September 26, 2020

‘Green Decoys’ Environmental Activists Posing As Real Hunters and Anglers

*Editor’s Note* – This is a press release sent to me about an effort by the Center for Consumer Freedom, to expose the fact that some hunting and angling organizations are actually environmental groups who often get their funding from environmental and “left-wing” organizations. I welcome the fact that CCF is exposing this for the purpose to stop promoting environmentalism at the expense of game management, but this is nothing new. Many of us in the outdoor community have been harping about this for a long time, only to be told by many sportsmen, brainwashed to think these environmental groups are good for wildlife and game management, that they are our friends. It’s time to wake up and know who is buttering your bread and why. And while we are at it, drop the left/right paradigm nonsense.

For Immediate Release
January 30, 2014
Center for Consumer Freedom
Contact: Banks Woodruff
(202) 463-7112

New Website Exposes Self-Proclaimed “Sportsmen’s” Groups as Camouflaged Radical Environmentalists

Wealthy Environmental Foundation Money Funds “Green Decoy” Groups Who Claim to Speak for Sportsmen

Washington, D.C.—Today, the Center for Consumer Freedom announced the launch of GreenDecoys.com, a website devoted to exposing radical environmentalists camouflaged under outdoor-sounding names whose real objective is to serve the interests of their wealthy backers. Five groups of particular interest are the Izaak Walton League of America, Trout Unlimited, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, and Bull Moose Sportsmen’s Alliance.

The website is available here.

CCF researchers spent weeks investigating the financial and personnel backgrounds of these “green decoys” and discovered many connections with organizations and financiers infamous for environmental activism. As illustrated in the accompanying infographic, common financiers include such left-wing grant-making titans as the Pew Charitable Trusts; the virulently anti-gun Joyce Foundation; and the Hewlett and Packard Foundations, multi-billion-dollar groups that give tens of millions to environmentalist causes.
InfoGraph

Click image to enlarge or see it here.

As to their false public impressions, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, for example, has been described in the media as “Republican-leaning.” However, it then received $1.2 million to form a group benefitting liberal labor unions, the so-called Union Sportsmen’s Alliance, which seeks to draw members away from the National Rifle Association. The Izaak Walton League, which describes itself as an angling group, receives money from the left-wing Packard Foundation, which has given over $50 million to Planned Parenthood.

The backgrounds of high-ranking officials in these groups also call into question their commitment to what are generally identified as “sportsmen’s” activities. Backcountry Hunters and Anglers executive director Land Tawney, for example, ran the liberal political action committee (PAC) calling itself the “Montana Hunters and Anglers Leadership Fund,” which spent $1.1 million against Republican U.S. Senate candidate Danny Rehberg in 2012 and received several hundred thousand dollars from the League of Conservation Voters, a liberal environmentalist group.

“These self-anointed sportsmen groups posture as advocates for the hunting and fishing communities, but their funding tells the real story,” said CCF Senior Research Analyst Will Coggin. “Given the millions they collectively take from radical activists, it’s clear they serve an environmentalist master, not America’s sportsmen.”

Share

Two Psychotic Actions Don’t Equal Rational Justice

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, a fringe, psychotic group that uses fraud and other unethical means to raise money to pay overblown salaries and fund programs not geared to saving or protecting animals, attempted to file a lawsuit on behalf of 5 California whales demanding the same constitutional rights as humans. PETA vs. Sea World was subsequently thrown out of court because the judge ruled animals don’t have the same rights as people.

As perverse as this kind of behavior is, it is not a position shared only by whacked-out PETA members. Cass Sunstein, President Obama’s pick to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, has stated publicly that he believes lawsuits should be brought on behalf of animals.

The United Nations and most animal rights groups fully support the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights which claims that animals and humans all share in the same rights.

Understandably a psychotic behavior on the part of those who support such rights equity with animals, we now learn that the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) is considering filing a lawsuit against PETA that would, “represent the 25,000-plus dogs and cats that PETA has killed since 1998 whose “rights” have been violated under the 5th and 8th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution”.

While the notion in and of itself is totally asinine, those who understand the differences between rights for humans and welfare for animals, get their point. I am only assuming the announcement of consideration to sue is for the purpose of making a statement and not actually an attempt at using two wrongs to somehow come up with anything that resembles truth.

Similar to the actions of the Humane Society of the United States, these two groups solicit money from anyone from small individual donors to very wealthy celebrities. In 2009 Carrie Underwood gave $200,000 to HSUS.

Unfortunately for all the donors, they are not made aware of the fact of the tens of thousands of family pets these two groups routinely euthanize, sometimes without giving any effort to find them homes.

It is very important for individuals and organizations like the Center for Consumer Freedom to recognize and expose fraud and hypocrisy as is the case here with PETA. What is not acceptable is to use PETA’s own crack-brained ideas to allow animals to have legal representation of any kind in our courts.

We get your point. Now let’s move on.

Tom Remington

Share