Editorial-Opinion April 2011

The intellectual dishonesty of the Georgia Wildlife Federation (GWF) continues to be impressive.

Last month I ended this editorial noting that the GWF — through its wholly owned sportsman’s facade called the Camo Coalition — objected to the legislature’s plan to treat all specialty tags the same. Somehow “fair-is-fair” for all specialty tags is not fair to GWF. This becomes particularly galling to sportsmen when one understands that none of the funds raised by the wildlife tags are used for sportsman’s programs.

But that was last month.

This month, they have eclipsed themselves again.

In an effort to blow enough smoke and dust in the political air, hoping to freeze the progress of the bill that would allow hunting deer over bait, they have “discovered” a property-rights issue.

GWF’s objection paints them at best as naive, and at worst, politically nasty. In either event, they have attempted to bait sportsmen into supporting a legal concern that is bogus.

The legal concern is property rights.

What has my neck bowed is not the pros and cons of baiting. That long debate has been held, and sportsmen’s voices on both sides have been heard. GON has provided a platform for those debates for many years.

My concern is the callous attempt by GWF to mislead sportsmen by now touting a “property-rights issue” they helped create in the first place.

GWF e-mailed sportsmen this message.

“HB277 has moved to the Senate. Property Rights Now a Huge Problem. Contact your Senator to say NO to Shooting Deer over Bait.”

Sportsmen who follow this GWF/Camo Coalition call-to-action  will be seen as uninformed by their legislators.

GWF goes on to say…

“The amended House Bill 277 will allow shooting deer over bait in the southern part of Georgia. In addition, the bill was amended to require that bait must be located at least 50 yards from the baiter’s property line. But the law in the northern zone still says the hunter must be 200 yards and out of sight of any bait. So that means that you cannot legally hunt land next door to someone who puts out bait unless you are more than 150 yards from your own property line.”

So, what is wrong with the “property-rights” claim by the GWF?

Re-read their last sentence. If that sentence is true, then if the bill fails, you can change the 150 back to 200 yards — like it is now.

Their suddenly found “property rights” issue has been in place for 10 years. GWF supported the original baiting rule of 200 yards and line of sight when then WRD Director David Waller established it. When Waller retired from the state, he went to work for GWF as head of the Camo Coalition.

Laughingly, GWF is objecting to the taking of a property right 10 years after they helped implement the taking of the very same property right.

This taking is nothing new. But this bill reduces the taking by 25 percent. So why is GWF squealing?

It is a smoke-screen— a false argument designed only to stop a bill.

GWF says there is a new property rights issue in the bill. They are wrong, and they know it, but they are often wrong. It doesn’t seem to bother them.

For instance, they say that sportsmen oppose drilling for oil in ANWR, when surveys say most sportsmen want that oil field developed.

GWF says they raise money at the buckarama’s for sportsmen’s programs. OK, name any two programs the GWF has for sportsmen? GWF was founded in 1937. Don’t you think by now you could name at least two programs funded with buckarama dollars?

GWF says sportsmen oppose hunting over bait, when clearly, most sportsmen don’t.

GWF says a lot.

Now they say there is a property-rights issue in the current deer baiting legislation. And they ask sportsmen to kill the bill because of this property-rights issue.

GWF is as wrong about this issue as they are about all the others.

GWF claims to “Speak for Sportsmen.” If they do, what must our political leaders think of us?

So when you write your legislator, you might start by letting him know who does, and more importantly, who does not speak for you.