Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 224

Thread: BHA vs SFW

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Yukon Canada
    Posts
    1,289

    Default BHA vs SFW

    I have been looking through both of these orgs websites lately and couldnt help but see big differences in what they both stand for. How many support what Org?? I would need more info to make a decision but based on what I have read on each site I would be leaning toward SFW personaly.

    BHA To much language that feels wrong to me. (very shaky on predator control issues, and not sure they are sport hunters friend)

    SFW I read and agree with a lot of what was on their site.

    I am sure both Orgs do good/bad things at times, and I know there are members of each Org on here. They just seem so far apart I thought it would be interesting to see what others thought.

  2. #2

    Default Suggestion

    Pick an org. that is smart enough to realize obvious things such as: ORV abuse can be an issue in sensitive habitats. Choose a team that that thrives on denial if you like quicksand and don't give a whit about your children's options. Choose morality and a common sense handling of the natural world.

  3. #3
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,391

    Default

    With regards to what SFW stands for, you really need to look into what they have done instead of just what they say. Looking at their website, a lot of it sounds pretty good to me as well. In their public presentations like the ones they did at some predator calling seminars last winter, all of their talking points sound great on the surface. The problem, though, is that their rhetoric doesn't match their record. In Utah (where they started and have been more active for a longer period of time) they have moved the allocation of tags hard towards privatization and profit. A full 5% of tags are now auctioned off, and across the board the state is becoming more of a pay-to-play management system. That is exactly what they've tried to do in other states, and it is the direction we're heading here. They talk a good game about helping out those who just like to hunt, but their record says otherwise.

    Perhaps BHA isn't the org for you, but be sure to take a very close look at what SFW has actually done before lending them your support.

  4. #4

    Wink

    Go with your first instincts Yukon. Your initial impressions were absolutely correct. Go with the Org that for years and years puts their money, time, energy and effort where their mouths are. They are a very progressive organization and not afraid to engage in difficult tasks and will gladly support and pay for needed programs that the state has refused to finance. Compare their ACCOMPLISHMENTS. Hands down it is recognizable SFW comes in first. Well....they could have done that, even if they had only accomplished one thing. They have created more hunting opportunties than their members have enjoyed. Take that into consideration when you look at permit allocations throughout. Not many take the time to examine them analytically. Make up your own scorecard with issues you hold dear to you. Then do a side by side critical analysis and fill in the blanks. Total the scores and go with the one that will benefit you and your desires.

    Unless you like land lockups, restricted access, priority allocation of fish and game, exclusive hunts, lip service and letter writing. Then choose wrongly.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  5. #5
    Member AlaskaTrueAdventure's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Paradise (Alaska)
    Posts
    1,543

    Thumbs up BHA all the way!

    Yukon 254,
    Thanks for asking this important question.
    If Akres has sided with SWF, then clearly back country hunters and guides like us need to join BHA.
    Thanks for helping me make this now obvious, cyrstal clear decision.

    Dennis

  6. #6
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    I guess I'm confused...............AkTrue.............is the stuff Akres said false?
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  7. #7

    Thumbs down

    Here are a few excerpts from another thread that bears repeating here. If you like "STOP signs" especially in Anchorage's and the Mat Valley's ONLY playground then pick your choice. As much time, energy, money, remediation and consolation that has taken place in the Jim Creek area, some will never be satisfied until it is locked up, with the "STOP signs". Sad

    "The Knik Watershed process is/was a major event where this mentality embraced by our State agencies was honed and perfected.
    This major lost battle empowered them and is the place where the public should have erected the STOP signs.
    Thanks for your efforts. Mark Richards."
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  8. #8

    Default Wrong

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    Here are a few excerpts from another thread that bears repeating here. If you like "STOP signs" especially in Anchorage's and the Mat Valley's ONLY playground then pick your choice. As much time, energy, money, remediation and consolation that has taken place in the Jim Creek area, some will never be satisfied until it is locked up, with the "STOP signs". Sad

