You’ve probably caught at least a whiff of the story that popped up last week about Ducks Unlimited, allegedly at the behest of the most unpopular man in Montana (the carpetbagger James Cox Kennedy of Atlanta-based Cox Enterprises), unceremoniously dumping longtime DU magazine contributor Don Thomas (Lewistown, MT) over an article in Outside Bozeman magazine.
The article – A Rift Runs Through It – was a very well-constructed and accurate summary of the fight for access to the Ruby River as it relates to Cox’s land, an access right granted by the Montana constitution as upheld by the Montana Supreme Court in 2014 and remanded back to district court for final resolution of the Seylor Lane access dispute specifically.
Thomas Responds With Class
Ducks, Politics, and Money by Don Thomas
As many of you know, I have been a regular contributor to Ducks Unlimited magazine for nearly twenty years, serving as their Field Editor and writing the back page column in every issue. Not any more.
In October, 2015 I wrote a piece for Outside Bozeman magazine, A Rift Runs Through It, about the long Montana legal battle to secure and maintain public access to the Ruby River in accordance with the state’s stream access law. (I will make a copy of that text available to anyone on request.) To summarize a complex issue for those unfamiliar with the case, wealthy Atlanta businessman James Cox Kennedy engaged in extensive litigation to prevent such access, only to be denied repeatedly in court due to the efforts of the Montana Public Land and Water Access Association. While the article was not complimentary to Kennedy, no one has challenged the accuracy of the reporting.
James Cox Kennedy is a major financial contributor to Ducks Unlimited. On November 10, a Ducks Unlimited functionary informed me that my position with the magazine was terminated because of Cox’s displeasure with the article.
Several points deserve emphasis. The Ruby River article had nothing whatsoever to do with ducks or Ducks Unlimited (DU hereafter). The article did strongly support the rights of hunters and other outdoor recreationists to enjoy land and water to which they are entitled to access, and DU is a hunters’ organization. By terminating me for no reason related to my work for the magazine and the organization, DU has essentially taken the position that wealthy donors matter more than the outdoor recreationists they purport to represent.
As an outdoorsman and conservationist who supports the North American Model and the Public Trust Doctrine, I find DU’s action reprehensible. As a journalist, I find it chilling. Wildlife advocates today face ever increasing pressures to abandon these principles in favor of the commercialization of our public resources, largely from wealthy individuals like James Cox Kennedy. If every journalist reporting on these issues faces this kind of vindictive retribution, the future of wildlife and wildlife habitat-not to mention the hunters and anglers of ordinary means who form the backbone of groups like DU-is bleak indeed.
This issue is not about me or my professional relationship with Ducks Unlimited magazine. It is about integrity and the future of wildlife in America. If you share my concerns-especially if you are a DU member-I encourage you to contact the organization, express your opinion, and take whatever further action you might consider appropriate.
Don Thomas
Lewistown, MT
No Matter How You Spin It, It Sure Looks Like Ducks Unlimited Values Deep Pocket Donors Far More Than Your Access Rights
Ducks Unlimited, a storied organization with a long history of solid action and advocacy, an organization that relies upon an army of grassroots volunteers and donors for much of their work and budget, appears to have shat the bed on this one, at least from the current optics.
Even if Cox didn’t coerce inspire the DU editorial team to hastily dump Thomas as alleged, their decision to do so suggests not only do they NOT support the storied access rights that Montanans deeply cherish, they’re willing to very publicly distance themselves from an accurate story featuring their high-roller, enemy of public access donor.
[Mind you, they’re likely waiting for what they’re hoping is a tempest in a teapot to blow over, though the story has grown legs and is still kicking up a bit of dust. We’d sure as hell as hope they’d at least feel compelled to respond with some explanation as to how they’re NOT increasingly held captive by anti-public access donors, though actions speak far, far louder than words. Turning a deaf ear to the story response this week has certainly allowed negative perceptions to build up a full head of steam.]
Thomas’ article didn’t mention DU (or even come close); DU certainly appears to have taken the side that deep-pocket, privatization-minded interests matter far more than we members of the great unwashed public at large.
DU’s actions certainly read like (there’s that pesky optics thing again) overt retribution, and have drawn a fair amount of attention in the Montana press, from a number of writers across the board and even the New York Times.
If Cox did trigger DU’s actions, it’s time for DU to be ridden out of town on the proverbial rail. Underestimating the vehemence with which fishers and hunters treasure access and public lands will likely have far greater repercussions than imagined.
DU has done some wonderful things over the years and has a number of very fine people working within its volunteer base, but they’ve jumped the shark here and it’s time to fess up and step up for access, not for deep pocket donors intent on stealing part of Montana’s and your sporting and recreation legacies.
Related Ducks Unlimited Goose Egg Reading
Just a few of the many recent articles and posts; search “ducks unlimited thomas firing” or something similar – 62,500 results pulled Saturday morning…
New York Times 11 November 2015
Billings Gazette 11 November 2015
Hunt Talk Forum Posting, Ongoing, with Commentary from icon Randy Newberg
Quack. Quack.
