Hunters, anglers join global-warming outcry

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Diana Marrero

Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - Anglers say trout and salmon are moving upstream looking for colder water. Duck hunters say the prairie potholes where ducklings hatch are drying up. And game hunters say moose populations are migrating north.

Many of these outdoor enthusiasts blame it on global warming. Now, they are lobbying Congress to protect their favorite pastimes.

Nearly 700 hunting, fishing and sporting groups, including several from Arizona, recently sent letters urging lawmakers to support a bill to curb the greenhouse-gas emissions that cause climate change.

These are not your typical environmentalists, but they are increasingly interested in environmental issues.

"The hunting and angling community is becoming more aware of global climate change and the problems associated with that, especially how it affects fish and wildlife," said Rod Mondt, who lives in Tucson and works as a conservation-lands coordinator for Trout Unlimited. "They see it more readily because they're out in the field more."

By taking on global warming, outdoor enthusiasts join a diverse group of activists, from evangelical Christians to farmers, clamoring for legislative action on climate change.

The debate could heat up this summer because lawmakers are expected to consider legislation that would cut carbon-dioxide emissions by two-thirds nationwide by 2050.

"America simply has to step up and take a leadership role," Sen. John Warner, R-Va., told a gathering of hunters and anglers last week.

Warner, who is sponsoring the bill, said he hopes the new coalition can help sway his Republican colleagues.

"There is no legislator worth their salt who wouldn't listen to local hunters and fishermen," he said.

Concerns in Arizona

In Arizona, hunters are concerned about the effects of drought on the state's mule-deer and elk populations. Conditions near the Grand Canyon have gotten so bad that some wildlife there must rely on man-made water-catching devices as the sole water source.

Anglers warn that warmer temperatures could lead to a decline in already threatened species such as Apache trout in the northern part of the state.

Jason Williams, 31, a firefighter from Prescott, worries about the drought that is killing the ponderosa pines and could affect the state's big-game herds. He says he already has noticed effects of global warming in his native Illinois, where he would go ice-fishing while growing up.

"Nowadays, you're lucky if the lakes freeze in the winter," he said.

Williams, who used to work for the Arizona Wilderness Coalition, hunts for elk, duck and quail and likes to fish for trout. An independent, he says hunters and anglers have a better chance than many environmentalists of swaying Republican lawmakers.

"It makes a big difference if Republicans are hearing from what they consider to be their base," he said.

Working together

By mobilizing outdoor enthusiasts, bill supporters hope to tone down the partisan rhetoric that often accompanies discussion of global warming on Capitol Hill.

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., former chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has called global warming a "hoax." And Warner was the only Republican to support the bill in that committee.

With a 51-49 Democratic majority, supporters must work with the GOP to get to the 60-vote threshold needed to pass controversial legislation.

The GOP has a long tradition of environmentalism. President Theodore Roosevelt championed the creation of national monuments, parks and preserves that served as the foundation for the current park system. President Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency. And the GOP was instrumental in passing a number of environmental bills: the Wilderness Act, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act.

Change under Reagan

Environmental issues began to take a partisan tone under former President Reagan, said Jim Moore, a professor at Pacific University in Oregon. But that's beginning to change with the involvement of hunters, ranchers and other conservative-leaning groups, he said.

David Crockett, an avid sportsman and descendant of legendary frontiersman Davy Crockett, called on GOP lawmakers to be Republicans in the Roosevelt tradition by supporting the global-warming bill.

"It gives us the chance to keep what is most precious to us," he said.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/green/articl...unters0221.html

[AtlantiCat 0]

What's sad is that these are the same people who were calling the environmentalists names like "stupid tree-hugging hippies" not so many years ago. Now it's starting to affect you. Now you start to take notice. Pathetic.

[GaryC 7]

The environment is changing. We didn't cause it and we can't stop it. Adapt or die.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The environment is changing. We didn't cause it and we can't stop it. Adapt or die.

Human activities can and have brought about drastic changes in the quality of the environment - across hundreds of miles of land and sea.

The contention is whether this reasoning applies to the atmospheric environment. Of course - with half the world's land changed by human activities, how could it not?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The environment is changing. We didn't cause it and we can't stop it. Adapt or die.

Oh geez, Gary. Tell that to the hunters. The point is we need to change our current approach to the environment as it effect so many aspects of life. I know you think that the environment should never get in the way of business making profit, but with enough foresight, people realize that without a sustainable environment, businesses such as the logging industry, fishing industries, etc. will collapse. It's ignorant to think we don't have an impact on the environment and to continue down the path we are on is reckless.

[GaryC 7]

The environment is changing. We didn't cause it and we can't stop it. Adapt or die.

Oh geez, Gary. Tell that to the hunters. The point is we need to change our current approach to the environment as it effect so many aspects of life. I know you think that the environment should never get in the way of business making profit, but with enough foresight, people realize that without a sustainable environment, businesses such as the logging industry, fishing industries, etc. will collapse. It's ignorant to think we don't have an impact on the environment and to continue down the path we are on is reckless.

