Wyoming PAC

[BuzzH]

Protect Wyoming: New nonpartisan PAC aims to put a stop to selling off public lands

POWELL — Believing that efforts to sell off public lands and what they see as the privatization of wildlife and abandonment of scientific management threaten residents’ livelihoods, two Cowboy State

www.wyomingnews.com

 

[Big Fin]

I like it. Donation made.

 

[Treeshark]

Too many of these grifts going on these days. No thanks.

 

[Mallardsx2]

“Protect Wyoming is by Wyoming people, for Wyoming people. We are not being organized by out-of-state money….”

Okie dokie then. I wonder what their stance on 90/10 will be. lol

 

[Big Fin]

Too many of these grifts going on these days. No thanks.

A grift? noun - petty or small-scale swindle

Guys putting their time and effort into something they believe is a grift?

Here's an idea - If you don't have something worth while to contribute, just move along.

I'm more than happy to donate my $200 in some people who are willing to do what they can to preserve/conserve hunting and public access in their state. I like folks who think they can make a difference and set about to do something about the challenges they face rather than hang out on social media and complain.

I hardly doubt their gonna get rich or go on a big drunk on my small donation. And if my Kalshi account would let me bet on whether they'll show up and speak up, I'd bet another $200 on that. And when I won, I'd donate that to them.

Good on them. I hope they make the difference they are working towards.

 

[Treeshark]

I am aware of the definition of the word @Big Fin - I chose it with purpose. Mike Lee has spawned a bunch of these types. Waiting for Land Tawney to pop back up with one.

Sorry my post offended you.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Sorry I offended you with my opinion, @Big Fin.

Things seem to be changing around here a bit.

I dont think you offended anyone.

I think your use of the word "grift" was quite generous. If Wisconsinites put a PAC together to combat deer hunting issues for Wisconsin - id be all for it.

I struggle to see why you feel so differently so often.

 

[Treeshark]

I struggle to see why you feel so differently so often.

Perhaps it comes from a different vantage point?

 

[Big Fin]

I am aware of the definition of the word @Big Fin - I chose it with purpose. Mike Lee has spawned a bunch of these types. Waiting for Land Tawney to pop back up with one.

If you want an echo chamber (and it seems that may be the case lately), have at it- it’s your show.

Not asking for an echo chamber and don't want an echo chamber.

The "echo chamber" reply often seems to be the cop out when I challenge what someone says, which isn't very often that I do that. It's seems to me as an avoidance tactic from a discussion about serious issues in hunting, in this case, the folks who are actually doing something for hunting only to have their efforts be questioned.

Because I own the joint, some claim, as you have, that statements by me that might differ from their opinion is somehow a demand for an echo chamber. When stating such and not providing any substance to their claims, it seems the person using that defense is the one wanting an echo chamber.

I'll stand by my statement that it's chickenshit to make the claim you have, about people you don't even know, when those people are trying to do something beneficial for hunting in their state. If you want to call that a request for echo chamber, knock yourself out.

 

[Treeshark]

I’m guessing by your outsized reaction here that this isn’t the first time you’ve heard of these guys. That or you somehow vetted and donated within a 9 minute span from the original post. Whatever, not my business.

The world really doesn’t need more public land/“conservation” NGO/PACs at this point- I get it’s hot right now, but the market is beyond saturated. And they’re almost always to the detriment of the NR hunter. Beware the Conservation Industrial Complex.

Note to self: be careful using the G word on Hunt Talk. Duly noted.

*This post may contain opinions that @TOGIE finds emotionally distressing

 

[TOGIE]

*in your opinion

 

[Big Fin]

To add to my thoughts, as someone who spends a lot of time with hard working volunteers, I know they could be doing a lot of other things with their time. They have lives, families, jobs, businesses that all are huge demands on of their scarce time. Yet, these generous folks find a way to make it a priority to allocate some of that scarce time to things they love; in the case of the circles I volunteer in, that would be hunting and conservation. They have my complete respect and appreciation.

Maybe you volunteer for groups in the hunting and conservation space. If so, your opinions and statements about this group would be far different than the opinions about volunteerism that I hear from the other hunting/conservation volunteers I interact with.

Folks who want to ridicule or question the motives of people trying to make a difference are very likely to get push back from me, whether on this forum, in person, or any other place I see them devaluing the effort of volunteers.

If you feel that we don't need more groups, that's fine. That statement doesn't devalue the character and the motives of volunteers as you did with your statement that what they are doing is some sort of grift operation.

Use the "G" word all you want. When you use it in the way you did about people giving their time to the cause of hunting and conservation, expect push back.

 

[SAJ-99]

“Protect Wyoming is by Wyoming people, for Wyoming people. We are not being organized by out-of-state money….”

Okie dokie then. I wonder what their stance on 90/10 will be. lol

Even Wyoming politicians aren’t free. I would think @Treeshark would at least be happy that these guys are trying to manage their own “wildlife” in Cheyenne.

 

[BuzzH]

I’m guessing by your outsized reaction here that this isn’t the first time you’ve heard of these guys. That or you somehow vetted and donated within a 9 minute span from the original post. Whatever, not my business.

The world really doesn’t need more public land/“conservation” NGO/PACs at this point- I get it’s hot right now, but the market is beyond saturated. And they’re almost always to the detriment of the NR hunter. Beware the Conservation Industrial Complex.

Note to self: be careful using the G word on Hunt Talk. Duly noted.

*This post may contain opinions that @TOGIE finds emotionally distressing

Quit your crying about not being able to hunt as a NR. FFS, you can buy 5-10-50-200 tags OTC in Wyoming in several units.

I'm of the opinion you just like to bitch. If you spent as much time hunting as you do whining about your downtrodden NR woes you'd be at 100 elk already.

