Vice President Cheney quail hunting in 2002. AP Photo/David Bohrer, White House
by Frank James
I'm not among those who see the invisible hand of Vice President Cheney behind everything that happens at the White House.
But I have to admit, as soon as I learned about this executive order President Bush recently signed, ordering federal agencies to enhance hunting opportunities on federally managed lands, my suspicions did run in the direction of one of our nation's most famous hunters.
Here part of the executive order:
Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this order is to direct Federal agencies that have programs and activities that have a measurable effect on public land management, outdoor recreation, and wildlife management, including the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture, to facilitate the expansion and enhancement of hunting opportunities and the management of game species and their habitat.
Sec. 2. Federal Activities. Federal agencies shall, consistent with agency missions:
(a) Evaluate the effect of agency actions on trends in hunting participation and, where appropriate to address declining trends, implement actions that expand and enhance hunting opportunities for the public;
(b) Consider the economic and recreational values of hunting in agency actions, as appropriate;
(c) Manage wildlife and wildlife habitats on public lands in a manner that expands and enhances hunting opportunities, including through the use of hunting in wildlife management planning;(d) Work collaboratively with State governments to manage and conserve game species and their habitats in a manner that respects private property rights and State management authority over wildlife resources;
(e) Establish short and long term goals, in cooperation with State and tribal governments, and consistent with agency missions, to foster healthy and productive populations of game species and appropriate opportunities for the public to hunt those species;
(f) Ensure that agency plans and actions consider programs and recommendations of comprehensive planning efforts such as State Wildlife Action Plans, the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, and other range-wide management plans for big game and upland game birds;
(g) Seek the advice of State and tribal fish and wildlife agencies, and, as appropriate, consult with the Sporting Conservation Council and other organizations, with respect to the foregoing Federal activities.
The new executive order brought a critical response from an organization called Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility or PEER.
For Immediate Release: Monday, August 20, 2007Bush Orders Federal Agencies to Promote Hunting
Refuges, Forests and Grasslands Directed to Maximize “Hunting Opportunities”
Washington, DC — A vacationing President Bush issued an Executive Order directing federal land management agencies to “expand and enhance hunting opportunities.” While the order does not overturn any conservation laws, it establishes a preference for hunting at the expense of all other activities in the administration of federal lands, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).Although the order explicitly covers national forests, wildlife refuges and range lands, it also applies to all federal agencies “that have a measurable effect on land management,” such as military bases and nuclear weapon reservations. These federal agencies must now “evaluate the effect of [their] actions on trends in hunting participation [and] consider the economic and recreational value of hunting in agency actions.”
“This is political meddling posing as a conservation policy,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “This order reads like it was written by a lobbyist...”
Or the vice president.
The PEER press release continues:
Issued this Friday, August 17, 2007, the order mandates that federal land managers –
“Manage wildlife and wildlife habitats on public lands in a manner that expands and enhances hunting opportunities, including through the use of hunting in wildlife management”;
Defer to “private property rights and State management authority over wildlife resources”; and
Foster “productive populations of game species and appropriate opportunities for the public to hunt those species.”
“The President seems to be saying you can never have too many deer and that public lands should be run as a salad bar for trophy animals,” Ruch added. “It would have made more sense to have Dick Cheney sign this executive order instead.”
Bingo. So I'm not alone in seeing the connection.
The PEER press release continues:
The edict does provide that any actions should be “consistent with agency missions.” Further, it stipulates that the directive “does not create any right…or privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States [or] its departments…”“This may amount to no more than meaningless pandering to the ‘hook and bullet’ vote but, if vigorously implemented, has the potential to change what happens on the ground,” Ruch concluded, noting that most federal lands except national parks already allow hunting. “There appears to be no shortage of hunting opportunities; perhaps the reason for the decline in hunting licenses lies elsewhere.”
The action enshrines an entity called the Sporting Conservation Council, created by outgoing Interior Secretary Gale Norton in 2006, to help develop “a comprehensive Recreational Hunting and Wildlife Conservation Plan [setting] forth a 10 year agenda for fulfilling” the goals of the Executive Order.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Fox News exclusive on Dick Cheney's hunting "accident".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR7CH9zvD6s
Posted by: John E | August 20, 2007 2:27 PM
Chicken-hawka love shooting at things that don't shoot back!!!
