I am wondering what peoples thoughts are on organizations like greenpeace & the sierra club
I know the thought that first comes to a lot of peoples minds is tree huggers and over the top activists, I think that if you take 5 minutes and look at their websites you may have an appreaciation for what they are and do. I know they may often make the news due to some extreme acts but if it takes some extreme acts to make a little progress I think it is worth it. These organizations don't necessarily stand for not cutting down any trees or not killing any animal its more protect what we have. I think that all scuba divers appreciate the serenity of a dive and the things you get to see and I would assume that most of us would be for protected marine reserves so we can enjoy coral reefs and seeing an abundance of life....that is what these organizations stand for on a larger scale. So take 5 mins and browse their sites. Let me know your thoughts!
As a matter of fact, the Sierra Club has close ties to many animal rights organizations such as the Humane Society of the United States which has close ties to many more extremist animal rights groups. The Sierra Club is very much in favor of no hunting, no fishing and zero impact activities. I am sure you can find many similar ties with Greenpeace, probably at a more extremist level than Sierra.
Neither group will EVER have any of my support. My support goes with groups such as US Sportsmans Alliance, the Izaak Walton League of America and organizations such as Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever and other similar conservation groups who cater to all of those who enjoy the outdoors at all levels.
Sierra club has done a lot to protect land from development and access restrictions. Climbers like them and if you have to make an impact just don't use the land they protect. The work they do isn't bad. To group them with their more radical connections is like connecting the catholic church with NAMBLA because they both harbor pedophiles.
I don't agree about anti fishing, read
They are trying to save 37 million acres just for hunt and fish. Sure, it's their press but it's not Anti sportsman!
Florida Sierra "We anticipate that we will be able to work cooperatively with the SWFWMD, FWCC, Ducks Unlimited, Audubon and other entities and programs to provide guidance and funding for waterfowl habitat restoration/enhancement as part of the Lake Hancock restoration activities." So Ducks Unlimited is selling you out as well? Those nasty Sierra people must have lied to DU, right?
"In the United States, ExxonMobil supports Ducks Unlimited's..." Really! DU get oil money as well! Is that paying for all the dead birds after the spills?
Sierra Club is very cautious in how they word their press releases. There is a lot of anti sportsman work they do. I belong to the Outdoor Writers Association of America and at one of their recent conferences the Sierra Club sponsored a few meals/activities. They showed and spoke of a lot support for non-hunting and non-fishing activities. So much so that many, many hunting and fishing corporate members of OWAA threatened to stop their support of the organization.
Taken from the US Sportsman's Alliance website:
The Sierra Club: No Friend to Sportsmen
Environmental group uses resources to reshape wildlife management programs
October 15, 2005 (National)
The Sierra Club is a powerful, well-funded environmental organization that has used its financial resources and bank of lawyers to reshape wildlife management practices and programs. While it claims to not oppose traditional outdoor sports, the group continues to attack hunting, fishing, trapping and wildlife management programs.
Efforts to Derail Hunting
⢠In 1995, the Sierra Club sued in district court and halted black bear hunting in Washingtonâs Cascade Mountain range.
⢠In 2002, the Sierra Club joined anti-hunting groups in bringing lawsuits to halt land management practices in Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota that are necessary to sustain healthy wildlife populations.
⢠In 2002, the Sierra Club filed suit in district court and stopped an Oregon elk study that pointed to the need for regional cougar population reductions, i.e. hunting.
⢠In 2002, a Chapter of the Sierra Club of Canada denounced Quebecâs wildlife conservation policies and began a movement to ban hunting and trapping on wildlife reserves.
⢠In 2004, a Sierra Club chapter in New Mexico began a campaign to ban trapping on public lands.
⢠The New Jersey Chapter of the Sierra Club opposed the stateâs 2003 and 2004 bear hunts and called on former Gov. James McGreevey to issue an executive order blocking the hunt. The chapter also opposed a bill to allow Sunday deer hunting.
⢠In 2005, the Sierra Club joined anti-hunting groups in threatening to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service if the Florida black bear is not listed as an endangered species.
It Looks Like an Anti, Acts Like an Anti - It Must be an Anti
⢠In 1976, Sierra Club lawyers joined in a New Jersey lawsuit to force inclusion of anti-hunters on the Fish and Game Council. The suit failed.
⢠In 2002, a Florida Sierra Club chapter endorsed People for the Ethical Treatment of Animalsâ (PETA) mantra and advocated a vegetarian lifestyle.
Following the Leader
Some of the Sierra Clubâs leaders are animal and environmental extremists.
⢠Sierra Club board member Paul Watson, founder of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, sails a heavily-armed, cement-bowed ship in search of fishing vessels to sink, according to a May 2004 article in Front Page magazine. He claims to have sunk 10 vessels since 1979.
⢠Watson mentored notorious animal-rights militant Rodney Coronado, who was sentenced in 1995 for burning down a Michigan State State research lab in 1992.
⢠In 2003, Watson hoped stack the Sierra Club board of directors with other like-minded individuals and âuse the resources of the $95-million-a-year budgetâ to address animal-rights issues and immigration policies. The board candidates he endorsed were not elected and his scheme failed.
⢠Jim Flynn editor of the Oregon Sierra Clubâs Conifer newsletter applauded Earth Liberation Front (ELF) activists who torched the offices of an Oregon timber company in 2001.
Friend or Foe?
The Sierra Club is, at best, no friend of hunting and outdoor sports. At worst, it is a dangerous adversary of those who enjoy the activities and depend on traditional wildlife management for the continuation of their outdoors lifestyles.
Sure, the Sierra Club has done a lot to protect land, but from who and for what? There are other conservation organizations out there that do much more than the Sierra Club and do so at a more scientific/biological sportsman friendly way.
They "anticipate" they will be able to work with these groups. Doesn't mean they will. It is all in the wording.
Some of us prefer to think that PETA means People Eating Tasty Animals!
But I do have an "Ocean Conservancy" calendar in the computer room.
I've been a 25 year member of Sierra Club and I am a TREE-HUGGER. "Leave no trace" seems to me a legitimate goal. Scuba comes as close as possible, leaving not even a footprint (although I admit to having peed in my wetsuit). If you know of a group that is more intent on developing a sustainable society, please let me know.
The Izaak Walton League of America is about as good as it gets for all around conservation without infringing on anybodies rights.
Here is their link: . There are others that specialize in certain areas of conservation and cater to all of those who enjoy the outdoors.
It's one thing to "leave no trace," it is an entirely different thing when you abuse our court systems to get your agenda passed into legislature while bypassing the biologists that are hired to make the proper decisions regarding conservation within a state.