You're wrong the market is not saturated in Wyoming for PAC's that are going to vet and try to get more hunter, wildlife, and public land candidates. In fact, if you can find me another PAC dedicated to hunting and public lands in Wyoming, please point it out.

To the best of my knowledge, this is the first one I'm aware of in Wyoming. Just so you know, most all the NGO's in Wyoming are 501c3's and can't endorse candidates.

Further, if you read their website you'll find out they have ZERO paid staff, 100% volunteer. Unlike you, they put their shoulder to the wheel. I recently met one of the 2 guys starting this, a few more that are working behind the scenes as well. Good people near as I can tell, and its an insult to call them grifters.

Thanks for doing your usual for Wyoming Wildlife and Public lands, exactly nothing.

 

[BuzzH]

“Protect Wyoming is by Wyoming people, for Wyoming people. We are not being organized by out-of-state money….”

Okie dokie then. I wonder what their stance on 90/10 will be. lol

They have a contact form, ask them.

 

[Big Fin]

I’m guessing by your outsized reaction here that this isn’t the first time you’ve heard of these guys. That or you somehow vetted and donated within a 9 minute span from the original post. Whatever, not my business.

The world really doesn’t need more public land/“conservation” NGO/PACs at this point- I get it’s hot right now, but the market is beyond saturated. And they’re almost always to the detriment of the NR hunter. Beware the Conservation Industrial Complex.

Note to self: be careful using the G word on Hunt Talk. Duly noted.

*This post may contain opinions that @TOGIE finds emotionally distressing

I wouldn't know these guys if they walked into my house and sat on my couch. So, your guess is wrong. Yeah, it took me less than five minutes to determine their efforts were worth my donation.

I'd be curious as to what this "Conservation Industrial Complex" is? I've volunteered for most of the national groups and many of the state-based groups. I'm a Life Member of at least a dozen of them. Every single one of them do good work. Everyone of them rely on committed volunteers to get that good work done. None of those volunteers view themselves as part of an "Industrial Complex."

Your statements, which I'll take as a reflection of your opinion, doesn't show much appreciation for the many volunteers who make up the backbone of these organizations. In my opinion, it's a kick in the crotch to these volunteers and that will get a reaction from me, which you view as "outsized."

You write that the work of these groups is "almost always to the detriment of the NR hunter." The best thing a non-resident could do is to support groups that are helping put more critters in the landscape in states where we are non-residents. Us NRs the first to get cut in a state like Wyoming, as it should be, and we have the most to benefit if we can keep herds at higher numbers.

Mule deer numbers have dropped by 50% in Wyoming in the last 25 years. That's at least a 50% drop in NR tags for us. In most instances it is more, as the tag cuts resulting from lower herd numbers is disproportionately in the NR allocation to keep resident opportunity in tact. The pattern for pronghorn populations is very similar, as are the tag cuts.

Imagine how much easier it would be for us NRs to draw mule deer or pronghorn tags if we had twice as many animals on the landscape, as we had 25 years ago. It would be way easier. I'll support any group that is trying to change the trends and put more animals on the land, which is more tags for Rs and NRs.

If we are to ever get headed back that direction of higher herd numbers, it is going to be because residents of Wyoming, and groups they volunteer for, do the things necessary to protect and improve habitat. Habitat degradation being the biggest reason for these declines.

We as non-residents are not going to sway their politicians or their elected/appointed officials. We're pretty much relegated to helping with our pocketbooks, our support of orgs that are doing that good work, and advocating for Federal land policies that give more accommodation to wildlife where much of this wildlife lives. Seeing Wyoming residents as enemy and fearing/distrusting Wyoming folks who work to increase herd numbers is a logic that is lost on me.

I get it, the world is divided into scarcity thinkers and abundant thinkers. The volunteers who are trying to put more wildlife on the landscape to the benefit of everyone are the abundance thinkers.

 

[Wildabeest]

I think this is the part that triggered @Treeshark…

“Lentsch and Allen also refuse to support the privatization of wildlife through ‘transferrable landowner tags,’ or the monetization of wildlife for private profit”.

 

[shoots-straight]

Their on a similar track to where the "Montana Sportsmen's Alliance PAC" was 15 years ago. This Wyoming group and our group have a lot in common. We are still doing business although some faces have changed and we are all a lot older. Some of the founders have passed. New blood is good to see. "Montana Sportsmen's Alliance "

 

[Johnny Bravo]

What I read is this seems like people who are outfitters trying to save their jobs?

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I’m guessing by your outsized reaction here that this isn’t the first time you’ve heard of these guys. That or you somehow vetted and donated within a 9 minute span from the original post. Whatever, not my business.

The world really doesn’t need more public land/“conservation” NGO/PACs at this point- I get it’s hot right now, but the market is beyond saturated. And they’re almost always to the detriment of the NR hunter. Beware the Conservation Industrial Complex.

Note to self: be careful using the G word on Hunt Talk. Duly noted.

*This post may contain opinions that @TOGIE finds emotionally distressing

I think quite the opposite, hunters need way more state level PACs focusing on sportsmen’s issue. If we didn’t have CRWM in Colorado we would be totally hosed. Every state needs an org that can get involved at the state level on behalf of hunters. At some point the anti’s are gonna come for you, even in places like Wyoming. Hunters will need these orgs and fundraising mechanisms in place. The national species-based conservation groups are great but they are limited in what they can do and truth be told, state level politics is what really affects hunters. That is where most management decisions are made. Issues in every state are different. It might be public access one place and anti-hunting initiatives in another.

It seems your knock on them is that they will advocate against the NR hunter. Doesn’t appear that way at this time, but to be determined. Unless of course Rob Shaul pops up as their leader, eff that dude. I like the focus on science-based wildlife management. Something sorely needed by their neighbors to the south.