Posted by: Anonymous | August 20, 2007 2:31 PM
Even by the usual Tribune hate-Cheney standards, this is a pretty vile low blow.
Posted by: Bruce | August 20, 2007 2:33 PM
So now our govt. wants to start making it legal to hunt elderly white men on federal lands, too? Interesting.
Posted by: snalg | August 20, 2007 3:07 PM
I don't have any problem with hunting. What I do have a problem with is environmental mismanagement. 'Enhancement of hunting opportunities' is the exact opposite of responsible land stewardship.
Teddy Roosevelt would be appalled at what passes for the modern Repub. party.
Posted by: weinerdog43 | August 20, 2007 3:11 PM
I agree 100% with weinerdog43s comment...this is not responsible...Teddy would not be happy.
Posted by: Matt | August 20, 2007 3:25 PM
Let's see, the Clean Air Act actually allows more pollutants to be released...No Rich)Child Left Behind only leaves behind kids who don't get vouchers...let's call this the Federal Save the Animals Act.
More BuSh BS... Old white men getting their rocks off shooting animals...probably with an Uzi.
Posted by: Save the Animals? | August 20, 2007 4:10 PM
Wow. You’ve gotta love a president who's priorities are in order!
In a Press conference today on the September 15th report due on Iraq, someone asked about the presidents priorities and questioned the executive order President Bush recently signed, ordering federal agencies to enhance hunting opportunities on federally managed lands.
President Bush said, “Well, ah, damn the deal in Iraq, Gen Petraeus has that under control, right? Well, I mean I can’t always think about Iraq, I have other things to do. I was just a little disappointed this week while on vacation. I didn’t shoot a darn thing, it’s like all the wildlife just up and left Texas, and I want to know what happened to them. I want everyone to start getting the animals back on government property, so we can have a huge hunt fest next spring. A president’s gotta have some fun running this country. If President Bush ain’t happy, then nobody should be happier than me…that’s the way you say that, right?
Oh boy…
Posted by: Bella | August 20, 2007 4:28 PM
And the CHicago LIBune continues to become nothing more than the DailyKos-Lite.
This is an absolutely ridiculous story that was done just to appease the LIBune's Loony Left readership.
Posted by: John D | August 20, 2007 5:05 PM
As a hunter, I find the Bush/Cheney order excessive and anti-conservation.
Posted by: Arizona hunter | August 20, 2007 6:28 PM
Well John D, how about addressing the issue for once? Does the Repuke party support the environment or not? How do you square 'managing for hunting' vs. managing for a healthy ecosystem? (They're not the same thing incidentally.)
I hunt and fish, and this is just a stupid program. Your vision of this country seems to be some whack version of 'my country right or wrong.' Instead, it's 'my party, right or wrong.' I'm a former Repug., and as long as people like you run the party, I'll NEVER be back.
Posted by: weinerdog43 | August 20, 2007 7:26 PM
WE ALL KNOW WHAT THE LAW SAID THE DAY BEFORE GEORGE ENHANCED IT WITH HIS O'GREATNESS.
I GUESS WE ALL KNOW WHERE CHENEY WAS HUNTING, MUST OF BEEN ON FEDERAL LAND, AND MUST OF BEEN A FEDERAL OFFENSE FOR HUNTING ON THE LAND. I GUESS WE ALL KNOW IT MUST OF BEEN A FEDERAL OFFENSE NOT TO REPORTING THE SHOOTING EVENT IN A TIMELY MANNER, LIKE THE SAME DAY.
SOUNDS LIKE THE PELICAN BRIEF ALL OVER AGAIN, ENTITLED "EXECUTIVE ORDER"
Posted by: Roger Morris | August 20, 2007 7:35 PM
'Liar' is just as ugly a word as 'thief,' because it implies the presence of just as ugly a sin in one case as in the other. If a man lies under oath or procures the lie of another under oath, if he perjures himself or suborns perjury, he is guilty under the statute law.
- Teddy Roosevelt said this on May 12, 1900
Good point about Theodore, so correct, he'd be appalled by republicans. Given his sentimemts over one who "suborns perjury," and the way the GOP rallied around Bush even after he was caught red handed lying under oath about not having sexual relations with that woman.
