Share on Facebook subscribe feed
1 Replies | Page 1 of 11 | Top of Page | Bottom of Page

Remove the Green Filter

by , Posted to on 10/23/2009 10:11 PM | "Quote" | "Quick Reply" |

Joined: 05/24/2008
Location: ND

 

Tuesday, October 20, 2009


Remove the Green Filter And . . .    [Frank Miniter]

Perhaps you saw the recent Reuters article "U.S. hunters, anglers lobby for climate bill," which disingenuously insinuates that most hunting-conservation groups support so-called comprehensive global-warming legislation. This recent push by some hunter-conservation groups to join the global-warming debate, as it has been explained to me, is tactical.

Since Teddy Roosevelt reinvented the American sportsmen, hunters and anglers have been at the forefront of the conservation movement in the U.S. Through taxes on their guns and ammo and fees for their licenses, sportsmen pay for most conservation in this country. Environmentalists don't pay those taxes when they buy spandex mountain-biking shorts or REI water bladders. Nor do they do the on-the-ground work that hunters and anglers do for fish and wildlife. So it's no surprise that they're looking to sportsmen for validation.

Needless to say, a pro-conservation agenda does not coincide with a conventionally green agenda. Consider that the National Rifle Association and Safari Club International have argued against claims that the polar bear is in danger from global warming and have opposed the recent U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rule change to ban the importation of legally hunted Canadian polar-bear skins. Hunter-conservationists understand that such regulatory efforts are self-defeating. Polar-bear hunting has given local native populations an economic incentive to coexist with polar bears, and hunters' money has added millions of dollars to polar-bear conservation. Studies have shown that polar-bear populations have been growing for decades — including the hunted populations. Ending the importation of polar-bear skins harms polar-bear conservation.

So why do
hunter-conservation groups want a seat at the table in Washington with greens — who, despite their posturing, seem not to understand how best to protect wildlife and the environment? I asked George Cooper, president of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, why they were entering the global-warming debate. He said, "We want to be certain some of the money spent on this issue goes to help wildlife." That's a pragmatic Beltway position; the downside, of course, is that left-wing journalists and environmental groups can claim they have support from what are seen as typically conservative groups. Articles such as this Reuters piece, then, are spin. Wanting a seat at the table is not an industry-wide endorsement of the green agenda — and certainly not an endorsement of the socialist's wet dream that is cap-and trade.

Frank Miniter is the author of
The Ultimate Man's Survival Guide and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Hunting.

Re: Remove the Green Filter
by on 10/23/2009 10:28 PM | Reply #1 | "Quote" | "Quick Reply" |

Joined: 05/24/2008
Location: ND
1 Replies | Page 1 of 11 | Top of Page | Bottom of Page
Posted By:
Posted On: 10/23/2009 10:11 PM
38 Views, 1 Comments

Tags: remove, filter, u.s, recent, hunters, anglers, frank, miniter, reuters, 0
More Tags: Reuters, George Cooper, Washington, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, United States, Environmental Issue, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Rifle Association, Teddy Roosevelt, Frank Miniter, president, author, The Politically Incorrect Guide, Environment
Region: North Dakota

Categories: Other > Politics
Rate This ForumTopic
  • Currently 0/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

0/5 (0 votes cast)

You must be signed in to comment on this topic





Total Outdoor Network
TON Sites | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use



North Dakota Fishing and Hunting | Minnesota Fishing and Hunting | Wisconsin Fishing and Hunting | Nebraska Fishing and Hunting | Walleye Fishing | South Dakota Fishing and Hunting | Alaska Fishing and Hunting |