Ep. 29: Jeff Crane & Andy Treharne

Andy are. You may never have heard of your intian sports This Foundation, but hopefully this conversation will change that and let you know how important this group really is because CSF is the foundational arm where the go between between the sportsman's Caucus and the hunting and fishing world, and the sports's caucus is porton Is because it is a three member group in Congress that have dedicated themselves to the legislative policies of hunting and fishing and protecting

our rights. So CSF is let go with there the middleman for that conversation, and it is an importance comes and I think probably why this was important and me going in here was CSF. It's not a forward facing group. They're not Rocky Mount Nelk Foundation, they're not Ducks Unlimited, they're not backlunting Hunters Angler. They don't do a whole lot of marketing. They don't have members that they don't really have on the ground presence as we know conservation.

But what they do is work for us every day, make sure there's a bipartisan voice for legislation, there's a bipartisan voice for doing the right thing for hunters in Englands. And that is to me. It's a little bit in the weed, but it's important as anything. And what I came out from this conversation with is a gratitude for

Jeff Andy CSF and what they do. I want to shake their hand and say I appreciate you standing up doing all the hard work, digging down deep and making sure our government works for us and for what we love. So hopefully this conversation will inspire you to learn a little bit more about CSF, Understand what they do, Understand the congressional sources, talk why they're important, and be knowledgeable

about those other things. So about further ado Episode over twenty nine, straight from Capitol Hill recording fellas, how's it going great? Good? Yeah, introduce yourselves. We have Andy and Jeff. We're here. I'm here in the UH. I'll let you guys describe it. We're here in the Congressional Sports Foundation office, correct, heart of the district. Um, Andy kicked away. Introduce yourself, sure, Andy Treehorn. I'm CSFs Federal Land Policy Director. On I

live just north of Denver in a town called Louisville, Colorado. Awesome, awesome, Jeff, I'm Jeff Crane. I'm the president of the Congressional Sports Foundation. Home for me is Annapolis, Maryland, which is about thirty five miles east of here. And as you said, and we are two blocks from the United States Capitol, right on Capitol Hill. That's right, that's right. I've spent a

lot of time here, grew up in this area. UM, spent a lot of time and when I was a child as a tourist, but then work for the n R and spent a bunch of time down this way when I did that. Um. But I always like to start these things as there's no video and nobody can see where we are. So Jeff, can you try to We're in your office, just to kind of describe the surroundings. Give us your use your best pro as Andy, feel

free to help, but I'll chime in need so. So my best pros on this is that we like to practice what we preached ure and so being outside hunting and fishing is part of my life and to have the opportunity to be able to marry that with my work has been just a dream come true. So my office has taxidermy in it, sitting with a window that looks right out onto the street there and uh so here they are and and um, the I suppose the interesting thing is my grand Slam a wild Turkeys is

in here. And that's mainly because my wife decided that she's allowing tax to drmy at home. But she thinks turkeys are ugly, and I think turkeys are beautiful, so they're always we got we got my big time turkey hunter and night I have not yet achieved the Grand Slam, so we'll have to. That could be a whole other podcast talking turkeys. But yeah, it's nice to uh, I feel kind of at home with tax Jermy d C. Probably not every office near the Capitol building has that. No,

I would say it's pretty unique. So for sure, there's a few of them, a few members up on the hill that they've got, They've got a few pieces in their office. Yeah, it's nice to walk in there occasionally and specifically, you can think of Jeff spent some time in Congressman Don Young's office. He's got some real good stuff from Alaska in there that he can probably describe

in detail better than I can. Yeah, you walk into the front of the congressman's office and there's a brown bear brug that's on the wall that he shot and it's a massive bear. And then you go into his inner office and there's all kinds of cool stuff from Alaska and North America, and then he's got African and stuff. So he's not afraid to where who he is and what he where. He his passions are on his sleeves.

So it always if you feel like, you know, fourteen million hunters out there, you know, if you just if you just think about hunting sportsman not being just hunters, but um, if you just think about hunting, the percentage of the actual population that hunters are is very small. Would you compare that to the percentage of the hunters that the hunters are congressmen or are serving in Congress right now? Is in a very small percentage of folks

that actually actively hunt? Uh? You know, well that that's that maybe is the question is the active hunters or fishermen, or those members of Congress that recognize that they have constituents that are actively involved in this because are The Congressional Sportsman's Caucus has grown to be the largest was to active bipartisan caucus on Capitol Hill. They're nearly three hundred members in the House and the Senate had a five and thirty five total members of Congress. So, um,

that's a pretty good number to say the least. How many of those guys actually hunting fish? You know, they'll tell you, oh, yeah, you know, I don't know whether they do. They certainly don't have taxidermy in their office and stuff. But we, you know, we get them out to Clay's shoots and uh we we fish with some

of the guys. And I've definitely seen pictures we you know, we do a slide show with our Big Dinner every year and asked asked members to send in pictures and it's great stuff, you know, them hunting, fishing with kids, grandkids, all that kind of all the stuff that we hold near and air. So you know, our one of our biggest jobs is just to work with them and show them the value in it for for conservation, their constituents, um.

And then you know, it's it's a bonus for us if we're actually getting out into the field with them and you get to see him in action, and you know, some of them they're they're a real deal. There's a few real deal center Heinrich. I know, it's it's huge. He's in a d I Y public class. Real deal um.

And it's not that it's necessary for those folks too to actively go and pursue those things, but as a hunter, it would be nice to know that they're they're there, um, because it's it's as you well know, one thing to go go hunting, another thing to support it, you know. I think that's something we struggle with a lot of times, you know, with our public images that to go do it into two be accepting of it and have not

experiences that's a that's a pretty big gap. So it's it's nice to know there's some some of those and I think some of them, um, they don't like to talk about it for for political reasons, based on where they might be from. But um, I can think of a couple examples of folks that you don't hear them talk about it very much. But I know, they go out of their way to do it when they're they're back home, and um, you know they still interact with

their constituents that hunting fish and UM, I get that too. Yeah, And then you know, uh, staff play a really important role in terms of advising members of Congress and on issues that maybe the member himself for herself doesn't know as well. If you've got somebody on a that's a trusted member of your staff that does happen to enjoy the outdoors and hunting and fishing and they can lean in, you're probably going to get a good reception out of

that too. So we worked the staff angle as well as the member angle to try to make sure we're getting folks out. And we do an August Recess clay shoot every year and and that fills up in about less than a day. And we have a big component for first time shooters with with instructors and if nothing else, somebody gets to pick up a shotgun and break a target and to spell some of the Hollywood miss about shotguns and what they are and what they do. Some of them can be so I auto, that's pretty scary.

