Randall Williams

September 18, 2018

Innovators in Both Camouflage and Conservation

First Lite is an industry leader for public lands, wildlife, and sportsmen’s access, and they doubled all donations to TRCP through their Round Up for Conservation Program in recognition of National Public Lands Day

In many respects, the history of the hunting clothing-and-accessories company First Lite is one of those classic stories of a great idea turned into a booming business. What started in 2007 as a two-man show offering only a handful of merino wool garments has grown into an industry leader with a full line of technical hunting apparel for both men and women that now employs sixteen enthusiastic hunters and anglers at their headquarters in Ketchum, Idaho.

Although much has changed in the last eleven years of operations, some things have remained constant—among them a core commitment to the cause of conservation, which is why TRCP is proud to have First Lite as a corporate partner. Like many hunters, co-founders Kenton Carruth and Scott Robinson have long felt an obligation to give back to wildlife and wild places in ways that go beyond the bare minimum of buying a license.

From their base of operations in the Wood River Valley, with views of the Pioneer range out the front door and Bald Mountain out the back, it’s plain to see why. Excellent mule deer and elk hunting can be found right outside of town in the Sawtooth National Forest, and anglers enjoy a variety of opportunities on nearby lakes, rivers, and mountain streams.

Ryan Callaghan, First Lite’s Director of Conservation and Public Relations

In their case, too, conservation makes good business sense. From day one, First Lite has catered to the needs of backcountry hunters, fully recognizing that the future of the company depends on the availability of quality public land opportunities for sportsmen and women. “By surveying our customer base we’ve found that over 80 % of our customers hunt on public lands with over 50% hunting public lands exclusively,” says Carruth. “If we didn’t step up and support our customer, why would they support us?”

Conventional wisdom would likely advise a growing business to shy away from controversy, but First Lite jumps into the fray when it comes to topics like public land transfer. Oftentimes leading the charge is Ryan Callaghan, the company’s full-time Director of Conservation and Public Relations, who has earned a well-deserved reputation as a tireless and outspoken public lands advocate. A Montana native who worked as a river and hunting guide until joining First Lite, Callaghan wants to make sure others enjoy the same opportunities he’s had. “My path hasn’t been traditional in any way,” he notes, “but I certainly wouldn’t be here without working on public lands. There is not a single decision I make today that isn’t rooted in some hard earned lesson guiding and playing on public lands.”

In addition to speaking out on the issues that impact sportsmen and women, First Lite has pioneered an innovative way of encouraging others to join the cause. In 2015, they launched Round Up for Conservation, a program that allows customers to round up the cost of their purchase to a specified dollar amount, with the difference directed to conservation groups such as the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, the National Wildlife Federation, and Pheasants Forever.

These good deeds have not gone unnoticed. First Lite’s efforts in the conservation sphere have garnered awards such as the Shift Festival Award for Business Leadership, the Open Country Award from Outdoor Life magazine, and the Larry Fischer Award presented by Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. In the hunting and fishing industry, their brand is second to none when it comes to conservation, which has earned them the attention of the broader outdoor recreation community as well.

Despite this recognition, First Lite continues to improve and expand its efforts to unite sportsmen around issues of habitat and access. The most recent project is a newsletter aimed at bringing more exposure to the work of their conservation partners, TRCP included. In short, they want to carry the flag for the causes they support, while also helping their customers become more informed about the current threats and opportunities when it comes to public lands and waters.

Callaghan boils it all down to a simple principle—doing the right thing. “Long before we ever had a strategy in place, we knew what was right when it comes to public lands and hunter access. We’re lucky that we can use our platform and success as a company to support the things we care so much about.”

Photo credit: DirtMyth

One Response to “Innovators in Both Camouflage and Conservation”

Do you have any thoughts on this post?

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Randall Williams

August 29, 2018

New Study Shows 9.52 Million Acres of Western Public Lands Are Landlocked

Results of the most sophisticated analysis of inaccessible public lands reveals a staggering challenge that the Land and Water Conservation Fund could help solve

This week, onX and the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership revealed the stunning results of a collaboration to quantify how many acres of America’s public lands are entirely surrounded by private land and, therefore, sit inaccessible to hunters, anglers, and other outdoor recreationists.

The Findings

More than 9.5 million acres across thirteen states in the American West were identified as landlocked by private lands in a study using today’s leading mapping technologies. The findings are now available in a new report, “Off Limits, But Within Reach: Unlocking the West’s Inaccessible Public Lands,” which unpacks the issue in unprecedented detail.

