NRA Warns Hunters to Prepare for War

“The NRA does not have credibility with hunters to the degree some think,” said Randy Newberg, a professional hunter and TV host, after reviewing the NRA’s new ad campaign. “To those of us with an eye on the future of wildlife, clean air, clean water, and productive lands, this message isn’t going to change our direction. It will be taken for what it is, an effort by the NRA to increase their penetration among hunters.”

However, Newberg added, the tactic of playing to fears of outsiders and framing political fights as existential crises “works very well for [the NRA] in other arenas, so it only makes sense to do the same when trying to gain more appeal among hunters.”

Click to expand...

Notably, the NRA campaign does not advocate for any specific policy changes. Instead, it just asks for donations.

Click to expand...

Schaaf said:

After years of the NRA sending mailers and asking for money, I haven't received a mailer in 6 months. Apparently 2 years of calls stating I was no longer going to be sending them money did the trick.

Click to expand...

Alex:

I got your message. Sorry I was in meetings all day.

Thanks for the link to that hunting campaign. I had not seen that. I personally know most the folks who contributed the articles to that website.

The tone of the website is typical of a “call to action” that the NRA would put together. Working on fears and putting things in very black v. white contrast, to create an “enemy.” Anti-hunting folks do have stated goals, and take actions, to eliminate hunting, so I am not too surprised that some in the hunting world use the term “enemy.” And less surprised that the group who would use that approach is the NRA. It works very well for them in other arenas, so it only makes sense to do the same when trying to gain more appeal among hunters.

That said, there is not much in those articles that I find rhetoric or politicized. Most of it is pretty much fact and the pieces are written by some very sharp minds with backgrounds in history, anthropology, sciences, etc. I do not split the world into enemies or allies, as does the NRA, though I don’t see this as politicizing. I don’t think I read about a single party/partisan/person/platform in any of it.

I don’t fear that the animal-rights movement is going to end hunting. They are an annoyance that operates on the same emotions some in the far fringe of the hunting world operate on; fear, distrust, anger, worry. That movement will not be the end of hunting. Yes, they will cause some disruptions and will be an obstacle to wildlife conservation models as has been used in America for the last 125 years.

Most hunters will read it and move on without donating or taking action. The NRA does not have the credibility with hunters to the degree some think. This campaign will appeal to some hunters who operate on fears. To those of us with an eye on the future of wildlife, clean air, clean water, and productive lands, this message isn’t going to change our direction. It will be taken for what it is, an effort by the NRA to increase their penetration among hunters. That low penetration among hunters, especially western hunters is not a fact they want the world to know. This is an NRA-style marketing campaign to improve their standing among hunters.

That said, I am curious what parts you find to be rhetoric and politicizing. I ask that, as I am always interested in how others see the debate/discussion from outside the ring of hunting and conservation that often engulfs me and might blind me to what others see as obvious.

Thanks for reaching out. Feel free to call tomorrow. I am open other than from 11:30 am to 1:00 pm Mountain Time.

Best,

Randy

Click to expand...