We even let them shoot some auto. So that's awesome. Well, that's a good a good segue into you know, it's pretty evident by the name, a lot of people will understand and know the name Congressional Sports on the Foundation. But then you guys would admit you're not as front facing to the community as Army F for Ducks Unlimited. Um, there's no membership drives where you guys are giving away

any products or anything like that. But your your function is as important, if not more important for you know, the day to day life of hunters, legislation, policy, those types of things. So either one of you guys are both just kind of give a quick rundown of CSF, what it is, how it runs, um, and you believe it's impact. I know it's a long answer, but let's start to get into you know, how you would explain

that to someone who's never heard of CSF. Great, So I'll start and we can cut it up in the sound bite so I don't get into a long monotone. But basically it was founded in eighty nine to support the then fledgling Congressional Sports Ones Caucus. Capitol Hill has caucuses, four or five hundred different caucuses. Um, you know some more known than others, and a caucus is nothing more than a bunch of elected officials that share some views

on things that want to be educated on it. They were smart enough to realize, even with the staffs that they have in their member offices, that having an outside body that could kind of be that that conduit, that link between between the conservation world and the hunting and fishing world and these members of Congress was going to be important, and it was going to be important to have have it be here in d C. Be you know, in part staffed by people that understand the legislative policy,

because at the end of the day, our function is to try to affect legislative and and administrative policy. But it's a policy function. And so um, we're very different. We're not membership based. We're very different in that regard and so um that's how we started and it's grown and and he can talk more about the expanse and into the into the States, but UH almost every one of the national UH sportsmen's hunting, conservation, fishing, conservation groups

our partners with us. So we play and we play a very niche role in trying to help advance things that that obviously we care about and so do their members. So yeah, and about fifteen years ago, UH, after the Congressional Caucus had been up and running for a while, Jeff and and some other folks that were here before my time, UH realized that a lot of hunting and fishing policy is made at the state level, with state game fish agencies creating the regulations state legislatures overseeing them.

And at that time, there were a handful of states that also had sportsmen's caucuses in their legislatures, but they didn't really have a great way to communicate with one another. And UH see what was working well in one state not working well in others, UH weren't identifying threats to hunting and fishing collectively, and so UH CSF and Jeff in particular, had the the bright idea to create an umbrella organization uh for those state caucuses. And then we

took that and ran with it. And since then we've been trying to encourage other states to establish sportsmen's caucuses that are bipartisan both chambers of the legislature. And then, UH we've been real successful with that. We've got them in forty eight states now. UM, and we put on a conference every fall where we try to bring them all together and have policy presentations, give them an opportunity to talk about what's going on in their respective states,

communicate with one another. And we've seen a lot of successful policy initiatives come out of that, for where a legislator from one state will be talking to uh, someone from another state and say, oh, that's a really good idea, and we don't have that in my state. So I'm gonna bring it back and start talking to my folks and see if there's a way that we can make this work for for my state, and that you guys work with the governors as well. We do. We have

a Governor Sportsman's Caucus, Uh, same thing, bipartisan deal. We've got thirty five members all over the country, and um, you know, we try to serve as a resource for them in the same way. Uh. They're a little harder to get in one place and at one time than than state legislators, but um, you know we can we

can play that role as well. If we get a phone call from one of their staff members and they'll call us with questions and say, hey, you know, if any other states looked at this and what was their experience, and um, you know there have been any lessons learned, could they do it better? And we can either give them that information or help them track it down through our relationships. When I imagine that to both of you guys, the you know, the term bipartisan isn't important in this function.

You know, there is We can go through this in some detail or about about this idea around, but I think that there's the traditional idea that this this sportsman's community leans heavily Republican. And there's a bit of a movement in Andy's part of the world that some hunting and fishing organizations are starting to look a little bit more blue. And then the way that they act and function, um and concerned the public lands and things like that

is there. You know, Jeff and your experiences, there been a change in in those forces a little bit right to left, how they view hunting, how they view the environment, how all that spins up into into the actual legislation and policy. Yeah, they're absolutely has and and even going probably a little further back in history, but you know, the several Southern and Bowl Weevil Democrats than the Blue Dogs and whatnot, Um, they they had they had a little bit more connection. I think it has to do

really a lot with geographics. Um, you know, if you're from a district that's urban suburban, your connection maybe is less to the outdoors and that sportsman's way of life. Whereas you represent a more rural district, you might be more inclined. And so I think as you looked at the map, the Republicans tend to to control more of those those districts. And so that's why this perception that it that it leans, you know, further to the Republican side.

And they they have it, but you know, um, we've got tremendous champions on on both sides of the aisle here that that really care about this. And when's the last time you went hunting and you got introduced to somebody and you asked them whether they were a Republican or a Democrat. I don't think that it's real awkward. It just doesn't come up up, you know. And and uh, um, that's not the that's not the binding factor on this.

It's the it's the passion for the outdoors, it's the love of nature, it's the responsibility to be conservation minded,

and that that crosses party lines. Acrosses gender, you know, and so um that's the beauty about working on this, but yeah, we could you know, more balance is always good in this town because you get labeled as being partisan on one thing that then it makes it harder to convince the other side that your your goals and objectives are altruistic and are about conservation and getting kids outside and all the stuff we know about. So yeah, yeah,

I would add to that. You know, you reference being in the West, and I think there is some change going on demographically in that part of the country as

well that's driving some of that. And speaking in terms of my day to day job and talking with folks, it's it's really more about when you sit down with a policy maker and you try to talk to them, whether they're on the right or the left, and it's more about whether they'll have a real conversation with you and try to understand where you're coming from in the perspective, whether that's Republicans on public lands issues or Democrats on

firearms issues, or or both. And as long as there are folks that are out there, they are willing to have a conversation and work with you in a pragmatic way. I think that's what's most important, rather than some sort

of label you you put on on folks. Yeah. No, we always talk about on this podcast, you know, pro nuance, like there are as you you brought up some very just in in describing how to have a conversation, you brought some pretty polarizing issues guns, public lands, things that are immediately put up the walls of on this team. You're that team. I think that's especially in you know, we found ourselves in a situation, Jeff. You sure really

noticed that a lot of our pursuits are complicated. They go across you know, age demographics, they go across different land uses, they go across a lot of different things. And for us to say I'm pro this, I'm anti this, without as a group as sportsman understanding what that really means to be pro something in anti something else, I think that's important. Have you found you know, in your many years of doing this and I know even prior to this you were a pH in Africa? Is that correct? Right?

And there's a lot of other things that you did, you know, coming up before you were in the chair you are now. I mean, have you found that to be um? Yeah, I think I think being able to have the dialogue first of all, um, convincing people it's okay to to not have to be one and a lock of step agreement with one another. We probably would find the three of us may not agree on every single thing out there, and just in our conservation world,

just from a different perspective. And being able then to try to to to map that course through through the political process is what you know, that's what we we specialize in doing. And you know, sometimes that's successful, and in particular and federal politics, a lot of times it isn't. Um. There's a lot of conflicting things that go on. There's

a lot of pressures that go on. You can be dead right on the policy and still never get it done because it gets overtaken by either partisan politics or something else suddenly flares up. And and you know, we're not the we're not the number one thing if you look in polls, is to what americans buying large are concerned about, economy, jobs, threat on terror, I I A. Or it's the stuff that's first and foremost for everybody's life.