“At 9.52 million acres, the massive scale of the landlocked problem represents a major impediment to public access and the growth of the $887-billion outdoor recreation economy,” says Joel Webster, Western lands director with the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. “These are lands that all Americans own, and yet public access is not readily available or guaranteed.”

Up until now, little has been done to make a comprehensive and detailed assessment of this frequently discussed issue. This new report breaks down the 9.52 million acres landlocked across the West into totals for each of the thirteen states, highlighting the largest landlocked parcel within each state and how many landlocked acres each federal land management agency oversees.

Photo credit: Tom Fowlks

More than 93.2 percent of landlocked public lands in the West are managed by the Bureau of Land Management. Wyoming holds the most inaccessible public lands with 3.05 million acres—or almost a third of the total landlocked acreage across the region.

onX was founded on helping people access the outdoors and public lands, and our partnership in this project is an extension of that,” says onX founder Eric Siegfried. “In additions to creating technology that enables people to make memories in the field or on the water, we strongly support efforts that either improve current access points or open up new opportunities for our customers. Why not start with the public lands that we rightfully own?”

A Solution in Jeopardy

The report also highlights the most powerful tool for opening landlocked lands to the public—the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which, among other things, pays for voluntary easement and acquisition agreements with private landowners. This joint effort between onX and TRCP arrives at a critical time for the fund, which is set to expire on September 30, 2018, unless Congress acts to reauthorize the LWCF.

“Our report offers a clear and accurate picture of a major access obstacle facing public land users, and the Land and Water Conservation Fund is the single most important mechanism for addressing this challenge,” says TRCP’s Webster. “Many lawmakers talk about their commitment to public access, and the clearest way for them to demonstrate their support would be to reauthorize this critical program by September 30.”

“Many public land parcels without guaranteed public access range from five to 30 square miles in size—we aren’t just talking about postage stamp sections,” adds Siegfried. “Understanding this, lawmakers have a very real opportunity to make a positive difference by expanding public access for the American people, and we hope they do.”

Landlocked Acres by State

Arizona: 243,000 acres
California: 492,000 acres
Colorado: 269,000 acres
Idaho: 208,000 acres
Montana: 1,523,000 acres
Nevada: 2,054,000 acres
New Mexico: 554,000 acres
North Dakota: 107,000 acres
Oregon: 443,000 acres
South Dakota: 196,000 acres
Utah: 264,000 acres
Washington: 121,000 acres
Wyoming: 3,046,000 acres

 

Learn more and download the full report at unlockingpubliclands.org.

 

In partnership with

Randall Williams

August 16, 2018

Do You Know Where Your Conservation Dollars Come From?

Thankfully, when it comes to funding for maintenance and improvement of fish and wildlife habitat or sportsmen’s access, all our eggs aren’t in one basket­—here are the major conservation funding sources that every hunter and angler should know

Sportsmen and women know that the money we spend hunting and fishing not only drives an $887-billion outdoor recreation economy, but it also pays for wildlife conservation and fisheries management across the country. License sales by state agencies and duck stamps from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service offer the most obvious examples, but the full picture includes a diversity of sources. Thankfully, not all our eggs are in one basket, and though we contribute heavily to the American conservation funding model, we are not alone.

At the federal level, conservation funding can be a complicated landscape of laws and acronyms. But it is critical that sportsmen and women understand where this money comes from—and it’s not always out of our own pockets—and the incredible value of investing in our fish and wildlife resources now, in case there’s ever a need to defend these revenue streams against shortsighted cutbacks in the future.

Get on a first-name basis with these major conservation funding programs.

The Gold Standards

The Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, more popularly known as the Pittman-Robertson Act, allows the federal government to assist states in wildlife management and restoration efforts. Passed on September 2, 1937, Pittman-Robertson applies an 11 percent excise tax to sporting arms and ammunition, the funds from which are distributed to states to cover up to three-quarters of the cost of specifically approved projects. Since its initial passage, the law has been amended to tax pistols and revolvers, bows, crossbows, arrows, and archery parts and accessories. Habitat improvement, population surveys, species introductions, wildlife research, hunter education, and the building and maintenance of public shooting ranges are among the types of projects funded by Pittman-Robertson (“P-R”) dollars.

In 1950, lawmakers passed the Dingell-Johnson Act, or the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act. Modeled after Pittman-Robertson, the law provides federal dollars to states from an excise tax on fishing tackle, a motorboat fuels tax, and import duties on fishing tackle and recreational watercraft. These funds are used to support projects relating to the management of fish populations with a “material value in connection with sport or recreation in the marine and/or fresh waters of the United States,” including boating access facilities, wetlands restoration, boat safety, public education, and clean vessel sanitation efforts.

Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson have been tremendously successful, generating more than $20 billion dollars for conservation since the first annual P-R apportionment in 1939. In addition, both laws mandate that any state seeking funds under these programs must refrain from diverting fishing and hunting license sales for any purpose other than funding their fish and game departments. In this way, they reinforce the broader fiscal structures of our conservation model.

Photo courtesy: Lisa Hupp/USFWS
An Overlooked Workhorse

Although its name may bring to mind crop insurance and nutrition programs, the Farm Bill is the single-largest source of conservation funding in the United States. Given the fact that 70 percent of land in the lower forty-eight states is under private ownership and 45 percent of that is agricultural, American farmers and ranchers are critical to ensuring that our woods, waters, and fields continue to support healthy populations of fish and wildlife.

By supporting the nation’s agricultural producers, farm bill funding improves water quality and habitat, while also incentivizing public access and wetlands protections. Among the many important programs in the Farm Bill for hunters and anglers are those encouraging the planting of cover crops and compensating farmers for removing environmentally sensitive lands from production. In addition to the sheer scale of the Farm Bill’s impact on the landscape, it is a fiscally significant source of funding—experts suggest it accounts for nearly $1 billion in conservation spending each year. In the last five years alone, more than 900,000 acres of private land in thirty different states have been opened for public hunting and fishing thanks to $40 million in Farm Bill allocations.

Photo courtesy: Kansas Tourism
The Premier Lands and Access Program

In 1964, Congress established the Land and Water Conservation Fund to establish new and improve existing outdoor recreational opportunities on public lands. LWCF dollars come from a small fraction of the oil and gas royalties collected by the federal government, and are divided into one of two pools: grants to state and local governments for projects like boat-launches, playgrounds, and trail networks, and appropriations to federal land management agencies for acquiring lands, waters, and access for the sporting public. Parks, forests, shorelines, farms, ranches, and refuges all across the country have been conserved with LWCF dollars.

Over the years, the Land and Water Conservation Fund has invested more than $16 billion in conservation. Because nearly every county in the United States has benefitted from an LWCF project and the program costs nothing to taxpayers, it enjoys bipartisan support on Capitol Hill and among the American public. And given that it spends dollars raised through resource extraction on outdoor recreation opportunities, it stands as the perfect example of a balanced conservation program.

Photo courtesy: Katie Theule
What’s Next?

These funding sources have made an incredibly positive impact on our nation’s fish and wildlife while also improving the opportunities available to hunters and anglers. But their future remains uncertain. Experts worry that declining rates of participation in hunting will result in the diminishment of Pittman-Robertson funding. And every five years, the passage of a new Farm Bill hangs on complex legislative processes that are unfortunately too often steered by partisan gamesmanship. This year’s bill is no exception.

Perhaps most significantly, however, the Land and Water Conservation Fund is set to expire on September 30, 2018, if Congress does not authorize its renewal. While there stands a tremendous amount of public support behind the process and key lawmakers have voiced their commitment, the administration’s proposed FY19 budget suggests little appreciation for the fund’s importance to hunters and anglers.

Federal decision makers need to hear from sportsmen and women how necessary these funding sources are to the future of hunting and fishing. Their continued contributions to fish, wildlife, and access are too important to be left to chance or the political winds in Washington, D.C.

 

Top photo courtesy: leighklotz

Kristyn Brady

August 9, 2018

House Bill Marks Long Overdue Step Toward Improving Fish Habitat

Rep. Wittman introduces first House legislation since 2009 to authorize the popular National Fish Habitat Conservation Program

Yesterday, Congressman Rob Wittman introduced legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives to advance the conservation of our nation’s fish habitat and improve fish populations and angler opportunity. The National Fish Habitat Conservation Through Partnerships Act (H.R. 6660) represents a long overdue next step for fisheries resources and builds upon years of work by the sportmen’s community.

“We’re grateful for Rep. Wittman’s leadership in working to advance this vital bill to authorize the National Fish Habitat Partnership, which was created during the Bush administration to foster partnerships that improve conditions for fish species and enhance recreational fishing opportunities,” says Whit Fosburgh, president and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. “The most successful conservation work of our day is done collaboratively, with local input, and with the most efficient use of federal funds. The Fish Habitat Partnership model checks all of these boxes to the benefit of anglers across the country.”

