As anti-gun and anti-hunting forces across the United States are finding out, it's increasingly tougher to push through more restrictive regulations on shooters and hunters. When asked why they're failing in their efforts, they invariably give three letters as the source of all that legislative and grassroots power: N-R-A.

The National Rifle Association, with four million members, may not be at its peak of membership numbers, but it is definitely keeping its political muscle intact. When there is an issue concerning guns, the NRA is all over it - at the local, state, and national levels.

But the NRA has at times been criticized for a perceived lack of action on the preservation of hunting rights.

Recently, I spoke with Kayne Robinson, NRA's former president, now Executive Director of NRA General Operations, and Darren La Sorte, NRA Manager of Hunting Policy about that. I wanted to ask the men most directly involved in hunting efforts if they felt that criticism valid.

What I learned was that the NRA was more likely to be convicted of being the major defender of hunting than to be indicted for ignoring the importance of America's hunting heritage.

"Really, we're the biggest and most effective hunting organization in the United States - and the world," said Robinson, "Everything hunters live and die on- from political action to habitat - is important to the NRA. There have been crucial decisions - recently - that have preserved massive amount of public lands to hunt, and that work has been done in many areas because the NRA was at the forefront."

"Sometimes," says La Sorte, "all we have to do is let legislators know that we consider a bill important. In Kansas, for example, there was a youth hunting initiative in committee. Our lobbyist let the committee chairman know we thought it important and essential that it be passed. That chairman said flat-out that if we hadn't let him know we thought it was important, it would have died in his committee. Today, Kansas has that Youth Hunting Initiative."

La Sorte quoted examples: from right-to-hunt legislation in Missouri to a Wyoming measure that now permits bowhunters to carry firearms in the field.

The general public, Robinson and La Sorte agree, don't realize that in some cases, the NRA alerts other organizations of goings-on other pro-hunting groups might simply lack the manpower to monitor.

In the Congress, for example, it was the NRA that gave other groups the heads-up the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) was lobbying to ban importation of polar bears. From the point of notification, the USSA, SCI and other hunting groups were all over the matter - leading to its eventual defeat.

Likewise, the NRA has people on the ground in New Jersey as a confrontation between New Jersey elected officials and the Fish and Game Council seems inevitable over the management of the state's growing black bear population.

So, is there a "vast left-wing conspiracy" out to create onerous regulations designed to drive hunters out of the fields?

"Unfortunately, no." laughed Robinson, "Many of the pieces of legislation aren't intentionally designed to run people away from hunting, they were created to make life as easy as possible for regulators."

As an example, Robinson cited a Wisconsin proposal that would have made it illegal for hunters to carry more than 25 shotgun shells when hunting waterfowl. The penalties included arrest and the potential seizure of the hunter's equipment - including his boat. What had been a complaint that hunters were shooting too many shotshells, Robinson explained, had morphed into a regulation that limited the amount of ammunition waterfowlers could carry into the field.

"How would that regulation have been enforced," asked Robinson, "by inspecting hunters and boats. While hunters were out trying to hunt, game officials could spot-check their boats, count their ammunition and, when they found the twenty-sixth shell, arrest the hunters. Not exactly a practical law."

Robinson also laughingly cited an Iowa regulation said that if you had game meat in your freezer more than sixty days old, you could be arrested. A Wisconsin regulation said, essentially, "if you were sighting in your rifle in your grandfather's field the day before deer season you could be arrested." The rule, Robinson surmises, came from an enforcement case where someone had been charged with shooting a deer the day before deer season.

"Regulators couldn't prove the deer had been shot the day before the season opened, " he explained, "so officials figure the best way to prevent early hunting was to forbid hunters to be in the field with center-fire rifles the day before hunting season opened."

In other words, many silly rules are the result of agents having problems with a particular case and that spilling over into regulations that may have negative implications for the entire hunting community.

Unfortunately, both Robinson and La Sorte agree, there are some groups of "elite" hunters who compound the problem. In pursuit of their narrow area of interest, they demand rules that fit their agenda, neglecting the impact it may have on other hunters.

"Occasionally," La Sorte explained, "we are our own worst enemies in that respect."

Are there major threats to hunting, fishing and trapping today?

Yes, says La Sorte.

"Preservation of the right to hunt, fish, and trap is a major issue," he says, "eight states in the last ten years have passed right to hunt legislation, but their language looks like it could be subject to interpretation. We're working to get model language out there that preserves the rights as we know them in our traditional sense, not as they might be interpreted."

"No net loss is the other huge issue. We're fighting that fight in conjunction with other groups. We are, as they say, the thousand-pound gorilla in issues; so when the NRA shows up, politicians get interested. "

"We're working to make certain they know this is very important to all our members."

And what about the perceived schism between some hunters and shooters? Is that a real issue, or has the outdoor and shooting media created a "Chicken Little" issue?

"It's Chicken Little," said Robinson, "granted, some hunters - and some shooters - are only interested in what they do. But that's not the majority of hunters or shooters."

"We all know the hunting debate is important - to all of us - and there is power in numbers. At the end of the day, when we turn out groups for gun issues, a large number of them are hunters. We all know each of these issues is crucial to the preservation of all our rights."

So, Robinson and La Sorte say, the NRA is out there for both hunting and shooting issues - because both are vitally important to the preservation of our rights.

Rights, they say, that must preserved for two groups of gun owners: shooters and hunters.