# Sportsmen Muscle



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Tony Dean Outdoors
Issues/with permission
Sportsmen Will Make a Difference in November

By Bob Marshall

It was Wednesday morning, and Sen. John Kerry was calling. He had an important point he wanted to make to hunters and anglers: "I think I do a better job of fighting for the rights of sportsmen than George Bush does," Kerry said.

Over the next 20 minutes the Democrats' presumptive presidential nominee gave detailed explanations for that claim based on now-familiar themes: He is a life-long hunter and angler, he has never voted to take away hunters' gun rights and -- most important -- he is much stronger on environmental protection, without which sportsmen would have little fish and game to pursue.

By the time Kerry had to get back on his campaign plane, I knew the interview revealed good news for sportsmen. Not because of the knowledge and passion Kerry displayed when discussing the issues; the man didn't win three terms to the U.S. Senate without being a convincing campaigner. Instead, it was the fact that he bothered to call at all.

Sportsmen and their issues may be back in play during a presidential election for the first time in decades. And that can only be good news for the future of fish and wildlife, and all other things that depend on a clean environment.

It was no accident that Kerry chose to wrap this Louisiana visit around sportsmen's environmental issues -- including a tour of Shell Beach's eroded marshes and a lunch with local anglers. The Democrat's photo-op came just two weeks after Bush had a raft of sportsmen's groups out to his Texas spread for a similar publicity event.

The sudden prominence of the hook-and-bullet crowd in this election is a direct result of what has been a serious revolt over the last year within the ranks of a community Republicans have taken for granted for more than 30 years. The sporting culture had long been suspicious of mainstream environmental groups -- "tree-huggers and granola crunchers" -- because they were championed by liberal politicians. To most sportsmen, "liberal" meant anti-gun, and anti-gun meant anti-hunter. So any administration could always count on the catch-and-kill folks to be in their column -- or at least silent -- when they squared off with environmental groups.

The Bush Administration may have changed that.

In its zeal to roll back environmental policies that have protected fish and wildlife habitat for a generation, this administration clearly misjudged today's educated sportsmen. Hunters and anglers have been outraged as oil and gas wells have spread across previously protected forests and prairies, as waterfowl wetlands have had Clean Water Act protections stripped, as blue-ribbon trout streams have been placed in the path of logging operations.

So when the presidential season got underway, the unthinkable happened. Not only have sportsmen been openly bolting the president, there are now "Sportsmen for Kerry" groups.

It's hard to overstate the importance of this change to the future of public hunting and fishing -- and the general health of our environment. For 50 years the two greatest forces in American conservation have been sportsmen and environmental groups. Hunters and anglers put up most of the money that paid for government programs rebuilding fish and wildlife populations, while the green groups worked in Washington to provide essential federal protections for the needed habitat.

But despite their obvious common interests, the two groups seldom worked together, instead buying into stereotypes that insisted they were mutual enemies, not brothers in arms. That friction was important to the moneyed interests who oppose tough environmental regulations and even the idea of public lands as part of a public trust. Their worst nightmare always has been the possibility of environmental-sportsmen. If the guys in the hunter-orange hats suddenly began thinking green, politicians they could always count on might have to start listening to the other side.

Now that could be happening.

The first sign came late last year when the president agreed to sit down with sportsmen's groups to discuss his administration's assault on the Clean Water Act. By the end of the session he agreed to restore some protections to waterfowl wetlands. The reviews were good enough on that episode for Bush to follow up with the recent meeting at his ranch. And now we have his challenger reaching out to sportsmen -- and sportsmen responding.

The ideal outcome of this would be for sportsmen to recognize that mainstream environmental groups have been waging their battles for many years -- but they can no longer do it alone. If hunters and fishers take that step --if the "catch-and-killers" admit they have as much at stake in the battles over clean air and clean water as the "granola-crunchers" -- then fish and wildlife issues will cease being a partisan issue.

And that would be good news for hunters and anglers -- and all other living things on this planet.

. . . . . . . .........................................................