The National Fish Habitat Action Plan was first established in 2005 by state fish and wildlife agencies and their federal, conservation, and private sector partners, and since that time, 20 Fish Habitat Partnerships have been formed to guide federal grant funding matched by state, local, and private dollars and to incentivize locally driven, community-based fish habitat conservation.

Wittman’s bill is also an example of good governing: It guarantees that a maximum amount of program-designated federal dollars will be directed toward collaborative on-the-ground projects to improve sportsmen’s fishing access, restore water conditions, and ensure abundant fish populations. To date, more than 600 successful conservation projects have been carried out through Fish Habitat Partnerships across the country.

The TRCP strongly supports H.R. 6660, and encourages expeditious review and approval of this important legislation by the House Natural Resources Committee. The TRCP also supports the Senate companion bill, S. 1436, and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s recent inclusion of this priority within the HELP for Wildlife Act (S. 1514.)

 

Top photo courtesy of the Chesapeake Bay Program via flickr

Charlie Booher

August 8, 2018

These Changes Are Worth Your Time to Stop the Spread of Chronic Wasting Disease

As deer hunters, we will inevitably have to change our habits to prevent the spread of CWD—how much are you willing to give up so we don’t have to give up on hunting altogether?

We know by now that chronic wasting disease has infected deer species in 25 U.S. states and two Canadian provinces. It is always fatal, spreads rampantly, which, unfortunately, demands that hunters make at least some sacrifices if we hope to curb the epidemic and save deer hunting as we know it.

CWD has most recently made a pass through the upper-Midwest states where I live and hunt. That makes this disease not only detrimental at a population scale, but also deeply personal for me. I don’t believe that hunters are more averse to change than the average group of people, but we’ve often been asked to change our ways for the good of the herd or landscape.

The good news is that we’ll be at the forefront of the effort to control this destructive disease. The bad news is we’ll also have to be at the forefront of change, no matter how uncomfortable.

How much should we be willing to sacrifice? If you ask me, quite a bit.

CWD Directly Threatens the Places Where I Hunt

I have been hunting in Michigan since I was five years old, at which point I convinced my dad to build us a deer blind and take me along with him. Back in those days, we started “hunting” with a camera, a Stanley thermos of hot chocolate, and, on his part, a whole lot of patience for a squirmy kid. Since then I have upgraded to a 12-gauge slug gun and Folgers, but we still sit on that same stone pile every November. Three generations of Boohers hunt together on an old family farm in the southwest part of the state every year.

Most of the other hunters that I know have a similar story.

I’ll be honest, there are better places to hunt. And we might look for one if our only goal was a deer with 130+ inches of antler. Don’t get me wrong—harvesting a trophy buck would be nice, but it’s not essential, and truthfully it hasn’t happened in quite a few years on this property. But we take the time of work and school, make the drive from Wisconsin, and pony up for out-of-state licenses just to carry on a tradition that is at least four generations old.

My time afield is about more than just deer and deer hunting. It’s about spending quality time outside with my family, knowing where my food comes from, and intentionally taking time to be away from the rest of our busy lives.

The deer are just a part of it, but these experiences wouldn’t happen without them.

Fortunately, Hunters in North America Have Done This Before           

One of my biggest fears is the permanent loss of wild deer herds and, therefore, my inability to share my family’s traditions with another generation of whitetail hunters. So it’s worth it to me to make broad, individual sacrifices today to ensure the preservation of this resource for the future.

In the words of the famed conservationist and forester Gifford Pinchot, it is our responsibility to practice “foresighted utilization, preservation, and renewal of forests, waters, lands, and minerals for the greatest good of the greatest number for the longest time.” That is what we as hunters must do with regard to elk, moose, caribou, whitetails, and mule deer.

Of course, this is not a new concept, especially in the field of wildlife conservation. This sentiment dates back many years before the famed North American conservationists of Theodore Roosevelt’s tenure. The story of hunters acting as conservationists in North America is long and detailed, and it must inspire our future actions.

Since the late 19th century, we as hunters have stepped up to change our policies and practices for the betterment of the wildlife resources that we so enjoy. Examples of sportsmen and women willing to do this work are abundant among TRCP’s partners: If waterfowlers had not banded together to form Ducks Unlimited during the dust bowl, we likely would not have been able to have duck seasons today. The same could be said of the National Wild Turkey Federation’s efforts to reintroduce and propagate a game bird that was once extirpated from much of the Eastern United States. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation did the same for elk.

