Outdoor Focus: Sierra Club and sportsmen form new friendship

RSS Feed

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 20, 2006
Messages
22,221
Reaction score
0
Choosing between whether to fish or cut bait, the Sierra Club has made a decision to partner with anglers and hunters in its conservation quests. Its new Sierra Sportsmen online network at Sierrasportsmen.org is a Web site that unites seemingly polar opposites: the Sierra Club and sportsmen.

http://www.sacbee.com/fishing_hunting/story/902750.html
 

Kernman

Active member
Joined
Feb 19, 2007
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
I couldn't believe it when I read it at first. But I guess it's true. I've understood for a long time that we hunters and conservationists have a lot in common - and a lot to lose together.

Could this be the beginning of a new political party? How about The Roosevelt Party?

I've been lurking on this site for couple years now. I would have replied sooner but I didn't know it was so easy.

I live near Frazier Park, and I'm about five to 15-minutes away from my hunting spots. I walk my dog, Cody, every day, and I know where all the deer and rabbits go and when, and what paths they use.

But I'll never tell. And of course, Cody can't talk.

Best of luck to you all this season.

And thanks Sierra Club.

And thanks, Teddy.
 

Rumpled

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2001
Messages
206
Reaction score
0
The official Sierra Club policy is that properly regulated hunting is OK.
But, nearly every Sierra Clubber is a total liberal anti-hunter.
And many of their lawsuits etc are anti-hunting.

I wonder how this flies with the average Sierra Club member.
I think they are trying to broaden their membership.

I wonder how sincere the group really will be, should we start posting are harvests on their website?
 

Speckmisser

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2001
Messages
12,900
Reaction score
26
I think the organization believes they're sincere, but they've still got a lot to answer for to a lot of hunters before they start seeing any real influx of new membership (and yeah, this whole thing is to draw new members...thus enhancing their political strength).

I've been really ambivalent about the whole thing since it was first announced. The organization actually approached me and many other outdoors bloggers to publicize the new campaign. While a lot of what they say makes sense, re: sportsmen ARE conservationists, there are a lot of policies that the Sierra Club endorses that fly in the faces of hunters... particularly in regards to predator hunting (bears, mountain lions, wolves, etc.) and in regards to issues like lead ammunition.

The optimist in me suggests that if hunters really do get involved in the Sierra Club and take an ACTIVE role, we can change some of those positions and policies to reflect our interests. But there's an equally strong pessimistic side that realizes the fact that hunters, as a group, really don't get active in this sort of organization... so any membership fees and political clout would be used to further the existing policies. In essence, we'd be funding our own opposition in some key conflicts.

It'll be interesting to see if anything really develops out of this.
 

Kernman

Active member
Joined
Feb 19, 2007
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
I think you are wise to be wary. I tend to see Sierra Club members as urban types, with little real sense of what actually happens in the woods. They backpack, but stick to the trails.

Only fool hunters plow or sneak through remote brush to scout new spots, and in the process, really get to know the wilderness.

We know what is really going on out there.

And in the process we develop respect and awe for the animals, and a love for nature.

I hope someone from the Sierra Club will join in at some point - assuming anyone from that group is listening. Challengse me, but lets get a dialogue going.

We need to work together to keep the developers from raping what is left of the wilderness.

If the Sierra Club can convince me that they believe that ethical hunters are environmenlists just like they are, then I would consider joining, and I would definitely write more posts that hopefull would get read by more hunters.

The Sierra website shows supposedly real hunters talking about their Sierra Club activities.

Logically then, if we hunters expanded their membership with hunters, we would have more say in how they spend their money.

Or am I just hopelessly naive.

Kernman
 

Tallbud

Active member
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
In my opinion, one should wonder WHY does the Sierra Club want to forge relationships with outdoor sportsmen? There must be an ulterior motive. I have never met a member who has the same overall outlook on hunting and fishing. 99% of all outdoor sportsmen are environmentally friendly, and 99% of all Sierra Club members are environmentalists. Yes, there is a difference. Environmentally friendly means following the rules and laws, keeping our hunting and fishing areas clean, teaching and promoting safety and ecology to others and our children among other things. Environmentalists want outdoor sportsmen out of the outdoors. They want the outdoor recreation areas returned to a pristine unused state. I agree with Speckmisser when he said... "there are a lot of policies that the Sierra Club endorses that fly in the faces of hunters... particularly in regards to predator hunting (bears, mountain lions, wolves, etc.) and in regards to issues like lead ammunition." I would hope that the Sierra Club might be changing their approach, but I would have to see it to believe it!
 

shaun748

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2004
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Trust me,,All they care about is our money from membership dues..As someone mentioned there are not enough hunters willing to join to have an impact on their real agenda..I was a sierra club member here in Los Angeles for the past several years when my Chapter put foward a motion a few years ago to work to ban hunting in the San Gabriel mtn area that I hunt ...

As was mentioned already, 99% of the members are weekend warrior outdoorish cityfolks, who only walk on trails and it annoys them that we step off the trails.....I am all for conservation, but as mentioned I got tired of receiving their literature that was leaning pretty far left of most of my views( I.E. yes there is global climate changes, BUT BUT I believe this is a natural occurence that fluctuates thru the centuries,,hint=the Bering land bridge melted long before cars were invented!!)..They also really pushed for Al Gore in their mailers during those years, though I don't want to get into political arguments with anyone here, but I did not agree with me membership money working for Gore.

I canceled my membership about a year or two ago though I still get mailers and the agenda has not changed one ioda...No matter what they say I have seen no changes in their views since they have decided to recruit hunters..Now they say they want to save the animals with our help, but don't have any plans or real desire to assist in our goal of hunting those same animal populations our membership dues have saved.

If you notice they are pretty cool and open with fishing(as most average non-hunters are) and go on and on about people fishing,but animals are another story and their members are not at all happy that Hunters are being recruited and I used to recieve their magazine and can tell you first hand the vast majority of the letters to the editor were people complaining about us being recruited and complaining about our hunting stories and pictures......I think the editors have a niave sincere hope to work together, but too many anti-hunting members rule the roost there..

They did know that Paul Watson was a bit extreme for them and it is nice they got rid of him, but I will contribute to other organizations that are fully on our side, while also fighting for conservation, rather than the other way around.
 

NVsasquatch

Active member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I am very suspicious about the motives of the Sierra club. The inability of the sierra club to compromise or work in collaboration with disparate entities in order to effect positive change other than to advocate dictatorial legislation is widely known in the conservation community. Groups that actually put boots on the ground, and dollars into conservation and science have been unfairly lumped in with these bastards for years. I would go so far as to say that they have caused irreparable harm to the perception of environmentalism in the United states.
I have never had a good result when they have been involved in any project I've been a part of.

 

Latest Posts

Advertisement



Top Bottom