Bowsite.com

FWIW Stix, has the BHA took a official position on this. Pubically? If they have, I’ve yet to see it because that warm and fuzzy letter they sent Michael was nothing more then a post on bowsite for its value. Until it’s a public statement against the reintroduction in CO.

“to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially with reference to the inalienable right of the individual American citizen guaranteed by such Constitution to acquire, possess, collect, exhibit, transport, carry, transfer ownership of, and enjoy the right to use arms.”

How does that compare to a pseudo-pro hunter public land access group? Oh, pretty sure the NRA's financials aren't quite as obscure or redacted as BHA's.

Oh, and for the record, I despise how the NRA lended support to the x-gun industry and forced them on PA.

Looked at the bastion of transparency called BHA. You know, vague pie charts and blacked out donor names on the 990's. Head up your ass, indeed. You must have one helluva an upper body....carrying all that water for BHA.

KS,

Relevance?

You think the NRA is transparent? They aren’t transparent they just go caught...in Russian lol.

Come on. The NRA and BHA do good things for hunting. I don’t understand why that is so painful for you.

We are talking about the silence of the NRA, you know the Organization that is constantly held up as the bastion of freedom, hard at work protecting American Hunters. If your answer to the NRA's silence and continued neglect of hunters ( well in fairness they don't neglect hunters when they want to fleece them for more donations) is that its the fault of BHA . You very well might be suffering from BHA derangement syndrome. See you primary care doctor who can direct you to resources that maybe able to help you cope with this horrible affliction.

NRA Life Member here

I have literally never heard the NRA described as such.

"No organization does more to support hunters than the National Rifle Association."

"As the legislative, legal and political arm of the NRA, the Institute For Legislative Action has a long history of protecting hunting by advocating for hunting opportunities and stopping anti-hunting laws and regulations. Stay up-to-date on hunting legislation and look up hunting laws in each state with NRA-ILA."

"The Fight To Save Hunting In hunting’s darkest hour, only the NRA has the muscle and the backbone to reject the animal rights extremists. "

asking for money.... "The Fight To Save Hunting In hunting’s darkest hour, only the NRA has the muscle and the backbone to reject the animal rights extremists. Donation amounts"

"Hunting Resources From Around The NRA Find hunting laws for your state, up-to-the-minute hunting news, and more, brought to you by the strongest advocate of hunting in the world."

Big difference between the mission statements of BHA and the NRA.

BHA first line of their mission state: "Backcountry Hunters & Anglers seeks to ensure North America's outdoor heritage of hunting"

NRA mission statement is “to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially with reference to the inalienable right of the individual American citizen guaranteed by such Constitution to acquire, possess, collect, exhibit, transport, carry, transfer ownership of, and enjoy the right to use arms.”

You see BHA has to ensure the heritage of hunting front and center. Yet they don't see the effect or more likely don't care the effect wolves will have on our hunting heritage.

With the NRA I want them focusing on my constitutional rights to keep and bear arms. I don't wanted them in the weeds focusing on wolves in CO. I agree with drycreek at times the NRA has lost their way or gotten into the weeds but I will still send them dollars as they do it better than most.

That’s the full mission statement. I think you left some things out or you’re just being disingenuous. Wolves in Colorado does not mean we are losing public land or waters.

Way to take it out of context.

By the way, I’m not your enemy. Misinformation on this site is the enemy.

How can that be? I just don’t believe the BS that wolves mean the end of elk and deer hunting in the West.

Let me explain this one more time. What the BHA did was send a response to an email. To an individual. This is not a public statement of where the organization stands on wolf reintroduction in CO. It is just a mission statement of what they claim to stand for. You and others can twist it as you like. But, that is all it is at this point.

I will say, I applaud the BHA for answering Michael. Its more then the NRA has done for my attempts. Honestly though, I never figured the BHA wouldn't respond to his letter. I also applaud them admitting they dropped the ball on this initiative. It was definitely not expected to hear that. However, what you or anyone can't do, is claim this is the public stance the BHA has made on this topic. If it is, please inform us all to a link providing the formal statement. If not, your only intent is to be provocative while knowingly misleading others while doing so.

