which side of the political spectrum those that want to ban hunting generally fall on.

It also doesn't take a degree in statistics to see that 5 points of data over 5 decades is insufficient proof of a clear anti-hunting agenda. But then again I suppose that would make me a stupid liberal liberal bc I want facts and data, but all you see is opposition to a pro-republican belief. When in reality I want to go beyond the sensationalism of "end of hunting" and talk about whether this exists in fact or in a scheme where someone is vying for your time and money. Especially given that HOWL has 0 transparency on finances.

 

[displacedtexan]

I'll also encourage people not to fall into black and white partisan thinking on this. I've spent a lot of time around environmental nonprofits, from the majors to the regionals, and I haven't known any of them to be anti-hunting, personally or professionally. There are obviously true anti-hunting groups, but the ones I've talked to see hunting as a way to bridge the partisan divide and find common ground to advance shared interests. I wouldn't write them off as tactical allies.

I don't understand why this is so complicated for so many people.

 

[CorbLand]

I don't get how you can extrapolate "the end of hunting" because of one season being reduced. That doesn't make me complacent. I dont agree with WA state removing the tags, but economically there was little displaced. These facts don't equate the extremism of the phrase, "end of hunting"

haha. not even close. SE Idaho born and raised.

That's all I've tried to say... obviously the Humane Society, PETA etc have extreme anti-hunting agendas.
but as you stated most dont agree with the agenda. Most still eat meat

I am well aware as I have many friends who live there. For context - I have previously stated I don't agree with having a FG commissioner appointed by the governor, and commissioners appointed by the director bc of this very thing. but wanting to change that makes me a liberal apparently...


It's something we should all be concerned with and take active stance against, but certainly isnt an "end of hunting" bc there is a clear agenda that will eliminate all forms of all hunting in 10 years as is alluded to in the podcast OP refers to.

oh because hunting is immune to supply and demand issues. Oprahs policy is very sustainable as we continue to have reduction of herds.

YES! Question and doubt everything. right? IATA

I think this is a good start to how I see it: not all republicans want to ban abortion, but all republicans still voted for the party that banned abortion, expanded govt, and created a govt policy of dictating your medical rights. But your exactly right, the party dividing on the idea of abortion was a major source of income for both parties.

It also doesn't take a degree in statistics to see that 5 points of data over 5 decades is insufficient proof of a clear anti-hunting agenda. But then again I suppose that would make me a stupid liberal liberal bc I want facts and data, but all you see is opposition to a pro-republican belief. When in reality I want to go beyond the sensationalism of "end of hunting" and talk about whether this exists in fact or in a scheme where someone is vying for your time and money. Especially given that HOWL has 0 transparency on finances.

Ironically, I never said one thing about what political party you support nor did I say anything about mine…but what ever allows you to sleep at night.