And so we're down the ladder to begin with. So that art of trying to find that deal and find their way through on the stuff is part of what, you know, part of what makes this exciting and some

days pretty dang frustrating. And I think you mentioned there's fourteen million or so hunters and anglers out there, and I I think part of the reason that we have been in the long term pretty successful is that that nuance and pragmatism where when big stuff comes up, you know, I think by nature we're a pretty pragmatic group and we can come together and uh go have those nuanced conversations with folks, and um, most of the time it

turns out okay for us. And in the big picture, do either of you guys have a specific example that either recent or just something that was climactic for this organization that was pivotal two hundreds of anglers and it was was a you know, I would say, just a turnkey moment for Hey, we're going to treat this issue this way, and here's who's on board, here's who isn't

on board. Because I'm sure there's a lot you know, public lands is the current trendything to talk about, but that wasn't always you know, top of mind for every hunter, every angler out there. Yeah, I can think of a couple. Um, you know, we this goes back a couple of years now, but um, we hadn't had a duck stamp increase in a real long time. And uh, that was something that

was really important. But the political environment in Congress, um, not not wholesale, but just because of a few louder voices that had some control over the process, made that probably difficult, more difficult than it needed to be. Um. And you know it didn't go once I remember correctly, once or twice, and potentially brought down some other policy goals with it. And UM, let me say, is that just a tax? Like generally, we don't want to increase taxes,

we don't give it. We don't give a ship what it is much. Yet even even though we were trying to explain to him, we are the people that are gonna pay. I always asking you for to tax me more. And yet they would still say, Now, I always use that as an example when I'm talking about so maybe this doesn't help my what I'm talking to a non hunter about, you know, the like I believe you guys

coined the American system of conservation funding. Talking to him about that, I'm talking to him about there's this one tax writes about ducks, and we go to it's like the the only you know, nobody's argument. Give us the tax, right, we came up with it, we want it, let's keep let's keep raising as much as we need to raise. Right. So I always use that specific example to say, you've got a willing constituency that's willing to pay, and it's

almost ingrained in what we do to pay. Absolutely, So there's an example of parts of politics saying like, well, we just can't we talk. We promised we wouldn't raise them, right, Yeah, and then and then they came back the next Congress and got it done. Um, you know. And there's examples at the state level too, like where I live in Colorado, we hadn't had a hunting your fishing license fee increase and since two thousand five until this year, and you know that that money is just not going as far

as it once did. I mean that's just math and uh um. You know, ten legislative session, we had bipartisan legislators that worked with the sportsmen's community bring a bill forward and I still can't tell you why that didn't pass that year. In past this year. Um, but it's it's one of those things where there's some pragmatism involved and a need to really go and educate people about who are paying these fees and why they don't mind

paying more, Uh if if they believe in what it's supporting. Yeah, that's a good segue to to that term American system of conservation funding because I was writing an article recently about Pittman Robertson. Your colleague philho And introduced me to this concept, and I was like, wow, okay, we should you know, just like the North American model wildlife conservation, which wasn't something coin like a lot of people think at the turn of the century. It was coin of

the eighties. Um. I think these are terms that can help us, not other important terms, because they can help us understand what's going on. But also it's inclusive of everything that's actually happening. So it's not just Pittman Robertson,

it's not just license fees. It's inclusive of everything. So, um, Jeff, can you talk about how much is that a part of your job now to to you know, to fight to these things, maintain and educate people on their legacy and and explain that the A C A s CF and what that means, Uh, for every hunter and angler. That's a big one. I got Listen. What you'll understand is that I asked questions that are like eight and if we get to the first two, that's fine, let's go.

Because I think you know, I'm hoping most of your listeners probably are familiar with with Pittman, Robertson and Dingle Johnson and those excise taxes on guns, m O, fishing, tackle, whatnot as being dedicated funding. So then you you you add on top of that the license fees and permits and things like that, and and it turns into the biggest funding source for most of the state fish and wildlife agencies around the country. And that is a very unique model to the United States of America and and

a hugely successful model. And and that's something that we as sportsmen and women need to be proud of. Um not just because we're we're carrying the freight in terms of finances, but because of that just as further indicates our passion for for wildlife and it's game in non game species as we all know that benefit from good habitat, conservation, from clean water um from things like this. So this

system isn't extremely important. And yeah, we do talk about it, I don't you know, And I know Andy and and some of the other guys on our state based efforts are are constantly watching because inevitably some somebody comes up with the idea of diverting those funds away and at

the state level that cover some other budget shortfall. And fortunately the folks that drafted that legislation we're smart enough to think and putting safeguards in there that if you do that, then you know you're gonna sacrifice all that funding. And but we have to check those states back on occasion because somebody, you know, like I say, somebody's figuring out there's a pool of money that we don't We don't really care about turkeys. We we care more about schools.

You know, let's divert it over here. So we are watching it. Um. From that side of things, we're working on other supplemental things to try to take some of the burden off the state agencies have got a tremendous amount of responsibility and and um, you know, that pool of money is and it's going as far as as it used to. And we gotta be watching for and we're working on some other things that we can get into to to try to look at some of the

other issues. And funding is always important. Unfortunately it always comes down to two dollars support stuff. Course, of course, it's it's it's a big part of our education mission too.

You know a lot of these state legend slators were coming from a background of being insurance agents or teachers or you know, they're they're busy, normal people and if they have never hunted, or sometimes even if they have, they might not know where the money comes from, or that there are in many state agencies out there that received no general fund tax revenue um that don't know that there's a ten or eleven percent tax on firearms

or ammunition or fishing equipment that supports their state agency that issues their hunting license. And so we do a lot of educational programming on that front too, and it's everything from the basics too. When they try to draft legislation to give away free licenses to some niche constituency um, which you know, maybe they deserve, we don't know, but we want them to have the information that if they're not charging what it cost to issue that license. They're

losing federal funding from the exercise taxes. Yeah, and I think there's isn't there a statute that says they don't spend it spend that money on UM conservation in the first was it two years? Uh, it's gone right, take it, which is which is a huge part of the Piven Robertson, Dingol Johnson funds. And so that's you guys, correctly, and then those states have to match. It's on matching thing.

A lot of times they use the licensed dollars. But nonetheless, it's uh, you know, it's a it's a pretty incentive driven program when it really comes right down to well, somebody a long time ago was very you know, Frankly D. Roosevelt and the folks are back in the thirties when they had that conservation conference, came up with these programs, were pretty smartly. And do you think for it to

be eighty years plus for that single program. And he's talking about license fees and UM Piven Robertson funds and Dingoel Johnson funds. I'm not sure what the number is, but it's a you know, if anywhere from I've seen anywhere from forty percent of state funding for conservation coming from and wildlife management is coming from that system now.