Where are we going to be if what you have heard is right concerning the NRA and the STW coalition? I'll tell you. We will be exactly where we were when you started this thread. The BHA will not have yet spoken against it pubically. While the NRA has. What will be your response then?

I do find it absolutely hilarious that you started this thread with the intent to trash an organization for not pubically taking a stand on this issue but, have ended up having to tell your fellow hunters to be patient while we wait on your preferred group. While the organization you was bashing has apparently taken a stand on this issue.

Stix, I'm not in denial of anything. On this thread and Michael's original thread, I have given credit where it was due. And, not where it wasn't. I also expressed my feelings about the lack of response from the NRA as well. What do you want me to do? Lick the boot heels of the BHA because they wrote an email saying they believe ballot initiatives isn't a good example of wildlife management? Gheez man, Nobody alive that knows anything about resource management believes any different. And every adult alive understands that typing a response to an email saying so isn't a formal public statement by any organization. Come on man!

As I said, up to this point neither organization has made a formal PUBLIC statement of where they stand concerning this. All we have is a mission statement from an organization you prefer. And, the funny part is, based on your words, a commitment from the organization you attempted to bash, to take a public stand in favor of hunters. These are the facts as we know it if you weren't lying about what you had been told concerning the NRA and the STW coalition. Aside from being ironic as all get out, it is hilarious to see your attempted mud slinging back fire.

FWIW, I'm not calling you a liar. Nor am I suggesting that I know the stance either organization will take. I'm simply being honest.

“We do believe that wolves are necessary for the ecosystem,” Moore said, outside a gift shop of wolf-themed memorabilia. “The ecosystems cannot support how many elk and deer we have, and over time we’re going to start to see a degradation of ecosystems due to that.”

Some proponents claim introducing wolves could help alleviate Colorado’s issue with Chronic Wasting Disease, a neurological disease affecting elk, deer, and moose. It results in slow degeneration and eventual death.

Catherine Herzog, wildlife chair for the Pikes Peak group of the Sierra Club, was trying recently to persuade voters to sign petitions outside the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo in Colorado Springs. “Half the herd of deer in the state of Colorado are infected with Chronic Wasting Disease,” she said. The CPW’s Ferrell confirmed that about half the deer herds in the state have CWD, explaining that a herd is considered infected if at least one animal in the group has tested positive for the disease. In elk, she said, up to one third of herds have been found to have CWD, which, again, means that at least one animal in the group has tested positive.

But, some opponents argue that the disease would still be spread through feces. Opponents and proponents cite different sources for their claims.

“To date,” says Jennifer Strickland, public affairs specialist for the Mountain-Prairie region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “there is no empirical evidence to support or refute” either position.

For Montana Democratic State Sen. Mike Phillips, a biologist who serves as director of the Ted Turner Endangered Species Fund and who has been involved in wolf restoration advocacy since 1995, reintroducing wolves here is about more than just Colorado, it’s about public lands across the country.

“The gray wolf remains fully protected under federal law. Consequently, its conservation future is relevant to all Americans,” he said in an Oct. 23 phone interview on his way to give a public talk in Denver about the wolf reintroduction battle. “This is a national issue.”

Wolves, he argues, have the capacity to inspire humans to be better. “How can you stand by and watch something you love be needlessly destroyed without rising up in defense?” he asks. If science makes clear that the “fate of humanity” is determined by the health of local landscapes, he argues, introducing wolves are both a symbol and a solution.

Others want to bring the wolf back to Colorado because it is the last state within the animal’s historic range that does not have them. To these supporters of reintroduction, it’s imperative that Colorado restore wolves, connecting the missing puzzle piece between the Arctic and the Mexican border.

There is something else: Plenty of voters might just like the romantic image of a wolf out there in the Colorado wilderness howling from a mountaintop. Some even believe “wolf tourism” could be a thing.

K'

In Idaho, 30,000 wolf hunters take about 150 wolves a year. We can't trap they can. They keep growing in population.

"Jason is a principled leader with tremendous field vision and political savvy. He has a strong campaign background and more than 15 years playing pivotal roles in all the NRA’s legislative accomplishments and victories. Our five million members and America’s gun owners have the strongest ally and the best advocate in Jason," said LaPierre.

