McCabe Home Wise Use Main Page

W.J. McCabe Chapter Izaak Walton League of America

(Author's Note: This copyrighted article has appeared in several magazines since I first wrote it in 1995, the most recent of which was a summer 1999 issue of Cabela's Sportsman's Quest. The article so infuriated the wise use movement that they orchestrated an email campaign against Cabela's, under the umbrella of one wise use group, the Blue Ribbon Coalition (BRC). Cabela's consequently distanced themselves from this article - which was clearly labeled as an opinion piece. This is doubly ironic because it was the magazine's editor, who had seen this article printed in another magazine, that asked to purchase reprint rights from me BECAUSE HE LIKED IT.

The BRC even reprinted my article in their magazine and on their website, without my permission and in violation of my copyright - one of the private property rights they so heartily endorse when it suits their need. Of course, they edited it to make it appear unbalanced, removing my criticisms of the big green groups. I have reprinted the unaltered article here so that you may judge the entire piece for yourself.)

America's hunters and anglers are caught in the crossfire of two conflicting movements: animal rights and wise-use/property rights. The former seeks to eliminate the lifestyle of sportsmen and women, while the latter seeks to win over the sporting community to strengthen its hidden anti-environmental goals. Ultimately, both movements have caused a harmful rift in the larger environmental community.

Animal rights advocates have sometimes pushed their agenda into the environmental arena, a place it does not belong. Focusing on the salvation of individual animals, they ignore that it is the survival of species that is important. When a species is plentiful, saving every individual is not only impossible, it is biologically or environmentally undesirable. Animal rights may be a social cause, but it is rarely a matter of environmental importance. Nevertheless, the strident attacks on hunters and anglers have left sportsmen and -women paranoid and fearful of anything that smacks of the animal rights agenda.

Enter the wise-use movement, a group largely funded by industry that seeks to roll back decades of conservation. By feeding myths to the sporting press, its proponents have duped many sportsmen and -women into believing that the environmental and animal rights movements are one and the same; that federal resource agencies have been filled with legions of "antis"; that wilderness designation is anti-sporting; that the Endangered Species Act is an animal rights cause; and that ecosystem management is also the venue of the animal rights movement. Into this maelstrom are swept many other causes, such as wetland protection and any other action that may rouse the anger of the property rights advocates.

Members of the wise-use movement know that paranoia is a powerful propaganda tool, and they wield it effectively. Because of our legitimate fear of overly zealous anti-hunting and animal rights activists, we sportsmen and -women have fallen for their spiel.

Unfortunately, mainstream environmentalists have done little to combat this. Most big "green" groups rarely reach out to sportsmen and women. Since many of us no longer join these groups, it has become easy for us to believe the wise-use fiction that these groups are anti-hunting. And occasionally, environmental groups shoot themselves in the foot by giving tacit approval to animal rights agendas. They have even failed to capitalize on the many issues and victories held in common with hunters and anglers.

As a hunter and an environmentalist activist for the Izaak Walton League, I have sometimes felt uncomfortable at meetings with environmentalist colleagues when occasionally I hear an ill-informed individual deride hunters as unenlightened louts. One advantage, though, of having one foot in each camp is that I can quickly put such myths to rest. My very presence can convince others that hunters can indeed be committed environmentalists. The fact is that the goals of all in the conservation and environmental movements are remarkably similar.

Aldo Leopold knew that. And if the visionary environmentalist and ardent hunter were to return today, he'd be deeply saddened by the present rift. The wise-use movement is pulling hunters and anglers away from the environmental community. Meanwhile, environmental groups stand by and watch it happen, failing to acknowledge that many of their members hunt or fish, and apparently willing to allow these people (which total 56 million in America) to leave their ranks.

As the environmental movement meets increasing resistance from organized opposition and their political henchmen, losing a large part of their potential membership to the opposition will severely cripple that cause we all hold dear: the protection of clean, healthy and biologically diverse environments. Without protected landscapes, clean air and water, and sound land use laws, we will have nothing to fish or hunt for, and no place to do it.

If hunters and anglers leave these issues for the green groups to deal with, then we can't complain when environmental groups fail to represent our interests. We actually end up proving some people's suspicions that we aren't interested in protecting something if we can't shoot or catch it. If that's what we've come to, then maybe our critics are correct, but that's not where we came from. From the very beginning of the conservation movement, hunters and anglers have been concerned about all living things and wild places. In the long run, retaking this moral high ground is our best strategy for the protecting hunting and the environment.

Even as you read this, a whole host of people are now working to unravel decades of environmental progress. Some of these people are politicians who parade around in camouflage once a year to get hunters' votes, proclaiming to be our friends, while they destroy the very things we cherish. These people are the common foe of everyone who loves nature.

We all know that the viewpoint of animal rights activists is biologically indefensible. But we must also wise up to the wise-users' contention that the environmental movement is comprised of animal rights zealots. If we don't, those out there anxious to see environmental protection weakened will succeed in their goal of preventing conservation-minded people from working together.

And no one stands to lose more than those of us who love to hunt and fish.

Copyright © 1995 Michael Furtman