My Letter to Senator Baldwin and a Message To Anti-Willdife Democrats



Last week the Wilderness Act and wildlife partially dogged a bullet when the disgusting “Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act” was voted down in the United States Senate. This rancid bill was put forward by Senate Democrats in the hope that vulnerable “red state” Democrats would get support from the gun and killing obsessed citizens in their respective states. The bill would have essentially gutted many Wilderness Act protections by allowing sport hunting, trapping, shooting ranges, and hunter/trapper “access” to many wilderness lands not currently open to wildlife killing. The bill would have also forbade the EPA from regulating the highly destructive and poisonous lead in bullets and fishing lures. Finally, in what may have been the most disgusting element of the bill, it would have allowed the importation of polar bears killed by trophy hunters in Canada prior to ESA protections being established in 1997. All of these odious elements fly in the face of the “environmentalism” that the Democratic Party has moved away from more and more each year. Especially under the anti-wildlife Obama Administration.

So what possesses these pretend “progressives” to pander to trophy hunting, shooting, anti-willdife, and anti-environment factions? Animals 24-7 editor and writer, Merritt Clifton, presents and outstanding piece laying out why Democrats “dance with the devil” and pander to wildlife killing interests.

Why U.S. Senate Democrats dance with Elmer Fudd & his hunting buddies

Why are ranking U.S. Senate Democrats seemingly hellbent on passing the “Sportsmen’s Act,” S. 2363, despite the opposition of more than 100 usually pro-Democratic animal and environmental protection charities?

“To give a couple of southern Democrats––lead sponsor Kay Hagan of North Carolina, and Mark Pryor of Arkansas––a political talking point as they campaign in the rural areas of their states,” alleged Humane Society of the U.S. president Wayne Pacelle in a July 7, 2014 alert to HSUS supporters.

That appears to be the short answer.

The long answer is that the Democratic Party is still smarting, albeit largely unawares, over the 1952 loss of the U.S. presidency to gung-ho hunter Dwight D. Eisenhower. Posing often with hunting weapons, Eisenhower won by a landslide over reputed pro-animal candidate Adlai Stephenson, after nonhunters Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry Truman had held the White House for 20 years.

In other words the Democratic Party are sellouts of the highest order and will sell their own “soul” to court anti-animal interests for a few votes. There is no better example of this than Wisconsin’s supposedly “Democratic” Senator, Tammy Baldwin.

Today I wrote a letter to Senator Baldwin expressing my extreme disappointment at her anti-willdife positions and her support of the disgusting bill mentioned above. Here is the letter:

Senator Baldwin,

 I am writing this letter to express my extreme and continued disappointment with your decision to vote for the so-called Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act (S. 2363). Myself and many other wildlife advocates find it highly disturbing that you would vote for a bill that amounts to nothing more than a giant give away to trophy hunting interests (Safari Club International) and the NRA. This vote, and your support of the 2012 delisting of the gray wolf in the Great Lakes states, have lead many of us to either withhold or withdraw our support for you and the Democratic Party.

 How does the average American citizen benefit from a bill that essentially opens to sport killing some of the very few remaining refuges that wildlife in our country have? To allow these remaining Federal wilderness areas to be opened up to “sport” hunters and to the even more deplorable trappers, flies in the face of the Wilderness Act, and appears on the surface to be nothing more than another give away or pandering attempt for trophy hunters, trappers, and those that show little to no respect for our remaining wildlife. This bill also adopts the propaganda that is presented from trophy hunting lobbying groups, the NRA, and state fish and wildlife departments.

 I also find it highly disturbing that so many Democrats would be on board with the attempt to further weaken efforts to remove or regulate lead from bullets and fishing lures. This again flies in the face of the environmentalist image that Democrats try to portray. Is it worth selling out those principles in the hope of gaining a few votes from the trophy hunting, shooting, and anti-environment extremists in this country? Some estimates show that that hunters constitute only four to five percent of the population in the United States. If that is the case, please explain why the Democratic Party continuously places their desires ahead of non-hunters and environmentalists each election cycle? We apparently cannot do anything to provide healthcare for all citizens, yet we can make sure that the Federal government can provide shooting ranges and wildlife killing fields on public lands?