I am posting this article from Tony not as an endorsement of one party/candidate over another, buy rather to show there is an importtant theme running even nationaly. SPORTSMAN UNITY! SPORTSMAN INVOLVEMENT. The commercial side is stepping up the ad campaign for market hunting already. They will try to wear you down and wear you out, make you tired and divided. Let 'em try. :beer:


----------



## nilsmaster (Sep 26, 2003)

Dick,

No doubt there is definitely concern among sportsmen and it is good to see. Tony had emailed this article to me a few days ago. Him and I have had a little share of email exchange about Bush and the environment. From what I gather of it the media is out to nail Bush hard for "reversing 30 years of environmental progress". I hardly doubt Bush's intent is to do that or that he is currently doing that. I don't know, apparently there is a lot of research I need to do because quite frankly I don't trust a dang thing I hear on the news. All I do know is that constructively conserving the environment is a heck of a lot better than controlling it to the stages of no use like most liberal keepers of the gate want. Sportsmen I feel are in that constructive category where whackos are known as the traditional tree huggers. What scares me is I hope the traditional adjenda doesn't start cheating and trying to cleverly lump the sportsmen groups into their whacko ideas. Their is honestly no way of having it both ways but I think we can have a little of each.

I guess what I'm saying is that me voting for Bush won't be because he's staunch on the environment it'll be because he's trying to win america back. Too long we've been sitting in a "you work hard, and I'll reap YOUR rewards" stage. I hope that people start to remember that countries out there didn't hate us with such strengths before we started becoming hypocrites. I or we didn't see it coming because Wild Bill kept it hidden from us all so well (helps to have the media on his side). It'll be a shame to have Bush lose because they once again are able to cover up the depature from dependance attitude that Bush is working to make an independant attitude. We all know many of the left enjoy dwindling people and making them feel worthless...it's how they get their programs passed. Anywho, just wanted to make sure that there are bigger things out there than even the environment. I'd only say this if I felt confident that the environment is being constructively conserved vs. abused. Maybe new things will come to light on that and I'll change my opinion but until then I am seeing America waking up from it's dependant lazy self. God Bless the soldiers and the country they defend. Prayers go out to the fallen....


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Nils, greetings again. My thoughts on national politics are private.

My concern for hunting issues and the enviroment are not. Many will try to seperate sportsmen ( and have done so very successfully in the past) by appealing to party hack politics. It will even take place here in North Dakota where both sides of the party faithfull will tell you, specifically you as a sportsman, as a resident North Dakotan, to step in line for the greater good of that particular party. Thank them all, there was enough greater good in Vietnam.
More than enough.

We hunters have an opportunity here in *this* state, in *this* election, to make change that is long overdue. Never before have we exerted ourselves to make a change, only *****ed about it, and allowed the same old good old boys to run rough shod over the interests of the state as a whole. It has to end. In our favor. Because that is the state's favor. In my very humble opinion the Public Trust holds sway. And that is also the law, even if it is not currently enforced in North Dakota.


----------



## Wyoming Willie (Apr 22, 2004)

I love how anyone can take any topic and spin it around and around to make it look like anyone is a saint or anyone is evil.

Regardless of sportsmans issues...heres the real key issue: do you want Kerry representing THE USA to the world today? We have a mid-east crisis that is boiling hot, we have a North Korean situation that is a pimple ready to pop, and Iran may well be developing military type nukes. I ask you again...do you want a military type leader or a run and hide from it type leader?

I cant picture changing horses in the middle of the stream, and a vote for someone like Kerry would be exactly that. If you are foolish enough to vote for someone because you think you will shoot 1 more pheasant or duck this year...remember that when nuclear winter sets in, ok?

Stupidity is rampant in the US today. Dont let yourself be part of it OR be stupid enough to buy into half truths, falsehoods or lies just so a man with NO past OR current mid-east experience can be President of the most powerful country in the world.


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

nilsmaster said:


> Too long we've been sitting in a "you work hard, and I'll reap YOUR rewards" stage. .


Are you kidding me. Isn't that what Bush and all of his millionaire cronies are all about. They pad their pockets at the expense of some of the most sacred environmental sanctuaries.

I believe that sometimes we as sportsmen need to quit putting LABELS on candidates and simply listen to what they say, see what they do and vote accordingly. By seeing and hearing everything about Bush, he is obviously, to me anyway, not the one I will vote for come November.

cootkiller


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

Oh, and by the way Willie, after being at war in the middle east since 2001 when we invaded Afghanistan, Bush STILL has ZERO Middle East experience.

He is the PIMPLE on the butt of america if you ask me.

And if you think that the crap that spews from his oral orifice has one iota of his own words or thoughts to it, you need to think at a higher level, cause it don't.

cootkiller


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Right on Cootkiller!!


