Fwp December commission meeting
- Thread starter 8andcounting
- Start date
Unless I missed it, it didnt seem like much time was spend on the changes here. I think I heard a couple public comments about this but not much from the commission or from the region. Pretty big changes for a region to go from a general to a draw tag to not camp out and talk about it a little.
WanderWoman
Well-known member
They typically only defer to the regions if there’s a question that Helena staff present at the meeting can’t answer.
MTelkHuntress
Well-known member
Here's the amendments that went through (highlighted in yellow). I had a hard time keeping up and got lost on the region 7 stuff.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
I sent my commissioner an email, but also feel a bit of hopelessness about it. Unless it’s a really egregious thing, they’re going to go through with the dinks and dunks that can’t get a large enough rise out of a Montana that’s worn out on this shit. I know one could argue that is the tactic -throw so much shit at the wall that eventually the little pieces start to stick - and that vigilance is eternal.
It’s a tired subject, but I do feel we’d have far better representation with an elected commission. These guys are shamelessly crooked, and why wouldn’t they be? No meaningful disincentive structure exists.
I get that, but the Commission and the Department encourage online comments. Is that for a reason?
I was on video calls most of the day and had another monitor going with the Commission meeting muted, using the caption subtitles. Either their annunciating was bad, my connection was bad, or they said some things that have me shaking my head.
The process of Commissioner Amendments needs to stop. That is a bullshit backdoor way that adds confusion and discourages public involvement. Rather than an amendment, put it out on the next meeting agenda so that their is full public comment and discussion.
Even though I wasn't listening, only watching and reading the captioned subtitles, this looked to be one of the most poorly conducted Commission meetings I've seen. Maybe that is a function of reading subtitles and not having an audio feed.
And now, the Department gets to be blamed for many of these Commissioner Amendments, even though the Department folks are not allowed to comment on Commissioner Amendments. Whether one agrees with some of the Department positions or ideas, the policies of MT FWP seem to quickly be morphing into the policy of the Commission rather than policies of the Department and staff.
T
tjones
Guest
If I heard right, and I may have been confused, did they cut all antlerless mule deer tags on public in R6 & R7?
I wouldn't say they "cut" them, but yes they made it where no mule deer does are allowed to be hunted on public land.
They've already cut R7 B tags by 90% and SB 281 comes in to play relative to NR B tags (2 w/a b10/b11, 1 otc).
T
tjones
Guest
SwaggyD
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2022
- Messages
- 1,743
As the commission said, now instead of 1 hunter with 6 tags you’ll have 6 hunters with 1 tag. Which could increase hunter pressure.
The roi on 1 doe for a NR isn't much of an incentive. The fiscal note showed about a $50k loss.
We'll see how it works. Forever is until next session.
Labman
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2015
- Messages
- 489
Did the June 15 bear amendment pass? I missed it being discussed.
It was moved to next meeting.
MTelkHuntress
Well-known member
I don't quite fully understand what this means. Just the commision gets to pick numbers while the biologist advises on a range?
Schaaf
Well-known member
Biologist will still put forward their recommended quota and the commission will either approve or modify the quota. As where before, the biologist recommended their quota within the range and then the commission either approves or modifies the quota. Bio would also have to go to the commission to get an adjustment to a quota range if it was desired.
Commission still retains their power to approve or modify but will definitely have their hand on individual quotas, likely the day of the meeting, much more often than before where they were effectively a rubber stamp on quota numbers.
In a commission that lets the biologist do their job I don't think its necessarily something I would get too worked up about but under the current commission this is gonna hurt.
Commission still retains their power to approve or modify but will definitely have their hand on individual quotas, likely the day of the meeting, much more often than before where they were effectively a rubber stamp on quota numbers.
In a commission that lets the biologist do their job I don't think its necessarily something I would get too worked up about but under the current commission this is gonna hurt.
This is why showing up is so important.
Don't just show up at a hearing to yell about something though. Put a proposal together and talk to your biologist & commissioner. You have to engage at the regional level, district level, and work the commission.
I was a little surprised by the lack of hunter engagement today.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
must be the folks on that other forum keeping the stats so high...
- Latest: reallyoldman
-
-
-