And I think even even more important is that the that ascent legislation that says the states can't divert the hunting and fishing license money that they collect themselves protects the federal money. So it all works together. And you know, so we've gone since the nineteen thirties essentially without having any significant diversion of hunting license revenue away from conservation, which I I can't think of another program like it, and they may be out there, but it's it is

pretty unique. And I one of the frustrated things about that program is that I, you know, I grew up in this I grew up in western Maryland and my dad hunted, My whole family hunted. I'm sure you guys had some similar experiences. Nobody they didn't set you down the first day you bought a license. Guess guess what this is what It's a beautiful thing. It's to be celebrated. It's part of our heritage. This is why you get to go hunting in the greater sense of the word.

I mean, it's a long story, but the big part of it is user pays public benefits. That's a huge part of it, and that's not a part of the storyline every young hunter gets to hear. Um. I hope they're changing that. Hopefully this conversation helps to change that. But I think it's such when we talk about it in terms of Capitol Hill, it's such an impactful piece of legislation. And I'm sure Jeff you could speak to

how much legislation comes and goes. Um. And you know, the building blocks of our conservation movement are still here eighty years later. Um, that's pretty unique, you gotta be Yeah. And there have been attempts to to change it. Uh. In particular, there have been attempts to change Pittman Robertson and redirect some of that funding towards things like victims

of gun violence and things like that. And so you know, we've had that that's that's been politically difficult to stand into that and say, no, this is not what this money is for, and we've got to protect the integrity of this kind of stuff and and so, um, yeah, it's a there there's a constant need to be vigilant and keep an eye out because people are trying to do things that don't necessarily fit in with what we think.

So I haven't heard a whole lot of solutions for how to replace that funding if if it goes away when people come up with bad ideas either Yeah, well, and then you talk about the number of hunters on the decline and there is a need for at some level to have a solution. Yeah, And I think there's a difference between replacing it and supplementing it. And um, Jeff alluded to it a little bit earlier, and you know, there are some things going on at both the state

and federal level on that front. And UM, I think the sportsman's community generally speaking is UM. I think even since I've been here seven or eight years, the there's been a change in in philosophy and oh budness to looking at some of those things and trying to identify some solutions because that conservation ethic is is still very strong and important to a lot of people. Yeah. Do you guys have to do a lot of Have you done a lot to this point with the land of

our Conservation Fund? Oh? Yeah, We've been involved in that

for a long time. One of the things that that program wise is the making public lands public component of that UM, which was to direct a certain amount one point five percent or ten million dollars, whichever is the is the greater um to go to these projects where there are literally landlocked on pieces of access points to federal public lands, willing seller, willing participant that will put a right away easement, and those don't typically score in

the scheme of things when they're when they're measuring projects under LWCF. So we worked with the coalition, with with the embron Ron Mental community to talk about, you know, incorporating this idea for us. It's really accessed for for hunting and fishing, but recreational access. You know, we're all concerned about kids not getting outside, and one of the issues becomes, you know, if you've got federal public lands and you can't get to UM, that's a problem. So

we're trying to address that. That is in the current UH authorization language. Actually, they the Resources Committee when they passed the bill last week, increased it to three percent and twenty million dollars. So that was a that was a win right there in terms of you know, that ability because there's a lot of acreage, especially in the West, that is inaccessible and you know, we need all of us know that more access is going to be better

for for getting people out there. Can you give me just just a quick I think people we were talking about earlier, as these things will come trendy. I think there's a lot of people hunting industry that know now what the Land of Water Conservation Fund is that maybe years past would have will laughed if they need to even know what it was, which is is a great thing. But can you give everybody that doesn't know just a

really quick rundown of that program? All right, I'll start and then Andy can correct me when when I when I get talked about it. So you know, it started in the started in the sixties, and so I mean it's been around for a long time. And again the idea was where they were, uh in particular, they were offshore oil and gas royalties UM on federal federal waters, and the idea was to be able to redirect some of those royalties back to conservation through what they created

as the Land and Water Conservation Fund. And so um, the program has been around again for a long time, you know, fifty fifty fifty plus years and and uh um, I'm just delighted that that there are some folks that are willing to listen to to the idea that you know, it's not it's not sacrilege to look at a sixty year fifty year old program and says there are ways to tweak this to make it, you know, more more applicable for the twenty first century than the middle of

the twentieth century. And and so, um, we're supportive of the concept the program that we just appreciate the fact that we were able to work with partners to include some access specific language in there. And Andy, I don't know if you want to add anything. Yeah, I think

that was a good summary. Um. You know, one of the challenges with that program as a whole that has been around since the mid sixties, and you know, it was coming out of the Eisenhower years, they created a Blue Ribbon Task Force to look at outdoor recreation in America was post World War two on the interstate highway system was new, and they realized that there was going to be a growing demand for recreation. And so those folks had a lot of um forethought and um, that

was a very good thing. But I think one thing that gets lost in a lot of the publicity and the advocacy around LWCF is that it's it's really only been fully funded one time and its history and you know, going back to that pragmatic viewpoint of trying to get positive things done for the sportsman's community constituency, I look at that and say, you know, are there opportunities to do this in a different way that is either more attractive to appropriators or can get us over the finish

line too full and permanent funding so that it doesn't have to go through the appropriations process every single year.

And unfortunately, because it has become somewhat politicized in some ways, I think it can make it more difficult to have those conversations um because people become more rigid, and people in the advocate the community become more rigid, and then by extension, members of Congress become more rigid um in terms of their flexibility to look at things in a in a pragmatic way and and say, hey, how are there some changes that we could we could make that you know, maybe we up this from nine million to

one point five in exchange for making some modifications or allowing some uh, you know, other folks to have a vested stake in this, and uh that that's a difficult message to deliver up there because everybody retreats to their corners and says, either this is great or this is not great. I imagine that rigidity comes from the fact that ours oil and gas involved, and I think that environmental issues involved. Yeah, those kind of things are coming

together with this. Yeah, there is. And you look at you know, back to your point about Pittman Robertson and promoting that and educating people about it. Yeah. I will often wonder if if we put as much money into promoting Pittman Robertson UM as certain interests put into promoting l WCF, UM, would it become more of the sacred cow that LWCF has become. And um, you know, I think LWCF has has done things have benefited me personally, you know, I mean some of the some of that

access I use all the time. I can think of two or three places, and I can think of a playground that Bosamontana where my kid was playing that I looked at the sign and it said thanks to the Land of War Conservation Fund. Absolutely seriously, Yeah, like are you know, there's there's just that's such an entangled thing

to understand. Yeah, and it's back to the nuance. It's also difficult even when even when the money's there and it's been appropriated, getting to the to the agencies and and talking with them and how they spend it, and um, you know, our part of our job is to make sure that they're spending at least a good chunk of it in ways that ben of fit hunters and anglers, and um. You know that that is a very very