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Here Cootkiller heres another good reason to vote for Kerry

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial ... =110005036

I'm sure you and Ken will figure out a way to justify this also.

Vote for Kerry Cootkiller, you and he have a lot in common.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

To each his own Bob...That doesn't mean you are always right.You stick with Bush and his pals...and we won't have anywhere to hunt...And the death toll keeps getting higher.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

If this topic is going to deteriorate into another national politics debate, I hope it burns out quickly and completely. Enough already. The point was that politicans are finally courting sportsmen instead of the other way around. This a key difference people. We have an opportunity here that may not pass our way again. Take it.

The danger is that party hacks are going to draw you away from outdoor issues by appealing to you to set aside your concerns " for the greater good". Don't fall for it.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Ken, after our economy is crushed by terroist acts and our very safety is gone because of the policies Kerry supports, hunting issues will seem trivial. *Willie is correct there is a lot bigger issue at stake*, if your house is burning down would you worry about the refrigerator door being open or would you concentrate on the fire. Conservation issues are important to me, and most republicans and democrats. Bush has down a good job and the number of deaths is small compared to similar situations in the past , unfortunately much of the good accomplishments we have made in Iraq, don't get the same play in the press that the bad stuff does. The "mainstream media" has a anti Bush ajenda and in this election year they aren't going to showcase the good things that are happening over there. Its a shame because people like Cootkiller form opinions based on these one sided viewpoints


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Relax Dick...this is just having fun...I know Bob won't change my mind and I won't change his.

Right Bob??? :withstupid:


----------



## Perry Thorvig (Mar 6, 2002)

Nice going, Cootie. Your comments about labeling are right on the mark. Pretty sage advice coming from the north shore of Devils Lake today!


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Thats right Ken and I love you and Coot :beer: no matter what your positions are politically. Dicks right about his point that we sportsman need to utilize the attention the politicos only show us in election years to drive our mutual outdoorsman ajenda no matter what party we are talking to. It's an opportunity that is fleeting, we have about 6 months to drive home some points.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

I agree...and I don't think the outdoors issues here in ND are Dem vs. Rep.

And you're right Dick...probably shouldn't have gotten off the topic.


----------



## nilsmaster (Sep 26, 2003)

Dick,

I'm sorry for writing what I did. It definitely opened the wrong door. I agree it is VERY good to see solutions finally coming to light instead of constant complaining that only strengthens the other side. I too should have kept my national politics private. I just wanted to say there are other things that may be...ahhh...never mind.

To each his own...right.

Cootkiller, start another forum and I'll participate. Dick started this for a different intention and it should remain on that.


----------



## Wyoming Willie (Apr 22, 2004)

Nils, you did nothing wrong. Forums are for discussing...

If people want to vote for Kerry, nothing in here is going to sway their "carved in granite" mentalities. It doesnt mean they are right, but its also their right to be wrong.

I found great amusement in Coots chastising about "thinking at a higher level" implying that he was more intellectual and deeper than someone that finds Bush the better choice. Thanks for the chuckle, Coot.

Just remember when we are up to our ***** in terrorism and nuclear attacks that your ego made you vote for the foolish vote just because you thought you were going to get something out of it. If thats all it takes, you are an easy sway.

Klinton left us with a mess, Bush got handed it, and now you want another LIb to make a bigger mess out of what Klinton left us? Are you thinking rationally?

Kerry offers little to nothing other than inspiring hatred of the current President. Hes done a fine job of rallying the haters...but he surely has zero focus on anything other than that.


----------



## Perry Thorvig (Mar 6, 2002)

WW-

Since you brought up the topic of nuclear attacks, who do you think would be more likely to push the nuclear button - Kerry or W? We know who is just itching for more war. I seem to remember that there was another guy by the name of Goldwater who lost an election for the same reason. He was the guy most likely to push the botton.

And, what did W do with the "mess that Clinton handed him?" He made it a much bigger mess!

How the heck did we get from a post about Kerry making an effort to connect with sportsmen to this? Unbelievable!


----------



## Wyoming Willie (Apr 22, 2004)

Liberals can always rationalize...thats how it got from the first post to this one.

Sportsmen will shoot more ducks and pheasants if they elect Kerry, was the theme of the first post. Mine are pointing out that theory is drivel. Its called "spin" and just Kerrys spinmasters way of pulling in the sportsmans votes. Just like he is working the "non military" types by claiming Bush is all wrong. Just like he is pulling in the gay / lesbian vote by being for gay marriage. Just like he is ... well, you must get the picture by now?