    "The Knik Watershed process is/was a major event where this mentality embraced by our State agencies was honed and perfected.
    This major lost battle empowered them and is the place where the public should have erected the STOP signs.
    Thanks for your efforts. Mark Richards."
    1. Plain and simple Res - 'locked up' is a gross exaggeration and one of the most overused/abused fear tactics employed to gather sheep. Can you back that assertion? No one I am aware of has ever suggested the area be 'locked up'. Confusing sustainability with such terminology is simply immature, IMO

    2. At this very moment, as F&G bios recognize the threat to documented critical areas, there is no 'remediation' as agencies pass the buck. True some are making some minimal efforts, but the documented damages continue.
    You are speaking against some heavy documentation - can't imagine you knowing the extent of it: Are you knowledgeable regarding USFWS recommendations for the Jim Swan Wetlands ? Do you think ALL habitat variations deserve equal abuse? Got any idea about what was ignored from F&G? DOT?
    Delineate your claimed 'remediations'.


    3.Consolation ?? Name some.

    What is 'Sad' is the propensity to exaggerate.
    What is it about sustainability and the value of rich habitats that is not within grasp??

    At least you provide a good model for juxtaposition amply representing the access w/o responsibility mentality and serve well to illustrate the inherent flaws in that narrow view.
    Thanks for that!

    Don't expect me to give all the details I have on these issues. Personal responsibility is requisite.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 68 Bronco View Post
    1. Plain and simple Res - 'locked up' is a gross exaggeration and one of the most overused/abused fear tactics employed to gather sheep. Can you back that assertion? No one I am aware of has ever suggested the area be 'locked up'. Confusing sustainability with such terminology is simply immature, IMO

    2. At this very moment, as F&G bios recognize the threat to documented critical areas, there is no 'remediation' as agencies pass the buck. True some are making some minimal efforts, but the documented damages continue.
    You are speaking against some heavy documentation - can't imagine you knowing the extent of it: Are you knowledgeable regarding USFWS recommendations for the Jim Swan Wetlands ? Do you think ALL habitat variations deserve equal abuse? Got any idea about what was ignored from F&G? DOT?
    Delineate your claimed 'remediations'.


    3.Consolation ?? Name some.

    What is 'Sad' is the propensity to exaggerate.
    What is it about sustainability and the value of rich habitats that is not within grasp??

    At least you provide a good model for juxtaposition amply representing the access w/o responsibility mentality and serve well to illustrate the inherent flaws in that narrow view.
    Thanks for that!

    Don't expect me to give all the details I have on these issues. Personal responsibility is requisite.

    "STOP signs".
    Your words not mine. To me Stop means Stop. Good try but I'll take you for your word.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  10. #10
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default

    Isn't about one org vs another.

    But if you want to know the differences between the Alaska chapter of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers and the Alaska chapter of Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife, you can find it on their websites and in how the representatives of those orgs conduct themselves. And you can ask questions and see what the answers are.

    AK BHA is about long-term sustainable management policies and long-term protections of big wild public lands that our kids and their kids can enjoy and hunt and fish in. That really is what we're about in a nutshell.

    And that means one of the things anathema to us, no matter where it comes from, is the idea that we should manage our game on a "maximum sustained yield" basis. We recognize the inherent dangers in doing that, and that it isn't just a "word" that is different between those who advocate for MSY strategies and those who seek to uphold the Alaska constitutional intent to manage on a "sustained yield" basis.

    We're moderates, really, as far as hunting orgs go, we will support prudent predator mgmt strategies just like we support prudent prey mgmt strategies. We don't oppose predator control but we don't support all predator control programs either.

    And another thing, the Alaska chapter of BHA has strongly supported resident hunting preferences when other orgs have stood silently by and catered to outside influences. We respect our non-resident hunting brethren and certainly want to have non-resident hunting opportunities in Alaska, but so far I haven't seen any other hunting org in Alaska support the kind of proposals we have re putting a clear preference for resident hunting opportunities when it seems there isn't enough game to go around for all.

