"I really have to wonder where the sportsmen’s voice is in all this."

[katqanna]

"There are some points here that take us down some very dangerous roads. They are playing interests against one another, and I really have to wonder where the sportsmen’s voice is in all this. We could be paying landowners to fence out elk? Paying for vaccination? All the while reducing elk populations and thusly elk opportunities for sportsmen? I really hope that SOMEONE in our agency stands up to some of the points presented in here, or we may face some major problems in the future."

This was in the opening paragraphs of the 1st FWP wildlife biologists statements about the proposed recommendations for Montana's Elk Management In Areas With Brucellosis. A very concerned, detailed point by point breakdown was then given. A second FWP wildlife Biologist stated, "Are livestock producers and other constituents willing to stand by this when other members of the public , MOGA, etc cry foul on us?"

The following link is for an article that shows the documentation of an obstructed process that concerns our elk here in Montana. I am hoping sportsmen will educate themselves and insert themselves into this public trust process.

http://womwe.blogspot.com/2013/07/montanas-elk-management-in-areas-with.html

And from the bigger picture, which will have to be written up shortly, that of APHIS (branch of USDA), USAHA and the DOL in their objectives and mission statements of eradication of brucellosis within the wildlife reservoirs, especially that of what they view as the bastion of brucellosis - the GYA (Greater Yellowstone Area). Rep. Alan Redfields HB 312 - the elk brucellosis test and slaughter bill was the testing of the water for the political machinery that has already been in place and activated once they knew that the brucellosis spread to back to cattle was of the elk genotype, not the bison, that they had long blamed as the source.