complicated question. And you know, their landowners involved and willing real estate transactions and all these different layers to it that make it a um, a very important but also very challenging issue to deal with on a year to year basis. Yeah, that's a good the good point you make back to the point about you know, Pivin Robertson and that system of funding not getting shined up and

put out there to the public as much. You know, and it feels We had a public lands roundtable on the podcast not long ago, and I was very much saying that it's easy to follow the trend, right, It's easy to hashtag something or say you're all about something without really understanding what's going on. And I think there's

huge parts of that that mirror and politics. Some something becomes trendy, something becomes the thing to do at that moment, something that becomes things that makes you're popular inside the halls of Congress and outside. You go do it with out really understanding while leaving behind or or running right over top of a very important system in this case Pivian Robertson, it's great. Well, politics is a popularity contest

that it is that it is, well, it's good. I mean, I know it's looking good that that the LWCF may get fund and perpetuity. I think that would. Yeah, well, we'll see. I mean, there there's a lot going on on that front with the deadline coming up at the end of the month, and I'm personally not worried about I mean, I'm suppose I shouldn't say I'm not worried about it, but but you know, they're gonna they're gonna they're gonna pass some short term continuing resolution to keep

the government floating along until after the elections. Um, the big deadline is to get this thing passed into law before the end of this Congress adjourns in December, because if you don't you got to start all over again with a new Congress. Nobody knows what that new Congress is gonna look like, but you know, there's a lot of work that's been done to get this year after

year back up to this point. And we gotta We got a you know, a few years of authorization for it the last time, and now it's time to see if you can't, you know, drive it home. And as Andy said, see if we can get this done. And you know, the brass ring is to get it done with mandatory, permanently authorized funding. And you know, I still think it's a win if you get it permanently authorized, even if we have to go back to the appropriators,

because you can come fix that later. You know, to go to zero and let let our perfect be the perfect be the enemy the good again. I'm probably I'm out on the limb where guys are gonna be throwing rocks at me, you know, for saying these things. But you have to be pragmatic in this job up here. And there are times when it's not popular to say, you know, we gotta cut, we gotta cut and run

with us. We did that with gray Wolves and in Wyoming and Montana, the deal just wasn't there to do, you know, to I mean in Montana and Idaho, the deal wasn't there at the time, for for for Wyoming, let alone the Great Lakes. And you know, it was not popular to say we're gonna cut. We're gonna encourage cutting the deal and taking the wind for for Montana and Idaho, just to just to break the log jam and demonstrate we we have the backbone to say, you know,

enough is enough. These things need to be managed by professional wildlife managers, not by not by the media and the hype in Congress and so um, those are sometimes the issues that that that we have to we have to pick a side, and you know it's not always easy. Yeah, I mean there's a lot of There's not a lot, but there's a few I can think of. I'm sure you guys could talk circles around me a lot of these issues. But things pop up, right, New Jersey black Bears, yeah,

most recent thing. Right, These things just pop up, not out of nowhere. The New Jersey black bear thing has been been circling around, so give me a quick I think that's just a good example of these kind of issues that you're talking about. That pop up and you know, yeah, this one's been swirling for a while. But well there's

that whether then there's good stuff too. I mean when when FLIP came up earlier this year when they passed the omnibus spending package, uh, I didn't anticipate that we were going to have the opportunity to do something that good as part of it. And you know, some of our friends in the land trust community came to us and said, Chairman Bishop is thinking about marking up a Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act bill that had been expired

since two thousand eleven. And we the acronym is flip FA And it sounds kind of scary because it says

land Federal Land Transactions. Yeah, so, uh, it does sound kind of scary, but it's actually a pretty solid program where BLM can go out and identify part of their regular planning process these isolated parcels or unusable parcels without a lot of value you to the public, and they can sell them and rather than that money just going into the treasury, it goes into something called the Federal Land Disposal Account, which they can pool money and use

it to buy better lands, you know, or landlocked parcels or checker consolidate checkerboard things like that and uh and we said, yeah, well, we'd be happy to help you, uh with getting this program re authorized, but you know, we we have some language you'd like you to consider. And uh it was specifically to be able to spend a portion of that money on landlocked parcels that have hunting and fishing access and uh they said okay, because I assumed because they thought it would be helpful and

uh getting it over the finish line. But you know, that was one of those things that we've been working on it for a while, but just the small window of opportunity something came up. We were ready, we could get it in there, and uh that flew through. I mean that was a three week process of getting some more money for landlocked parcels in perpetuity and that's a permanent authorizations. Yeah, I think I can think of more as many wins is is there are you know, trouble

spots at this point. I can think of the fire borrowing that was in that same ammum was packing as another part of like whoa cool, Yeah, solve that problem. Yeah, you know, it comes together when you know when they have to fund the entire federal government. Sometimes some opportunities that aren't always there. Yeah, there's a good bad I've tried to talk about that firebar Beca. Is it just a good example of something you'll never hear about, right,

you ever hear about. But that's something that you know when you talk about is there enough money to manage these federal lands? Well, if you're stealing it for for fire, fire suppression, fire suppression, um, he has not as much. Right, you can't just go ask for more, I guess sports

than you could, but they're not going to um. So those are small winds that could be celebrated as much as the fights I think in in our on our politics and our ad you know, being advocates, we just want to focus on the fight, like we gotta fight that. We gotta whack that mold down. We gotta whack that mold down, whack that one down. But sometimes you know, the dominants build passes and we've got a couple of

wins to talk about. Yeah, doubt and some of the some of that gets a little policy wonkish, and you know that's that's part of the challenges. Why is that important?

You know, Why why is far fire borrowing important? Well, you know, as you said, if you can't be if you're having to take money from inside the Forest Service and reprogram it for fire suppression because you're the West is burning up, or you're not being able to do the proactive things for trails and access points, for parking areas, for management of streams and other habitat and things that. I mean, that becomes a back to the dollars and cents. It becomes where can I put my Where do I

can put my money? And you can't just let it burn, you know because people people see that, you know, so you know, I mean that that becomes those those little winds sometimes are are a lot bigger than just a

little win. You know. I can think of one. This is now going back a long time ago in two thousand and five when UM the Highway Bill was being reauthorized and part of the Highway Bill is excise tax on motor boat and small engine fuel that goes into the Dingle Johnson account UM and in terms of for for bumping up that amount, and we were only getting fourteen point nine percent we as a sportsman's community out

of the eighteen point three cents. So there was about a nickel in there that wasn't coming back into it was just going into the Highway Fund. And we successfully argued and got that money to come in there. And since that time it's over a billion dollars of additional funding for for fisheries, conservation and habitat, for boat ramps, for boat safety. You know, I mean that's real money at a looking at a little nickel and saying we're missing that on and getting our fair share of this thing,