    Now whether or not someone wants to label that as not supporting "sport hunters" is up to them, but I want to be clear that it isn't about that at all...it's about a hunting org standing up for what our constitution demands and what is right and not getting sucked into the power and influence of other powerful monetary and political forces that tend to screw over resident Alaskan hunters <grin>.

    This is, and should be, another thing Alaskans should look closely into when deciding what an org stands for. Look at BOG comments...that will tell you a lot. Drop a line to the orgs and see what kind of reply, if any, you get.

    A broken watch is right twice a day. Every org does some good. Support the ones that best reflect the type of Alaska and the type of hunting and fishing opportunities you want to see in the future.
    Sincerely,


  11. #11

    Default Residue

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    "STOP signs".
    Your words not mine. To me Stop means Stop. Good try but I'll take you for your word.
    Promise??
    OK, I'll play - STOP. Literally.

    Metaphors are, assuredly, a dead art. I must remember to whom I am speaking.

    (This contributes nothing constructive to a valid topic, and as has been done before, reminds of tactics to ignore - tactics that would lose points in a basic high school debate.)

    While I am here - Thanks, Bushrat for detail on ABHA.

  12. #12

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by 68 Bronco View Post
    Promise??
    OK, I'll play - STOP. Literally.
    I rest assured that while you want others to STOP, you want to be able to continue on your journey/jihad. When I recognize a Cease and Desist on the part of the Lock Up Crowd, I'll take a break too. But in the meantime, I will remain vigilant and speak out against it. Jim Creek and Knik River beds are a playground and people need a place to play. To think there won't be some degree of vandalism or disrespect shown by some, if foolish. People will do this even in a Public Park in the middle of towns. Just gotta keep cleaning up after the few that ignore common courtesies. But if you lock up a place, you can expect that type of behavior to be even more present due to their reactions of being displaced or disenfranchised. Much easier to give people places to play and deal with the problems on a smaller scale.
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,031

    Cool I vote for None of the Above

    Quote Originally Posted by bushrat View Post
    A broken watch is right twice a day. Every org does some good. Support the ones that best reflect the type of Alaska and the type of hunting and fishing opportunities you want to see in the future.
    I belonged to the NRA until the very day that their head Wayne LaPierre made hay of the Oklahoma city bombing. His words were just so inappropriate that I could not be part of it, though I agree with many of their goals.

    Now I support individual issues, not orgs.

    WC Fields had it right when he said he would not stoop to belong to any organization that would be so despicable and morally corrupt as to allow him to be a member.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    I rest assured that while you want others to STOP, you want to be able to continue on your journey/jihad. When I recognize a Cease and Desist on the part of the Lock Up Crowd, I'll take a break too. But in the meantime, I will remain vigilant and speak out against it. Jim Creek and Knik River beds are a playground and people need a place to play. To think there won't be some degree of vandalism or disrespect shown by some, if foolish. People will do this even in a Public Park in the middle of towns. Just gotta keep cleaning up after the few that ignore common courtesies. But if you lock up a place, you can expect that type of behavior to be even more present due to their reactions of being displaced or disenfranchised. Much easier to give people places to play and deal with the problems on a smaller scale.
    Continuing to think of the whole place as riverbed and disavow the value of the Jim Swan Wetlands and adjacent uplands within that same 'playground' - named as critical habitat by F&G and DNR Commissioners in 1984 - That is what is clearly blind, foolish and greedy, but you are most welcome to to continue exhibiting that narrow view to your own detriment. Our org. has always said there is room for all in the Knik - go look at our very first pre-legislation PPT and learn. Your assessment and label of 'jihad' is not only wrong and unsupportable, but extremely offensive. I use 3 types of ORV's in the Knik myself. There is far more to sustainable habitat than just picking up trash, FYI. What a simplistic 'solution'.
    Also be aware that every single party involved lobbied for enforcement levels that are yet to be put in place. You can read. Read State laws too, while you broadcast your biases and fear messages that lie even outside those parameters. (Talk about 'jihad'!)
    Continue degrading our salmon, waterfowl, moose, etc. habitat if you must. Keep 'playing' on our children's tab and spreading hate terminology.
    BTW - the questions asked of you before were ?cleverly? avoided. The documentation on those answers exists in irrefutable quality and quantity, so the avoidance fits your MO.

