Bad taste in my mouth

They did it. After swearing up and down that they weren’t accepting any funds from HSUS, the backers of Measure 2 sold out. Apparently someone, somewhere is pretty nervous that they’ll lose the battle, because they’ve brought in the big dogs.

What am I talking about? Well, this morning I caught a commercial on TV regarding Measure 2. Supposedly it was a group of hunters talking about the lack of ethics in a “canned hunt.” Comparing high-fence hunting to going to the zoo and shooting a buffalo. Funny part is that the measure doesn’t “technically” address buffalo, just farmed elk and deer. So according to the sponsors of the bill, shooting a buffalo in an enclosure is just fine. (Although I think the zoo may have a word or two to say about it! LOL!)

At the end of the commercial, those little words show up at the bottom: “This ad paid for by the Humane Society Legislative Fund.” I’m guessing that the measly $100,000 or so that the ads cost were a joke to them. I mean, they have millions upon millions at their disposal, so this would just be hardly a drop in the bucket.

I wonder how many people sent them money, thinking they were saving a dog or a cat at a shelter, only to find out now that they’ve paid for an ad in North Dakota to take away certain hunting practices?

I’ve already heard some of the sponsors of the measure claim on radio that they have no control over where HSUS spends their money. That they didn’t ask for them to come here and get involved. That they haven’t had direct involvement with the cause. Sorry if I’m a tad skeptical about all that, but it seems a bit of a desperate attempt to try to sway last-minute voters. And I hope they realize what they’ve started.

Once a group like HSUS gets financially involved in a fight, they don’t like to lose. Again, check out what’s happening in Ohio…or any of the other states that have issues that interest this particular group. Their website claims North Dakota’s Measure 2 as one of their projects…again, the sponsors of this measure should be wary.

The good news is that this particular ad will stop running in less than a week. But you know what they say, once the barn door is open…well, you know.

Oh, and by the way, vote NO on Measure 2.

3 thoughts on “Bad taste in my mouth

  1. Val –

    As both a hunter and an ag-marketer, I’m vested in this issue quite heavily.

    To me, high fence hunting isn’t the most pure version of the sport, but it’s still hunting. Once you vote away rights, and anti- hunters get their way, that’s the start to a slippery downhill slope that can be irreversible. The loss of any hunting rights makes it easier for them to take them away in the future – not something we need.

    I remember reading an earlier post of yours I remember you saying something similar about the effects it could have on ag. HSUS has stated that it wants all livestock to become extinct – while this is a far shot, this measure passing would be one step closer.

    Please keep getting the word out – and hopefully the ads from the “sportsman against high fence hunting” don’t fool people. I’ll do the same.

    Al Winmill

    • Al – Thanks for the support! And I agree, HSUS’ goals may be a far shot, but I’m going to do whatever I can to make sure that not one of them are met. I want to ensure that my boys have every opportunity to hunt, fish, farm, etc. without groups such as HSUS standing in their way. It’s why I do what I do! 🙂

  2. Pingback: Protecting ALL animals – Vote NO on Measure 5 | Wag'n Tales

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s