and that was not what it was intended. And we were able to get that back. That was a very boring little fight, and yet at the same time, the net impact of that thing has been dramatic. Yeah, when you put it in those terms, I think people are probably happy to have you guys around, right, So um, I am, and I think that it's those things are being able to it's it's erroneous at some level to expect every sportsman to understand all this stuff. You know,

you still have the time of the day. They'd rather be sitting in a duck blind of course, and so I think, you know, as part of this conversation is understand that there's guys like out there like yourselves that are handling it, take care of it, working on their behalf. I think that's important, um, as much as anything with this policy stuff. Really, it bubbles up all the time, and it bubbles up to a point where they hear

about it. Like the Black Bears, you don't hear out it until it's a it's a full on fist fight. But it'd be nice to cut that off for it before it's people with signs, you know, protest in the Black Bear. Yeah, and you know we do again, we do some of that stuff, and we do successfully cut

it off before it gets there. Unfortunately, the you know, the ones that do show up, like the Black Bear hunt, you know, they make instant, instant national media stuff because people I have a wrong perception about what a bear is, and then then it just that just inflames it and by then then the game gets pretty dang hard for us at that point without a change in the administration up there. Well, yeah, and you've been so let's hit

that real quick stup, assuming everyone knows. Can you give me a quick rundown of the most recent legislation past and New Jersey are the most recent ban, right, So it wasn't and again i'll let Andy if i'm if I go off. I don't think it was legislation. I think it was a decision made by the now governor uh and his department up there to say that they were going to suspend the bear hunt and definitely and

basically stop it. And that's what's happened. And you know, all of us know that that management is done really well well, and it's regulated and hunting plays a critical role in that component of this thing. And the bear hunt has been very successful in New Jersey, and because New Jersey has a lot of black bears and and so, um,

it's been a good tool. It's been working well. Um, the Anti's obviously got into somebody's ear or is he ear, and whispered enough and got enough traction on this thing that that they decided, you know, against the against the direction of their Fish and Game Agencies or DNROR whatever it's called New Jersey to go ahead and and implement this band. And you know, that's that's where politics can

come in and in a bad way, you know. And so unfortunately, as I said, and maybe you know, hopefully it isn't gonna being something bad happens to somebody up there that's gonna trigger something. Um, but it's gonna take something, you know, beyond rational common sense. I think to try to put this back on track, and I think, you know, I'm afraid it's gone for this fall on. Yeah, it sounds like it is. Uh. Do you feel like it's

a slippery slope there? I mean I'm always wary of the slippery slope part of me, like, don't make any changes or it's all gonna go. Um. Do you feel like the the bear hunting specifically we've seen in British Columbia and now you see it in New Jersey where people, for whatever reason, bears are a tipping point for where hunting lives and doesn't live and what's appropriate what's not.

Do you feel like this recent set of bear related bands hunting bands are slippery slope or if if we allow it to continue, or if it does continue outside of our control. Next thing we know, they're banning deer hunts, and they're banning cod hunts, and they're banning all things like that. I would say, make no mistake that the same people who want to ban the bear hunt want to ban deer hunts. Uh, whether it's a slippy, slippery slope. I don't know. I mean, we've had we've had this

stuff going on. Um, you know, we lost spring bear hunting in Colorado, and um we opened black bear hunting in the state of Maryland and yeah, eight or nine or ten years ago something like that. Those and it's increasing and you know, the number of bears that they're taking. So there are there are some wins that go along

with with the losses. Absolutely, and there's you know, the really screwed up thing about the New Jersey situation is that I believe that executive order that the governor signed directed his state agency director to ban bear hunting on the state game lands. And the ironic thing about that is all of those properties were acquired by the State of New Jersey use Pittman Robertson money that was produced by hunters and shooters. And so you know, I think

there there's a philosophical and a practical problem there. Um. But you know, there's there's so many problems with the concept. I mean, since we lost the bear hunt in Colorado, um, you know, we've got we've got way more bears and a lot of those bears are dying anyway. From vehicle collisions or because they're getting into somebody's trash and steamboat or Aspen or Durango, and we've we've got over taxed

State Fish Wilife Agency employees. You know, we had one summer where they were spending I think the statistic was just in one area between Glenwood Springs and Aspen, where a lot of those bear problems exist, forty thou man hours just responding to problem bears. And you know, I don't think there's anyone that is reasonable that thinks that our State Fish and Wildlife Agency employees time is best spent responding to Oh yeah, an old lady that says

she's got a bear opening your trash can in her backyard. Yeah, I mean go to go to California mount lines, the same idea, Yeah, yeah, any other thing. Per cent of those cats have household pets in their in their stomach when unique crop see them after the state has to go in and kill them because they've got in trouble. Yeah, I mean, it's if you was if you were to stack up. I'm always at the point like hunters aren't always right, Like we're not always we're not always educated enough.

She just just the regular person. I don't know about you man, and he's always right. That's why we've added him to the podcast. Jeff and I, we don't know no Maryland, that's right, apparently guys pragmatic. No, no, it all's out west. Um, that's why you're moving to monteam. I would get to know more and more that I

think about that. But I think, yeah, you were to stack up the hypocrisies in the animal rights community that wouldn't take along and be pretty high stack Um, I think there you know, like you said, there's there's there's just so rooted in success, what's happened in the hunting

space and fishing space to these conservation successes. You could stack them up as high as the hypocrisies on the animal right side and say, look, yeah, if you're an animal, you're listed on the Endangered Species Act, well, yes, say that if you it should be a victory to get delisted and hunted again. If you were to look at the whole of the species, if you look at this, you know, in the case of Wyoming's grizzling bear hunt, if you were to look at just those twenty two

grizzlies that are gonna get killed. Okay, Yeah, but if you look at the whole of the population, it's it's a win. It's a victory to completely opened up, elisted and hunted again. And that's every uh, every species out there that it's a hounrible game species. Most of them were We're saved and and brought to bear by these policies, and most of them never ended up on the endangered species list. You look at you look at that list, you don't see a lot of game species on there.

And I think there's something to be learned there. I wish more people would pay attention to that part of it, Um. But I think part of the stage grouse stuff is because there are people that are are committed to that because they enjoyed hunting them. Yeah, what are you know we get We can get really deep down this rabbit hole. But I would I'd love to just go over in some detail here in the last part of the podcast.

You know what you guys are working on right now, um that maybe maybe it is getting publicity, maybe it's not something that you guys feel is very important to um the caucus into the foundation and to what you're working on. You know, I would imagine that like the main tenants that most hunters here about farm bill, Um, anything public Lilands related seems to be in their ear, and anything firearms related seems to be in their ear.