It just isn't true. Believe what you want but the environment changed before we were here and it will change after we are gone. We do indeed have an impact with our pollution and we have been making good progress towards changing that. But CO2 isn't a pollutant and our CO2 output isn't changing things. I know that it isn't the "consensus" but we have seen other consensus views to be wrong. The same applies to this. I will be happy to continue my life without regard to my CO2 output and be happy to vote for those that do not fall for that BS. You do what you want although I think it is a colossal waste of time and effort.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The environment is changing. We didn't cause it and we can't stop it. Adapt or die.

Oh geez, Gary. Tell that to the hunters. The point is we need to change our current approach to the environment as it effect so many aspects of life. I know you think that the environment should never get in the way of business making profit, but with enough foresight, people realize that without a sustainable environment, businesses such as the logging industry, fishing industries, etc. will collapse. It's ignorant to think we don't have an impact on the environment and to continue down the path we are on is reckless.

It just isn't true. Believe what you want but the environment changed before we were here and it will change after we are gone. We do indeed have an impact with our pollution and we have been making good progress towards changing that. But CO2 isn't a pollutant and our CO2 output isn't changing things. I know that it isn't the "consensus" but we have seen other consensus views to be wrong. The same applies to this. I will be happy to continue my life without regard to my CO2 output and be happy to vote for those that do not fall for that BS. You do what you want although I think it is a colossal waste of time and effort.

That's like saying your car is going to eventually break down or you'll eventually grow old and die so why bother to do anything to keep your car up or take care of yourself. What a cynical view on life.

[GaryC 7]

The environment is changing. We didn't cause it and we can't stop it. Adapt or die.

Oh geez, Gary. Tell that to the hunters. The point is we need to change our current approach to the environment as it effect so many aspects of life. I know you think that the environment should never get in the way of business making profit, but with enough foresight, people realize that without a sustainable environment, businesses such as the logging industry, fishing industries, etc. will collapse. It's ignorant to think we don't have an impact on the environment and to continue down the path we are on is reckless.

It just isn't true. Believe what you want but the environment changed before we were here and it will change after we are gone. We do indeed have an impact with our pollution and we have been making good progress towards changing that. But CO2 isn't a pollutant and our CO2 output isn't changing things. I know that it isn't the "consensus" but we have seen other consensus views to be wrong. The same applies to this. I will be happy to continue my life without regard to my CO2 output and be happy to vote for those that do not fall for that BS. You do what you want although I think it is a colossal waste of time and effort.

That's like saying your car is going to eventually break down or you'll eventually grow old and die so why bother to do anything to keep your car up or take care of yourself. What a cynical view on life.

It's nothing like that. It's more like taking medicine for a ailment you don't have.

[pedroh 21]

let's hunt possums!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

That's like saying your car is going to eventually break down or you'll eventually grow old and die so why bother to do anything to keep your car up or take care of yourself. What a cynical view on life.

It's nothing like that. It's more like taking medicine for a ailment you don't have.

Gary, if you could say that with absolute certainty then you'd have point, but you can't and that's the issue. Secondly, protecting the environment goes beyond just cutting down on emissions. There's also mercury, lead, toxic waste, air pollution. The hunters and anglers are seeing change happening and they want us to do something about it. Change is as inevitable as the fact that we'll all grow old and die, but life goes on after us and we have a responsibility towards future generations.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The focus is all wrong methinks - somehow the idea has been promoted that CO2 levels are the be-all-and-end-all of scientific thought related to climate change. From what I understand there are a whole host of changes going on - not least ocean acidity, which seem to go by totally ignored in these discussions.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The focus is all wrong methinks - somehow the idea has been promoted that CO2 levels are the be-all-and-end-all of scientific thought related to climate change. From what I understand there are a whole host of changes going on - not least ocean acidity, which seem to go by totally ignored in these discussions.

Yes and if Gary read the article he would have noticed that prior to Reagan, the GOP made protecting the environment a conservative issue. Starting with Reagan, however, the environment has been seen as something that should never interfere with commerce. It is a shortsighted and cynical view to say the least. Sustainability is a conservative notion.

[GaryC 7]

That's like saying your car is going to eventually break down or you'll eventually grow old and die so why bother to do anything to keep your car up or take care of yourself. What a cynical view on life.

It's nothing like that. It's more like taking medicine for a ailment you don't have.

Gary, if you could say that with absolute certainty then you'd have point, but you can't and that's the issue. Secondly, protecting the environment goes beyond just cutting down on emissions. There's also mercury, lead, toxic waste, air pollution. The hunters and anglers are seeing change happening and they want us to do something about it. Change is as inevitable as the fact that we'll all grow old and die, but life goes on after us and we have a responsibility towards future generations.

You got me all wrong stranger. The real pollution that we create is a serious problem and I am all for stopping it. Lead, mercury, acid rain, smog and any other pollution you care to name should be aggressivly controlled. I just don't think CO2 is a problem and I really don't care about that issue one little bit. So you go ahead and reduce your carbon footprint if you like. I just don't think your making any difference in worrying about it.