Hunters and Anglers: Global Warming is a Serious Threat; Time for Action is Now!

By: Lowell
Published On: 5/23/2006 8:17:20 PM

As many of us know, Al Gore's movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, is about to hit a movie theater near you.  Coincidentally, the National Wildlife Federation has just released its March/April 2006 "Nationwide Opinion Survey of Hunters and Anglers," and the results are eye opening.

For starters, it's important to emphasize that these guys - and I say "guys" because 75% are male - aren't liberals.  In fact, 73% consider themselves "conservative" or "moderate," while just 11% say they are "liberal."  Half consider themselves "evangelical Christians."  In terms of party affiliation, 31% say they are Democrats, 29% Independents, and 27% Republicans. In 2004, 53% of these people voted for George W. Bush, while just 29% voted for John Kerry.  Finally, a whopping 76% plan to vote this November.

One thing about hunters and anglers, obviously, is that they're outdoors a lot, doing what they love to do.  That gives them plenty of time and motivation to observe what's going on around them in nature.  And what they're seeing these days isn't good.  For instance, 54% are reporting "warmer or shorter winters" and 39% are seeing "hotter summers." Around 35% have observed "decreasing bird, fish or wildlife populations" where they live, 31% "more intense storms, including hurricanes," and 20% "new pests or invasive species."
What do anglers and hunters believe is behind these changes?  Well, 76% "strongly or moderately agree" that global warming is taking place.  A whopping 70% believe that "global warming is a serious threat to fish and wildlife."  And two-thirds believe that "global warming is an urgent problem requiring immediate action."

Why is global warming taking place, according to anglers and hunters?  A strong majority, 56%, believe it's being caused by "pollution from burning fossil fuels."  Around 22% aren't sure what's causing it, leaving just 23% who "moderately" or "strongly" disagree that fossil fuel burning is behind global warming.

What should we do about this situation?  According to the vast majority of U.S. anglers and hunters, we should make solving global warming a high priority by: making "energy conservation technologies more affordable for citizens" (87%), "provid[ing] payments to farmers and landowners who conserve soil and plant trees for reforestation" (85%), "investing in clean, renewable energy" (82%), "reduc[ing] emissions of greenhouse gases" (78%), and passing legislation with "mandatory timelines because industry has already had enough time to clean up voluntarily" (75%).

What about the Bush Administration line that global warming needs "more study?"  Only 28% of hunters and anglers agree with that stance, compared to 64% who would be more likely to support a candidate favoring immediate action.  And only 15% of hunters and anglers agree with the Bush Administration/Republican Congress desire for more "drilling for oil and gas in...wildlife refuges and [on] other public lands."  So much for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge! 

By the way, just 17% of America's anglers and hunters say that a candidate's "conservation policies or views" have "no influence" on their vote.  A whopping 80% say it has a "major" or "minor" influence.  And 86% say that the Bush Administration and Republican Congress are NOT doing enough to "break America's addiction to oil."

The bottom line here is that the Bush Administration and Republican Congress are way out of step with America's anglers and hunters on global warming and conservation issues.  This is an issue tailor made for Democrats to make huge inroads among a generally conservative voting bloc.  The question is, do Democrats "get it?"  Have they, for instance, read Steve Jarding's and Mudcat Saunders' latest book, Foxes in the Henhouse?  If not, why not?


Comments



Science - What a hoax! (Nichole - 5/24/2006 10:27:57 AM)
People seem to always think that when someone cares about the environment that they are a hippie liberal. Afterall, the only people who care about the environment are tree huggers.

It is obvious that stereotype is outdated.

I know that the current adminstration will not take action, because the next president, or the next can do it. Hell, why don't we wait until we have no more trees, no more ice-caps and no clean air..... then we should take action! We can't count on a scientist to know what they are talking about.