 In our own state of Wisconsin one form of wildlife or another is relentlessly pursued by packs of dogs 24 hours a day and 365 days a year on state and Federal lands. The most recent example of this is the use of dogs against wolves. You supported the removal of the gray wolf in the Great Lakes from the Endangered Species List. That 2012 removal has led to hundreds of wolves being shot, trapped, or relentlessly pursued by packs of vicious dogs. After the most recent State Appeals Court ruling dogs can now be used to “train” against wolves for 365 days a year with no restrictions. This is an animal that was under ESA protections less than three years ago and is now the target of legalized animal fighting. In one year the official population count has dropped by 19 percent. When other citizens and myself have contacted your office expressing concerns, and requesting possible Federal intervention, we received the exact same canned Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources talking points. Even more concerning is that these talking points are regurgitations of the very same propaganda presented by the Wisconsin Bear Hunters Association, the deceptively names hunting group, the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation, and Safari Club International. Should it be any surprise that many of us in the wildlife advocacy community in Wisconsin have become very jaded toward you and your positions on this issue?

I understand that Wisconsin has a higher percentage of people that call themselves hunters but they are still a far lower number than those of us that do not kill animals for sport or whatever justification used. Non-hunters continue to be ignored and have our views dismissed by you and many in your party. I expect this from the GOP and the other Senator from this state. I do not expect this from someone that proclaims to be a “progressive” Democrat.

 I voted for you numerous times when you were my Congressional Representative and when you ran for Senator. I was under the misguided assumption that you shared the same values about the environment and wildlife that I did. Apparently I was mistaken. Your stance against wolves and your vote for that disgusting “Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act” have done serious damage to your credibility among wildlife advocates in Wisconsin. I hope you reconsider your stance on these issues and seriously take into account the damage those positions have caused your reputation among those you should consider to be your “base” in Wisconsin.

The outrage and disappointment that I feel toward Senator Baldwin and the majority of other fake “Democrats” that voted for this bill cannot be understated but also cannot come as a surprise. Remember that a majority of Democrats also voted for the 2011 budget bill that contained the disgusting “rider” that delisted wolves in the Northern Rockies from the Endangered Species List. That odious inclusion was done to “protect” anti-wolf and supposedly “Democratic” Senator, Jon Tester of Montana, from a tough reelection in his strongly anti-wolf state.

I am no longer surprised at how low the Obama Administration and his Democratic allies in Congress will go to sell out the environment and wildlife in favor of votes. They believe that we are a permanent part of their “base” and will still vote for them in the end. I wouldn’t be so sure of that.

Please feel free to use elements of the above letter in your own responses to your fake “Democrat” senators that voted for the bill or take anti-wildlife positions.







11 Comments Add yours

  1. William huard says:

    Nicely done Paul. I find it shocking how little these senate politicians know about what does on in their respective States. Either she doesn’t know or she does know and doesn’t care. Which is worse?

  2. bythewindsailor says:

    I have TWO fake democrat senators, both of whom I voted for. Heinrich and Udall. I won’t be making that mistake again.

  3. Joe Ogrodnik says:

    Maybe let them know that you intemd to inform groups that love wildlife about her activity amd also have another lettet like this for people that feel the same to all sign and them send.

  4. Bob M says:

    Well, I don’t know. I phoned and sent emails to my two Senators (Cantwell and Murray). answered their bs NRA/SCI responses,and then visited both offices. Then, Murray sent me an email to support her in overthrowing Hobby Lobby. This was my reply:

    Honorable Senator Patty Murray:

    I’m confused, Senator Patty. You just voted (S 2363) to allow lead (Pb) and other toxins in the environment, reduction of the ability of the EPA to have some bite in regulating toxins in the environment, selling of public lands for development, opening of wilderness areas to inappropriate activities, reallocation of monies designated for wildlife conservation to develop firing ranges on public lands, letting pelts of threatened species enter the country as trophies, and generally your vote was against the work of myself and millions of Americans concerned about global warming and our massive and ongoing loss of biodiversity. Since the “mom in tennis shoes” apparently doesn’t care about the environmental heritage of either her grandchildren or mine, why should I be upset that the SCOTUS pierced the corporate veil with its Hobby Lobby decision?

    Your vote did not represent either the economic interests of Washington State (Wildlife Watching’s economic impact is 9 times that of hunting), nor its majority interest–only 4% of Washington citizens are hunters. It’s time to come home, and get in touch with a green Washington. Your current pandering to the NRA and the 1/4 of one-percent (0.23%) of Washington citizens that trophy hunt bear and cougars is an affront to the rest of us.

    So, Senator Murray, since you have voted for an acceleration of the deterioration of the environment for political reasons, I must consider that this push is also to further some unstated interest that will benefit neither me, my wife, family, nor other people. You have become a politician, and are no longer a mom watching out for her children and those of the neighbors.

  5. Isabel Owen says:

    All animals ought to be treated with respect and humanity.

  6. GarryRogers says:

    Very good! Scooped and reblogged.

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 )

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s