Unfortunately, today we are faced with a familiar, yet overwhelming challenge—to save our wildlife in order to sustain our traditions. For the sake of the habitats that we know and love, and the generations of hunters that are to come after us, we must actively change our habits. And with respect to CWD, that means a few things:

1. We need to be more conscientious about moving deer carcasses, especially “sensitive deer parts.”

These include the brain, eyes, spinal cord, lymph nodes, tonsils and spleen. Yes, this might impact your ability to bring your trophy home to your favorite local taxidermist or processor. However, there are ways to support the businesses near your home and slow the spread of CWD. The easiest way to do this is to hunt near your home, but that is not an option for everyone. If you hunt out-of-state or in another part of your state, consider doing more of your own processing in the field or having at least a portion of it done wherever you’re hunting.

Plan to add a few more knives, a bone saw, and a big cooler to your list of hunting gear so that you can bone-out your kill on-site.

Many states with CWD, like Michigan and Wisconsin, and some without, like Tennessee and North Carolina, are starting to restrict the importation of whole carcasses from other parts of the country.  However, most allow deboned meat and finished taxidermy products to be brought in. States have banned these body parts to prevent the spread of prions, while also allowing hunters to bring home some of their trophy for the freezer or the wall. These policies require some more planning and effort on our part, but are very important in minimizing the spread of this disease. Be sure to check out the regulations in the state where you live before you head out this fall.

Photo courtesy of Kripptic
2. We need to think a little harder about bait piles and salt blocks.

Every corner bar where I live has peanuts on the counter, almost without exception. I hardly ever think twice before grabbing a handful, that is, until the person next to me starts hacking and coughing, or worse, sneezes into the bowl. How about you? Would you partake if the person next to you is sick? How about if you knew that a quarter of the people in the county are ill?

Is this all that different from deer feeding on a salt lick or a pile of corn? In Dane County, Wisconsin, where I live, upwards of 25 percent of the whitetails are estimated to be infected with CWD. The only difference: as far as we know, they can’t tell who is sick and who isn’t.

Feeders are a great way to bring a lot of deer to your stand and can make for a much easier hunt, but they are also a key vector in the spread of disease. Concentrating animals (or people, for that matter) will make any disease spread more rapidly, but this is especially true of chronic wasting disease.

Unlike a large food plot or a stand of mast-bearing trees, mineral blocks and piles of corn bring deer to very, very specific locations. These lures force deer to eat off of the same exact spot as other deer. With a disease that is spread through saliva, like CWD, these places become huge transmission vectors.

In addition to increasing harvest limits in disease management areas, most states are changing some of the baiting rules that hunters must follow in the field. This includes restricting the use of urine-based lures, feed piles, and mineral blocks. While these bans often mean more time in the field, they are critical to slowing the spread of CWD. Each of these attractants can facilitate the spread of the disease by congregating deer in a specific area. As more cervids gather in these areas, there is a higher likelihood of an infected individual being present and transferring prions to other individuals or shedding them in the soil or water nearby.

3. We have to get our deer tested by state wildlife agencies.

Some hunters, and you can likely name a few, are reacting to policy changes and appeals for testing— implemented by state wildlife agencies to control the spread of CWD and improve our hunting—by railing against the effectiveness of wildlife managers. But these organizations are responsible for, and have a vested interest in, maintaining healthy and productive populations of game species.

As a hunter and someone who is studying to be a certified wildlife biologist, I feel that it is our responsibility to provide them with as much information as they might need to effectively and efficiently achieve these goals.

I get it. It’s a pain. It might take a little extra time and another $5.00 in gas to get to a check station, when all you really want to do is go home, eat some chili, and take a shower. Please, this season, before you go home and put your feet up by the fire, take your deer to a local check station to have someone from your state wildlife agency take the lymph nodes from the deer.

These small glands in the neck are easy to remove and they will not take your trophy antlers. The technicians at these stations are also trained to do these tests without damaging the cape of your deer, and often they will provide extra services like aging or green antler measuring at the same time.

Despite warnings from the Center for Disease Control and the World Health Organization, some people still choose to eat venison from untested deer in infected areas. Even if you are comfortable doing so, it is critical for state wildlife agencies to have as much information as possible about the deer in your area.

In the grand scheme of things, these steps seem like a relatively small price to pay for the future of deer hunting and the chance to sit in a blind with my future kids or nieces and nephews.

I will be making a few changes this November. Will you join me?

HOW YOU CAN HELP

WHAT WILL FEWER HUNTERS MEAN FOR CONSERVATION?

The precipitous drop in hunter participation should be a call to action for all sportsmen and women, because it will have a significant ripple effect on key conservation funding models.

Learn More
Subscribe

You have Successfully Subscribed!

You have Successfully Subscribed!

You have Successfully Subscribed!