If you think Kerry is the best choice...great....good for you. If you think Kerry will protect America, thats where you are confusing me. He will waffle, he will drag his feet, he will find out that international politics are nothing like he thought they were and that he knew NOTHING about them, other than making it sound like the current President was messing up.

Kerry has money, Kerry is buying the election, Kerry is only winning because people are afraid to stand up anymore and say WRONG IS WRONG. God forbid that Saddam wasnt caught red handed with nukes. We know he had chemicals...thats not enough? God forbid that we went in and deposed a dictator. The world knew he was one, and noone else had the backbone to take him out.

I laugh and laugh at those of you that say this was a war for oil. When your gas pump prices are $4 a gallon, dont whine. When you realize that the middle east is a political hotbed and we are securing our place there as a future stepping stone against other mideast countries we will likely end up having to fight like Iran...then perhaps maybe YOU will visualize at a higher level.

When you pull your F350's into the station and they say: 3 gallons per person...dont whine...because thats where I predict your hero Kerry will take us IF hes elected.

Just start making up excuses why he failed...because if he gets in and thinks hes going to clean up the mess going on and swirling all around us internationally...hes sadly mistaken. Hes no hero...hes just misled by his own ego and rhetoric into thinking he can make an overall difference.

As for nukes...I would HOPE that Bush would push the button if some other country did the same against us. Retaliation isnt wrong, its called protection of your families and your assets.


----------



## snowflake (Apr 2, 2004)

WW-I think you mean our families and OUR *****!!!!!!!!! :beer: W is doing a good job with what he was handed right from the git-go.Fuher Bill would have sold all our gun rights, hunting rights, and anything else he could have if he would have seen another 4 yrs. in office :eyeroll: Kerry is just a continuation of the same train of thought the previous administration had.The president is just a puppet acting out his partie's wishes.A vote for the big K is a vote against all sportsmen& women accross this fine nation.GO GET 'EM W,AND LET THE DEVIL TAKE THE HINDMOST!!!!!


----------



## nilsmaster (Sep 26, 2003)

Dick,

I couldn't help but get the sense out of your original post (end of it) that Bush is for the commercialization of hunting. Did I read into that wrong? Yes, I see his environment schedule isn't along the lines of the traditional "you can't use this land for nothing, no matter what" people but I don't know if its pushing a cause such as commercialization. Just curious...would like to know more.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Most of the people I know that hunted during the last 40+ years point to the heyday of pheasants with soil bank and such. For others waterfowl heaven for ducks was the 50's etc. Reality is that we will never see the days of open fields and plentiful game birds at those levels again. However one needs to realize that your choice in the voting booth does make a difference on the quality of the hunting both currently and in the future.

Many things have impacted hunting from drought to conservation policy's to farm programs to technology and the list goes on. These influences will continue to share the future of hunting and our daily lives be it work or school etc. I encourage everyone to try and make a thought out choice this fall in the voting booth. One must weigh all the effects that choice will have upon you and your family now and 10 years from now.

I for the most part have made some of my choices. Others I have not done so as of yet. Do so educated and not led or blinded by ideology or party hoopla. We as sportsmen have a window open to us in ND this fall that say not come again. Understand what and who you are voting for and why. I try not to be a single issue voter. Sometimes that is tough when emotions run hot. Choosing a single issue may result in getting that instant gratification but can result in other maladies that where plainly visible had one not allowed emotions to cloud one's vision.

One always needs to remember that polictions the farther up the ladder they get and the higher they want to go can and do tell the voters what they want to hear. For me I look past that and review the results of past actions be it votes, personal choices, how they surround themselves with both personally and professionally.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

nils, I don't do Kerry-Bush. At all.

ND: My whole and complete point is that sportsmen are being courted. Aggressively. Any decent challenger with a pro ND hunter view going against a Grade F-D-C can win, esp in a metro district.

This not a single issue campaign. Never will be. There are however evenly balanced candidates where one of them is pro-hunter, ND hunter. Do not confuse this with pro NRA-pro 2cd Amendment. Some say "we" should not be endorseing candidates based on their hunting views. You can be bet your bippy the NRA is going to endorse big time. Always have, so why don't we? Aren't we good enough to have an opinion? I think we are. :wink:


----------

