Time for Land Tawney to step down?

hossblur said:
See. Look how quick this thread jumps into a climate change argument. In doing so everyone retreated to their place.

It's EXACTLY why BHA shouldn't get sucked into that rabbit hole.

Somehow hundreds of other orgs didn't.
Click to expand...

Or, maybe be we could have the open mindedness and self restraint to have an intelligent conversation about it.
 
I look at groups like threads on this forum. If I don't like them, I don't join them, like treads on this forum, just don't click--real simple. I also don't expect them to change to fit my beliefs.

Now for real, going back to killin intruders.
 
tjones said:
I look at groups like threads on this forum. If I don't like them, I don't join them, like treads on this forum, just don't click--real simple. I also don't expect them to change to fit my beliefs.

Now for real, going back to killin intruders.
Click to expand...

Honestly I think you need to resurrect this one... definitely some ground we left uncovered.

Best T-Rex Medicine

I don't think they are like everything else. Think about some birds (basically modern dinos), you can chop a chicken's head off and it will for quite a while. Exactly what I was thinking, I’ve watching a tom take two body shots from a 12 gauge at 25 yards, flop over and then pop up like...
www.hunttalk.com www.hunttalk.com
 
I did a lot of googling and reading articles about this issue about 1.5 months ago. I'm a BHA member and like others was concerned about what appeared to be BHA going off the rez and taking up support of an issue I didn't sign up for.

The gist of what I came away with is that wind and solar infrastructure IS coming to public lands. This is not a question of "if" it's "when" - and frankly, I believe it. BHA's support of the legislation (sorry, I don't recall the name of the bill) essentially gives sportsmen a seat at the table as development is being planned. As I understand it, the situation can be likened to the begginings of the oil industry deciding where to drill or the timber industry deciding where to clearcut. Hunters and anglers never had a voice in the process. BHA's support of this bill brings us in and hopefully will start a trend in that direction.

Its not really not as simple as supporting wind and solar energy or not, its more a matter of thinking ahead and having a say in a process that is inevitable. For my part, I think this does line up with the mission statement and I decided I'd continue to support BHA.

Nothing good ever comes from heated, name-calling, political arguments on FB or any other social media, that's why I tend to stay out of them. That said, I'm pretty sure my voting record is rather different from Land Tawney's. I guess I just don't care about that because I do believe that when it comes to public land hunting and fishing, we agree.
 
Brian in Montana said:
I did a lot of googling and reading articles about this issue about 1.5 months ago. I'm a BHA member and like others was concerned about what appeared to be BHA going off the rez and taking up support of an issue I didn't sign up for.

The gist of what I came away with is that wind and solar infrastructure IS coming to public lands. This is not a question of "if" it's "when" - and frankly, I believe it. BHA's support of the legislation (sorry, I don't recall the name of the bill) essentially gives sportsmen a seat at the table as development is being planned. As I understand it, the situation can be likened to the begginings of the oil industry deciding where to drill or the timber industry deciding where to clearcut. Hunters and anglers never had a voice in the process. BHA's support of this bill brings us in and hopefully will start a trend in that direction.

Its not really not as simple as supporting wind and solar energy or not, its more a matter of thinking ahead and having a say in a process that is inevitable. For my part, I think this does line up with the mission statement and I decided I'd continue to support BHA.

Nothing good ever comes from heated, name-calling, political arguments on FB or any other social media, that's why I tend to stay out of them. That said, I'm pretty sure my voting record is rather different from Land Tawney's. I guess I just don't care about that because I do believe that when it comes to public land hunting and fishing, we agree.
Click to expand...

So similar to NRDC protesting predator hunting, and thereby not having a seat at those tables...

I've read Tawney's statements, and if that's true then why does BHA vociferously oppose oil and gas development. Why not engage with that process in a construction manner?

I'd just like to see some consistency on development.
 
Brian in Montana said:
The gist of what I came away with is that wind and solar infrastructure IS coming to public lands. This is not a question of "if" it's "when" - and frankly, I believe it. BHA's support of the legislation (sorry, I don't recall the name of the bill) essentially gives sportsmen a seat at the table as development is being planned. As I understand it, the situation can be likened to the begginings of the oil industry deciding where to drill or the timber industry deciding where to clearcut. Hunters and anglers never had a voice in the process. BHA's support of this bill brings us in and hopefully will start a trend in that direction.
Click to expand...