    My dead-end, waste of energy conversation with you is over, which I am sure will solicit some 'praise'. Any thing else worth saying here would get me infractions. Flaming is not my chosen method of debate.
    Though entirely over optimistic, I can only suggest some deep soul searching about the value of this life and this unique planet.
    Bye, Bye.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyMan View Post
    I belonged to the NRA until the very day that their head Wayne LaPierre made hay of the Oklahoma city bombing. His words were just so inappropriate that I could not be part of it, though I agree with many of their goals.

    Now I support individual issues, not orgs.

    WC Fields had it right when he said he would not stoop to belong to any organization that would be so despicable and morally corrupt as to allow him to be a member.
    NRA and DU both lost my support for similar reasons - details unnecessary.
    Your viewpoint understood.

  16. #16
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 68 Bronco View Post


    My dead-end, waste of energy conversation with you is over...
    i am reminded of the old adage " don't try to teach a pig to whistle. you can't do it but the pig likes the attention..."
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Yukon Canada
    Posts
    1,289

    Default restrictive

    Alaska Backcountry Hunters and Anglers values and supports sound management and conservation of all of Alaska's indigenous wildlife. We fully understand and respect that predator management involving "control" efforts may at times be warranted. We support those efforts when they are based on sound science and endorsed by seasoned area biologists who are well-funded and free from political pressure.

    This sounds pretty good, except if you read everything BHA has on their website about predator control its pretty hard for me to believe they would be supportive of much in the way of predator control.
    "seasoned area biologists" ones they like?? or agree with?? Who vets them?? Its obvious they didnt support the control efforts on the 40 mile herd.
    They dont support drilling in the 1002 lands... big subject that one and Im not getting into it other than to say this.. many believe that by not drilling for our own oil on our own land is a huge mistake for many reasons.
    I tried to find some things BHA have done other than oppose or restrict and couldnt?? You know like clean up a creek or help wildlife in some way. Wildlife management takes a lot of money and there are some very good Orgs out there that really help wildlife, those are the ones that will get my time and money RMEF for one. If BHA gets its way I think AK will look something like California.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Yukon Canada
    Posts
    1,289

    Default

    The mission of SFW is to promote the protection and enhancement of wildlife habitat, assist in providing quality wildlife management programs, educating the public about the role hunters play in wildlife conservation, and perpetuating the family tradition of hunting and fishing.

    Hard for me to fault that statement, then there is the fact that their website lists some pretty impressive dollars they have raised and used on wildlife habitat, and wildlife habitat is and will continue to be an important issue.

  19. #19
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    I am Valley trash.
    Posts
    589

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon254 View Post
    Alaska Backcountry Hunters and Anglers values and supports sound management and conservation of all of Alaska's indigenous wildlife. We fully understand and respect that predator management involving "control" efforts may at times be warranted. We support those efforts when they are based on sound science and endorsed by seasoned area biologists who are well-funded and free from political pressure.
    So Bushrat or Homer dave. Why is your organization against the department on the unit 16 bear issue? Is the Bio (tony) not smart enough? What would you have done differently and why?

    Also why the "stiffy" for SFW. Please explain everything you hate about this group.

    I will do my best to get this list/question to them and post their responses.

  20. #20
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon254 View Post
    I tried to find some things BHA have done other than oppose or restrict and couldnt??
    Thank You Yukon! A very accurate statement. Any consumptive wildlife user who supports this org isn't doing themselves much good..............at least IMO.
    I'm not a paying member of SFW either, but don't see them as the devil ABHA makes them out to be.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •