katqanna
Well-known member
On January 10th, 2013, the FWP Commission passed the Statewide Elk Brucellosis Management Proposed Recommendations (which they dont even follow). Within the Proposed Recommendations - Fundamental Objective #2 stated: Maximize acceptability of elk management tools and populations in the DSA for:
Sportspersons (measure with satisfaction survey),
Wildlife enthusiasts (measure with satisfaction survey),
Landowners (measure with satisfaction survey), and
Livestock producers (measure with satisfaction survey).
Dr. Mark Albrecht (one of the statewide working group members and a hunter) has a number of times asked the question of FWP and the group as to whether this program has met Fundamental Objective #2. At the July Statewide Elk Brucellosis Working Group mtg, FWP's Quentin Kujula stated they were creating a survey to determine acceptability.
FWP elk brucellosis management actions have not maximized acceptability. Instead, the more awareness of the situation has caused increased public comments against the program, many upset hunters going to Helena to speak to the FWP Commissioners at the April 10th meeting, a lawsuit, even public statements and public comments from some of the Statewide Elk Brucellosis Working Group Members. Info
So an acquaintance that knows all that I am doing on this elk front actually received the general household elk brucellosis survey and got the survey to me. At which point I contacted FWP for the set (below, one each for general household, hunter and landowner). The questions are leading and misrepresentative of what is really taking place.
It is now 8 months of DOL obstruction of my public information requests on the cattle infection cases, which in a way I am glad they initially obstructed this because I have gone searching in areas they would not have provided information. Along with the genetic information I have posted about before showing cattle transmission, I also have the document of the RB51 vaccination infection, recently got my Certificate of Veterinary Inspection from the 2007 brucellosis infection case which the Montana vet signed off on before the lab results were back in and shipped cattle out of state to Iowa, threatening the states livestock industry. I also have the 2007 lab reports which show when they received the 2007 blood samples (a day after the CVI says they were all negative), etc. Document after document is proving that the majority of cases (if not all) have been cattle, not our elk and definitely not our bison infecting the cattle in Paradise Valley. FWP did not do an investigation into whether or not our elk were actually responsible and they have not informed the public of any of this, hell, DOL never informed the public about any of this.
Elk Brucellosis General Household Survey
Elk Brucellosis Hunter Survey
Elk Brucellosis Private Landowner Survey
These are informational watermarked copies only. FWP does not want their "science" messed up.
Sportspersons (measure with satisfaction survey),
Wildlife enthusiasts (measure with satisfaction survey),
Landowners (measure with satisfaction survey), and
Livestock producers (measure with satisfaction survey).
Dr. Mark Albrecht (one of the statewide working group members and a hunter) has a number of times asked the question of FWP and the group as to whether this program has met Fundamental Objective #2. At the July Statewide Elk Brucellosis Working Group mtg, FWP's Quentin Kujula stated they were creating a survey to determine acceptability.
FWP elk brucellosis management actions have not maximized acceptability. Instead, the more awareness of the situation has caused increased public comments against the program, many upset hunters going to Helena to speak to the FWP Commissioners at the April 10th meeting, a lawsuit, even public statements and public comments from some of the Statewide Elk Brucellosis Working Group Members. Info
So an acquaintance that knows all that I am doing on this elk front actually received the general household elk brucellosis survey and got the survey to me. At which point I contacted FWP for the set (below, one each for general household, hunter and landowner). The questions are leading and misrepresentative of what is really taking place.
It is now 8 months of DOL obstruction of my public information requests on the cattle infection cases, which in a way I am glad they initially obstructed this because I have gone searching in areas they would not have provided information. Along with the genetic information I have posted about before showing cattle transmission, I also have the document of the RB51 vaccination infection, recently got my Certificate of Veterinary Inspection from the 2007 brucellosis infection case which the Montana vet signed off on before the lab results were back in and shipped cattle out of state to Iowa, threatening the states livestock industry. I also have the 2007 lab reports which show when they received the 2007 blood samples (a day after the CVI says they were all negative), etc. Document after document is proving that the majority of cases (if not all) have been cattle, not our elk and definitely not our bison infecting the cattle in Paradise Valley. FWP did not do an investigation into whether or not our elk were actually responsible and they have not informed the public of any of this, hell, DOL never informed the public about any of this.
Elk Brucellosis General Household Survey
Elk Brucellosis Hunter Survey
Elk Brucellosis Private Landowner Survey
These are informational watermarked copies only. FWP does not want their "science" messed up.