On his permanent appointment, Ouimet said, "I thank Wayne and the NRA leadership for entrusting me with a post so crucial to America’s freedom. Backed by millions of patriotic NRA members, NRA-ILA is the foremost defender of our Second Amendment, the safeguard of freedom itself. To every NRA member and gun owner in this country, I pledge that our defense will never waver on my watch."

Ouimet has embraced increasing responsibilities and higher-profile roles during his time with NRA. As director of federal affairs at the NRA-ILA since 2015, Ouimet was responsible for overseeing and implementing the NRA's federal legislative and political agenda. Between 2010 and 2015, Ouimet served as the deputy director of the NRA’s federal affairs department. Ouimet began his career with the NRA in 2005 as a federal affairs lobbyist, where he was responsible for the states of Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, New York and New Jersey.

Prior to joining the NRA, Ouimet served as a legislative assistant for Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia.

Ouimet also worked as a senior research analyst at the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Prior to that, in 1999, Ouimet moved to Washington D.C. for a job at the Republican National Committee where he conducted field research for President George Bush's 2000 presidential campaign.

Ouimet earned his Bachelor of Arts from Kent State University in 1999.

K'

The Rock Mt Wolf Project announced that they foresaw as many as 500 wolves in western Colorado based on their view of habitat and prey resource. So let say, in 20 years there are actually 300-400 wolves in Colorado if the prowolfers have their days in court== 300-400 wolves kill at least 10 elk per year, == 3000-4000 dead elk. In areas where low elk calf recrutement exists, wolves may cause a much long recovery.

Colorado has spent millions on the Colorado Moose herd that now is estimated at 3300 state wide. There is a fear and rightly so, once the wolf is established in Colorado, the moose population will be affected greatly over time. Hunters and non hunter love to see moose in Colorado and more than 25,000 hunters apply for a moose license each year with the low odds of drawing, only 1-2 percent.

Any lost of livestock, regardless of predator, bear, coyote, lion, or wolf , is surely a hardship on the ranchers and any $$$ competition will surely come from the Big Game Cash Fund (license fees) and not from and designated State fund. Dollars that the CPW can surely spend elsewhere. Maybe even give the, in the field CO a raise!

I understand that some might over exaggerate big game population loss per the wolf, and the end of hunting as we know it, but with a combination of 6,000,000 people in Colorado,, the millions spent on habitat and growing/managing the 10 big game species (thousands of animals) here in Colorado, the millions of dollars supporting the hunting industry, we surely do have a concern that by needlessly adding one more apex predator into Colorado is not a good deal for the wolf, for its citizens, for its livestock producers. my best, Paul

We can't trap, hunting success rates suck!! We will be there someday. Look at Idaho 1500 wolves right now, can't kill them fast enough with trapping, 30,000 wolf hunters, 15 tags per hunter and now a 12 month freaking season. Guess we can pay millions to USDA wildlife services to try to kill them, but I doubt aerial gunning will gain public acceptance in liberal CO, and doubt it would work in forested regions.

Jon also has some fascinating comments about "the science" and how it is all driven by greed for grant money/funding. You want some science to support the agenda? Write the check to academia. Interestingly, He also has some thoughts on BHA

https://sportsmensnation.com/big-game/wolf-reintroduction-to-colorado-with-jon-keehner-phd

The folks in Idaho who expected to live with 10 breeding pairs (100-150 wolves) after introduction probably thought that having 1500 20 years later sounded pretty far fetched.

The 2A speaks to the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Doesn't specify what kind...

Colorado does not have a wolf management plan that I know of, but they do have a guide line, White Paper, from the Colorado Wolf Working Group that addresses migrating wolves into Colorado. you can read this paper by looking up, CPW resolution 16-01, Wolf working group.

K~

Go for a little hike outside Krakow and you may not come back. The Germans on the border and they are true "blue headed wood boogers", have started Operation Wolf Blitzkrieg as they're getting bad in that area. Guess they figgered it was all good until they started eating the refugees! It was all fine eating Germans but soon as they turned on the refugees the Merkel Monkees could not have that!

K'

The folks in VA are on NRA boat now. If VA counties are talking of suceeding to WV you know they are jumping on with NRA.

K