A wise and great man, Roosevelt, you can be certain he'd never drag our boys off to fight in some foriegn land, in someone else's conflict, that's for certain.
Well, I don't expect this will get past whoever is screening this. Pretty obvious what's going on over here at the Chicago Tribune, and fragile world's constructed of misbeliefs and untruths are so easily shattered by one carelessly tossing a few obvious facts around.
It wouldn't hurt to pick up a legitimate non-partisan history book, from time to time. Even just forget all your preconcieved notions and beliefs, for just a moment, you know, to look around for yourself kind of thing. There's really nothing to lose, the distrust and insecurity your chosen not so real world isn't going anywhere if it's too frightening out here, I mean. Trust me, reality just seems a lot scarier than it really is, it's a matter of perspective. I think once your out here and realise you're ok, you'd really enjoy it. Life was intended to be a bitter-sweet melody, not a paranoid delusion. Savor it, the good and the bad, with a little practice, it comes naturally. A lot of things in life just happen, it's nothing personal, and it's not often someone out to get you either. None of us are really that important.
Eh, nevermind, what's the point, it's going to happen. Guess some of us were born stronger, some of us weren't. I have to tell you though, even though you've chosen half life under a veil of lies, so can't see what's going on, we can, and we're trying to defend all of us, including you, and you are really making our jobs very difficult.
Now, they succeed in detonating a nuke, something they'd love to do, in Chicago, in great part it will be because you fought us stopping it every inch of the way. Isn't going to matter much if you chose to wake up or stay dreaming at that point. So good luck, and enjoy your troubled dreams today, tomorrow they may well be nightmares worse than you can image. A life spent obsessing over and hating Bush, Cheney, whomever they happen to have choosen for you at that time, for no purpose outside serving themselves, not you, or anyone else, political office, at that point may seem a little silly.
Hate is an odd poison, one people take actually believing it's going to harm someone else.
So good luck, brother, sister, whichever fits, like it or not, we are fellow countrymen. Together or divided, with or without your help, we will all make it through, or we will all fall.
I can see I've done about all I can around here.
non omnia possumus omnes
Posted by: Ratko | August 20, 2007 9:39 PM
Ratco, defend the indefensible if you want, but trampling the constitution does nothing to defend America. Furthermore, questioning authority is part of what being an American is. Quit yer whining.
Non Gradus Anus Rodentum!
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | August 20, 2007 10:56 PM
Weinerbrain, stop with this I am a "former Repug." You never were. I have yet to see anything from you that even comes close to moderation.
And for the record, it is not my party right or wrong. There have been a few issues on which I have differed with "my party" and "my president."
Also, one minute you say "managing for hunting and managing for a healthy ecosystem" are not the same, but then you say you hunt. Well, if you do hunt and know anything about hunting then you know that hunting and the environment can go hand in hand.
So, you're not a former Republican and it doesn't seem you are a hunter.
Posted by: John D | August 20, 2007 10:59 PM
I was watching a bad "b" movie the other day, "The Hills Have Eyes", and was surprised to see Dick Cheney in a cameo role. I think he was playing himself. He bit the head off a parakeet and drank the blood, then wreaked havoc with his shotgun. He didn't have much of a speaking part, just a lot of rahr, rahr, rahr, but it was in character.
Posted by: dt | August 20, 2007 11:48 PM
Ratko,
WTF????
That must be some pretty good weed you're smoking there, brother. Just answer me this. How is the war in Iraq, which even U.S. intelligence agencies say has not made us safer and, in fact, likely serves to create a whole new generation of terrorist, is keeping nukes from getting into the wrong hands and into this country?
And BTW, dissent, in itself, is not hate. We've seen the neocon way and it was/is a disaster. Our country would be better served by putting its resources into more thorough inspections of cargo that comes into the country, improving intelligence "on the ground", getting out of Iraq and rebuilding our armed forces, showing a renewed commitment to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, among other actions. The neocon cowboys have succeeded in destabilizing the whole Middle East, weakening our military and turning world opinion against us. These are not the people I want "protecting" us. The only bad dreams I'll be having is if we have another "stay-the-courser" elected in 2008. But of course, that will never happen.
Posted by: dt | August 21, 2007 4:49 AM
Little Johnny, I voted for Ford, Reagan (both times), plus Judy Biggert as recently as 1996. It was after the phony impeachment mess and increasing wackiness of the Repugs. that I left.