Brian,

Hunters have always had a voice in decisions on where to drill or log on public land. You cant do shit on public land without a lease and a permit. Hunters and public land advocates have just as much opportunity to voice their opinions during public comment periods as anyone else. This Bill doesn't change that process. It's not as if this Bill makes it so that BHA is part of some public land development advisory group that gets to decide where we should or should not put a wind farm. The heart of the rub for me with this Bill and BHA's advocacy for it is the renewable energy mandate that is within. I cant recall the exact number but the Bill mandates a certain level of GW's by certain dates on public land. This is advocacy for development on public land. Pure and simple. It just so happens to be in the form of renewable energy. If the Bill called for mandated development of X number of acres of coal mining and gas drilling on public land i would be just as opposed. And just so we are all aware, O&G drilling is going to happen on public land whether you like it or not. Do you honestly think BHA would advocate for that Bill? I know they wouldn't because I have witnessed first hand the board decisions to protest any and all O&G leases on BLM land in Southwest Wyo. No mater how benign the parcel was.
 
Is there a CEO of a conservation org that is more polarizing than Land?
 
Nuclear Energy is the answer to all energy issues. The navy has been using them since the 1960s and they have been kicking ass with them. Power of the sun ☀️ to unlock all the energy you need.
 
Everybodys got to make their own decision about issues like this. I understand why Its polarizing or difficult to get behind, but after looking into it, I'm not just overwhelmed with enthusiasm but do feel ok about it. Enough to stay a member. I still think BHA is fairly unique and worth supporting. If you can't get past this action, or the current leadership its your business, move on to something else. But bear in mind that Tawney won't always be at the helm and there probably has been things BHA has done and will do in the future that you will be happy about.
 
Ben Lamb said:
Wayne LaPierre (They still do some conservation work)
Wayne Pacell
Ryan Benson
Jamie Rappaport Clark
Don Peay
David Allen
Erik Molvar
Kieran Suckling
Ingrid Newkirk
Click to expand...

That’s quite the list.
 
Brian in Montana said:
I did a lot of googling and reading articles about this issue about 1.5 months ago. I'm a BHA member and like others was concerned about what appeared to be BHA going off the rez and taking up support of an issue I didn't sign up for.

The gist of what I came away with is that wind and solar infrastructure IS coming to public lands. This is not a question of "if" it's "when" - and frankly, I believe it. BHA's support of the legislation (sorry, I don't recall the name of the bill) essentially gives sportsmen a seat at the table as development is being planned. As I understand it, the situation can be likened to the begginings of the oil industry deciding where to drill or the timber industry deciding where to clearcut. Hunters and anglers never had a voice in the process. BHA's support of this bill brings us in and hopefully will start a trend in that direction.

Its not really not as simple as supporting wind and solar energy or not, its more a matter of thinking ahead and having a say in a process that is inevitable. For my part, I think this does line up with the mission statement and I decided I'd continue to support BHA.

Nothing good ever comes from heated, name-calling, political arguments on FB or any other social media, that's why I tend to stay out of them. That said, I'm pretty sure my voting record is rather different from Land Tawney's. I guess I just don't care about that because I do believe that when it comes to public land hunting and fishing, we agree.
Click to expand...


If it wasn't for that pesky "discretion of the secretary part maybe. But.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Pucky Freak
Historically-representative ecosystem management
Replies
12
Views
931
Pucky Freak
Pucky Freak
Hammsolo
Washington Wolf Policy Comments
Replies
2
Views
698
bigwhale
B
Adamhuntingstuff
2023 Deer hunting Recap (MT, KY, IN)
Replies
9
Views
472
SFC B
SFC B
SCliving Outdoors
New Zealand DIY Public Land Red Stag and Tahr Hunt
2 3 4
Replies
67
Views
6K
elkhuntinfool78
elkhuntinfool78
Brad
It's Public Land. But The Public Can't Reach It.
Replies
16
Views
3K
Mussgrass
M

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,126
Messages
1,947,993
Members
35,034
Latest member
Waspocrew

Share this page

Back
Top