But I'm sure there's many, many, many other things that even farm Bill seems to be something that used to be on the tip of every hunter's tongue, but not so much anymore. So. Is there anything I know, it's broad again question, but anything on there that you guys are pounding on really hard that that folks need to know about. Yeah, we've we've got a couple of things

moving in the last week or two. UM. One is a bill called the Modernizing Pittman Robertson for Tomorrow's Needs Act, And I like how you guys with the act names are always it's impossible. Yeah, that's that's also by design, we're making so complicated that nobody can you can't ever keep up with them. But that one would provide the states a little more flexibility on how they use their Pittman Robertson allocations so that they can support some recruitment, retention,

and reactivation. Are three. There's other are Yeah, there's another one for you, but they're they're somewhat restricted on how they can use that money, uh, as they should be. But I think there's a growing recognition that some of the declines in hunting numbers are a threat to the funding model we've already talked about earlier today. And UH, there are some states that want to have some additional flexibility to use that money to recruit and retain and

reactivate new hunters. And so that's that's getting some traction. UH. There's another bill that's up is it tomorrow or tomorrow or Wednesday? That is called the Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act, and that that one also allows the state. It's a little more flexibility with how they can use their shooting range grant programs. They're funded by Pittman Robertson. And part of the issue now is they have to come up with a state or local match to build

a range. And this bill would lower the local or state match requirement to ten and rather than that two year window to obligate the money that exists now, they would extend it out to five. So the states and the locals have to come up with a little bit less and have longer to do it. And part of the motivation behind that is just with urbanization and uh sprawl,

there's fewer places for people to shoot. They're more public land shooting conflicts out there, and you know, there's a there's a threat of lost access if you like to shoot on public lands and you live anywhere near a metropolitan area of any size. And so the hope is that if this passes, will be a little easier to get some ranges on the ground and build some of that stuff up, give people places to go, hopefully take care of some of those conflicts with other recreational users

and adjacent landowners things like that. That's so those are good things and things that you know, a lot of people don't know. Most hunter safety courses are all state hunter safety initiatives paid for by Pittman Robertson as that how it works, Yeah, at least partially partially, UM, folks just don't know that. I didn't know until recently. UM. And so there's just little parts of that that I've

written about and talked about. But having you guys on to be able to articulate how it gets from an idea or a good idea, and sometimes it's like a back end good idea, like oh, we could do this, uh, in addition to all the other things we're doing on this bill or this package of legislation. So that's a that's a big deal. Yeah, I think you know, some of the administrative stuff has been really solid too. With

the expansion of hunting in the National Wilife Refuge system. Um, you know, we've got hundreds of thousands of acres more places to go hunt now since they've been trying to marry those refuge regulations up with the state management objectives and state regulations. It sounds like we're gonna get be able to carry bows across national parks um real soon.

I'm pretty excited about that. That was that one was just a ridiculous oversight by somebody, um seven or eight years ago when they passed that bill that allowed to carry a firearm across the national parks. So you know, if you're if you're wanting to go access BLM or for service or even private land, but you got across the national park to get there, you could carry a loaded firearm if you're a gun hunter, but not andy bows are dangerous carrying bows around. Somebody didn't get cut.

Somebody had to sit there and ride those guys and ride those guys and ride those guys and say this is important enough that they're going to actually issue you know, um and whatever director's order or whatever it's gonna take. It took a regulatory change, I mean regulatory and nonce a regulatory change to move to move that needle and just take care of something that was an over I was was pretty simple on things. So you know, I think that's important too. I mean we, I think everyone

in our society, but hunters too. There's these ideas that these large, you know, pieces of legislation or even legs, things that are legacy legislations have been going on like Pitt and Robins forever. They just come and go and they do their thing and nobody really has to work

at it. But if you follow the money from you know, when the manufacturer pays their excise tax to where to win, it goes in a lot of cases to the I R. S and the you know, a US fish and wildlife, and then it goes to the states and the states have to do this. And if you follow that money, you just kind of get tired, right, It's hard to even read that stuff. So um, you know, folks just understand how how complicated, how good of a system it is,

it's still complicated. It still takes so much to get that money in the right place and when it's there, to get it used in the right way. To think about all those guys sitting in a room in nineteen thirties coming up with that, Yeah smart, but smart without internet? Yeah smart. Yeah, that's a division. So I mean, that's you know, I think our challenges are to look at

those big, big opportunities for the twenty first century. And you know, the little stuff is super important, and we're always going to be diligent and going after that, but

some of these big things, you know. Um. Another one we haven't talked about is the Recovering America's Wildlife Act, which is uh an effort to try to get out in front of primarily the species of greatest concerns because again, the states just don't have the money anymore to go after all the all the things that the wildlife agencies

have to do now. And there's somewhere in the neighborhood of eleven or twelve thousand potential candidate plant and animals species that that are could end up on the threatened or endangered species and I don't you know, I would argue nobody wants to see that happen. And if we can, if we can do proactive man dagement and and get out in front of this thing, it will not only be good for a conservation, it will be it'll be

smart for America in terms of dollars and cents and so. UM. We've we've generated quite a bit of interest in this, in this legislation in the House and the Senate. We were candidly a bit disappointed that we couldn't figure out a way to weave it into the House Resources UH Committee mark up last week where they did the Atlanta water conservation funding. They did UH maintenance backlogs and park service and whatnot. There was a lot of money that

was coming out and we're all supportive of that. This would have round it in our mind, this would have really rounded that package up to get to this level. To it just didn't make it yet. Um, we're still not giving up. We've still got you know, um, some other thoughts and things and in mind to try to

make it happen. But you know, that would have that would have been a shot in the arm to add that put into that mix and Uh, now, those are the bits of disappointments, and when you're talking into the chairman and he's like, no, it's not gonna make it, and you're just you know, it's frustrating, but we're still

going to be there. Ninety four House co sponsors on the bill right now, and and bipartisan um leadership on it in the Senate, and uh, it's just too important in terms of a big long term conservation fix for us to not be driving this thing as well. So now, and I think, how would you describe me? And I hear you talk about that, in my own mind, having some experience with the Sports's Caucus codifies kind of how important that caucus really is because of what it does.

But how is you just described You know, we told people in the beginning what it is, but how would you describe its importance and kind of its impact on

the caucus itself on legislation like that. If you look at a lot of the legislation that's out there that we've discussed during this podcast and that you discussed on other podcast, I would almost guarantee you that every one of those bills is introduced and largely supported by members of the Sportsman's Caucus not true on everything, but you know, there's an awful lot of support from that. It gives us the opportunity to be able to reach those guys

in a very credible fashion. We've been around in this town for nearly thirty years. Um. The ethos that we have here is do not do not ever get caught up playing partisan politics, and do not ever get caught up given somebody partial information or god forbid, the wrong information. You know, you have to be CSF has to be the credible source that that they can rely on that we're going to give them the whole picture, tell them this is what's going on. You know, this is where

it is. And and I think that we've we've earned that reputation because we're here, We see these guys, we see the staff members here, and so I think it's a critically important function to have that that group of people, if nothing else, that they trust us to get good information to them in a timely fashion because we can do it quickly here. You know, whether it's a electronic push up the button to get something up, what you

could do from anywhere. But more importantly, if you have to hustle two blocks up the up the street for a meeting with somebody that gets called at five o'clock at night when they're saying, now, what exactly do you want us to slide in here? And you have to

be there to explain that. You know, the Biparson thing strikes me as something that you know everybody can take to heart, like that that you guys are focusing on making sure what you're doing is best for wildlife conservation, hunters, anglers before it's oh, hey, we really believe that you know, we're pro extraction anti extraction. Don't start there. You start with um, the core of what we do, who we are.