Remember, an apostate is not likely to go back. Unless the Repubs. dramatically move back to the middle, that party will continue to shrink. I for one will never go back, nor will I ever forgive what nitwits like you have done to our political discourse.
Posted by: weinerdog43 | August 21, 2007 7:49 AM
Chickenhawk Cheney hunting animals. Oh, how patriotic is that. What an American. He was too much a coward to serve his country in military sense- 5 deferrments and 'other priorities'. He always will be a smarmy coward who could care less about average Americans.
Posted by: Doug R. | August 21, 2007 8:55 AM
Chickenhawk Cheney hunting animals. Oh, how patriotic is that. What an American. He was too much a coward to serve his country in military sense- 5 deferrments and 'other priorities'. He always will be a smarmy coward who could care less about average Americans.
Posted by: Doug R. | August 21, 2007 8:55 AM
Weiner, if you voted for Reagan twice as you claim, please explain how Reagan was in the middle? Reagan was a true-blue conservative, even moreso than the current President Bush.
And, if you want to discuss political discourse, I suggest you take a closer look at the comments from your allegedly new-found friends on the Left. With them, it's all hate, all the time.
Posted by: John D | August 21, 2007 9:01 AM
I agree with Ratko. We could stop terrorism if we had no right to privacy. The Consitution is just a piece of paper, just like toilet paper is just a piece of paper, right buddy. And what's with habeus corpus? Sounds like a policy for people who want to get blown up.
Posted by: Typical Republican | August 21, 2007 10:53 AM
tr was a great pres. and conservationist and is probably turning over in his grave....but he did support the spanish american war (a william randolf hearst prestation) need one forget the rough riders.....true he did not start it and he did lead men into a senseless war for american imperialism and would have entered us into ww1 much earlier than when wilson was suckered into it....so lets at least be accurate....but he would have put gitmo to a better use like sending all the neocons down there to answer a few questions including the current resident in chief and his minions...then maybe we might start getting some straight answers and some truth....
Posted by: sean heretic | August 21, 2007 11:54 AM
They can always go to Michael Vick's house and shoot dogs.
Or maybe we should send Dick Cheney and Bobby Knight into the woods and see who "accidently" shoots the other first.
Posted by: Steve | August 21, 2007 1:36 PM
Sean and Steve, more examples of the maniacal rantings from the psychotic loony left. Rather than Cheney or Bobby Knight "accidentally" shooting each other, I'd prefer it if Democratic leaders were in that house and "accidentally" shot.
Doh! Here I go again, using the same little game the Loony Left plays in hoping Republicans get killed, but playing that game with their Democratic friends.
Posted by: John D | August 21, 2007 2:38 PM
It's about time we have a President that will do this. Hunting has been under attack by the Anti's for a very long time. Our rights are being eroded one at a time by the Socialist leaning left and this appears to be embraced by the Democrats. I was raised a Democrat and I feel left behind by my party.
Thanks goes out to President Bush!
Posted by: David Calderwood | August 21, 2007 3:37 PM
Dick Cheney is no hunter. People who participate in canned hunts are not hunters. My 16 year old daughter is a hunter. She has been taught to respect her prey as giving them a fair chance-canned hunts do not do that. She also is sure of what she is pulling the trigger at-Cheney does not!!!! Also, she knows not to mix alcohol with hunting-Cheney admitted to having a drink before he shot his friend-not smart!!! Therefore, my 16 year old daughter is a better hunter than Cheney!!! He is a disgrace to real hunters everywhere!!!
Posted by: cheryl | August 21, 2007 5:19 PM
Doh! Here I go again, using the same little game the Loony Left plays in hoping Republicans get killed, but playing that game with their Democratic friends.
Posted by: John D | August 21, 2007 2:38 PM
You continue to proove that neo-cons have no capacity for recognizing satire or, for that matter, a snese of humor.
Where, exactly, did I say that "I HOPE, they shoot each other"? As your rebuttal seems to suggest.
I was only making a playful comment on high profile people who had similar accidents while hunting.
For the record, I happen to think Bobby Knight is the greatest college basketball coach in history.
Posted by: Steve | August 23, 2007 12:44 PM