You know, the stuff hanging in your office tells a lot about those things too, and I think that's important. But have you seen, Jeff, because you've been around many decades, have you seen more challenges in recent administrations? You know, the Trump administration, the Obama administration. Have you seen more wild swings and partisan politics like I can think of the Bears the Year's National Monument is like the political

football that they're just throwing back and forth. And I know from talking to some folks on the ground there that that just makes it harder to manage that that piece of land effectively if it keeps getting its designation change because it's a you know, political win or political loss or whatever. Have you seen that heightened in recent administrations or it has always been the challenge now, I would say, and not just administrations, the Congress to um.

You know, Unfortunately, I think it's it's been heightened. Uh. And I think part of it is just the electronic age. Uh, and all of a sudden, you know, you're constantly being able to just bombard your position polarized. You know, people want to weigh in on stuff that they used to have to write a letter to you remember a Congress and things like that. I can just punch something into

your keyboard. And unfortunately, it's just it has created that that image of polarizing and and our stuff gets caught in UM sometimes you know, a bear's years or something like that. Maybe it is in there anyway, but sometimes we just get caught. I mean, we've come so close to getting a sportsman's package done, you know, over the years, and then found out at the very end it's caught

up in just purely partisan politics. They didn't want Obama to get a win, you know, and two years ago on his way out the door to sign a pro sportsman's bill, and that's what basically happened to it. And and you know, that's the kind of stuff that that is frustrating. And yeah, it's gotten worse, and it's both sides. There's there's plenty of blame to go across both sides of the political aisle. And um, the stakes are high, the money is high, um for these kinds of things.

And as I say, I attribute part of it just to the electronic new age making it that much more polarizing. I would imagine that in the grand scheme of like human communication were toddlers when it comes to using digital communication. We don't know how to do it. We don't know how to do it effectively. Mostly it's just garbage. But you know, it's not it's good to know that there's there's a lot of winds happening in this building. There's

a lot of winds happening. Then uh on Capitol Hill here for sportsmen, I mean, that's a huge thing I think for people to understand. It's not you know, if you get wrapped in a community of people, or you're wrapped in an organization that wants to make it seem like the sky is falling. It's falling in parts, but it's not all it's not all falling. It's it's never never as good as you think it's gonna be, and it's probably never as bad as you Yeah, I think

that goes back to that slippery slope argument. There's some more organizations around on both sides of of the ticket here that would say the sky is falling gets members, the sky is falling gets people to act, And that scares me sometimes to the to the point where where, um, I've seen it, like I said, I've seen it on one side and I've seen it on the other. I've seen one side that says I hate that organization, Like, well, you're doing the same thing they are, just for a

different cause. Um, So that's pretty scary to me. I mean, that's you feel like, that's pretty damning on sometimes in the sports's community. Is just you want to feel like you motivate people to act, and your motivations can then become a little bit muddy. Doesn't help, Yeah, for sure, it never helps, you know, And and and that's just not our that's not our m oh here. Um, that's just not our style a or and and you know, do we get frustrated when things come off the rails? Yeah,

you bet. You know, there's a lot of effort and time and energy and anticipation and when it doesn't go right it it can be pretty maddening. But you know, the winds are the winds are are equally as rewarding.

And if we can get those hunter numbers to turn the corner and start coming back up, and we can keep making making sure that we've got clean water and you know, good landscapes and good habitat management and get people outside, you know, I think that's that's I know personally, that's what I get more motivated by, is to make sure that we can hand hand this off and you know, I can feel like I've done my part to pass it on, you know, so that's a huge part. Thank

you for that. You're bad for sure. I think before we end the podcast, we should talk about hunting. That sounds good. You want to do layoff policy for a minute? Um, we're in Jeff, you're telling me about your your Colorado adventures. So what are you most excited about about the fall? You're gonna go hunt elk in Colorado? Second, rifle and second rifle and southwestern Colorado, and I have been doing it for a number of years now with a small group of buddies, and uh, you know, it's a high

mountain camp. It's awesome and just for for a guy that that spends most of his time hunting in the east, just to be out on those mountains and in the vistas and you know that here the elk and just they're just magnificent. The views are magnificent, and the buddies that I'm with, it's a special time and we all look for word to it. And it's a little dry out there, some fingers crossed it. Maybe some moisture will generators and we'll take care of that for you. We

direct some of this hurricane. We'll take it. Andy. What do you got on the dock? I've got a third season elk hunt in western Colorado and Grand Mesa lined up, going with some buddies from high school that I haven't hunted in a while with and uh, got some old men going with us. Should be some good stories, even older than you. Yeah, So hopefully they don't shoot anything, because I'm sure I'll have to carry it out if they do. But that's probably why I'm invited. So that's

half the fun anymore. Yeah, yeah, I'm just off the mountain. Yeah, I've got I've got two little kids at home, so any any time I can sneak out is a good time. Yeah, I know that feeling. Another feeling. Well, thank you, gentlemen. I appreciate you. Sit down, Thanks for what you do. Um. Thanks for fighting sportsmen and making sure we have a voice. Appreciate it. Thank you, Thanks, Thanks, that's it. That's all

episode number nine in the books. I really appreciate Jeff Crane and Andy Treharn hanging out, what they had to say, how they describe what they do for a living, um, And really most of all to me, bottom line on this thing is how many times they brought up, brought up bipartisanship, how many times they brought up having any dal with parts of politics, um and having to work around them. And and bravo, bravo to these guys from being the voices for bipartisanship, for working hard on what

I come. We consider some of these are the little things, the little details that will allow us to continue doing what we do outside. And so don't forget about Andy and Jeff and CSF what they do as go and hunt, you go and fish, and your money's are funneled back into conservation because they are important. So let's not forget them as we go out this fall. Go hunting. Uh. Next time on the show, we're gonna catch up with Charles the Rabbitman Rodney, another resident of the DC area,

somebody I've hunted within the past. He is an amazing character and his nickname is the Rabbit Man. So come on back for that next week. Until then, Honey Collective dot com for articles, for video, for all the other stuff. With this podcast, I want you to continue to go there and hang out, and soon enough you'll find that there's gonna be a new home for the Hunting Collective. We'll talk about that in the week to come, very very soon, and hopefully you will pique that as I am.

So we will see you for episode thirty next Tuesday morning. Back