Make the case for federalizing game species

[Fire_9]

Why the Poor Get Trapped in Depressed Areas

It’s harder than ever for the poor to simply pick up and move.

newrepublic.com

"...because while the suggestion to “go get a U-Haul” sounds simple, it’s an impossible task for somebody with no savings."

^This has been what I've observed. My best friend moved to Connecticut. It cost no less than $5k. He had it, so it wasn't a big deal. But yeah man, I have family that I doubt has $100 in savings. Maybe that's a decision, that kind of depends on where you land on a spectrum of philosophical positions about people and the economy.

Do those family members not have the ability to start a trades apprenticeship?

And I know it's not always that easy. It may not happen for that generation, but they can educate their kids/grandkids to make better life decisions. Generational patterns are hard to break but once again, those are individual decisions that people make.

 

[406dn]

At some point, before we married, I told my soon to be wife, that it was very important to me to live where hunting big game annually was doable.

We made a plan, stuck to it, and enacted it. I think moving west, without laying a monetary foundation is likely doomed to failure. It was quite true then, that finding a job that payed decently, was not an easy thing. Most jobs out here still pay poorly compared to many areas. So moving here broke, is not likely to work.

You need to put a nest egg together, EVERYONE should prioritize saving enough money, to weather life's storms. That's is just a basic tenant of sound financial behavior.

I have limited empathy for people who want to have their cake and eat it too. There are plusses and minuses in all of life's choices.

 

[Irrelevant]

Do those family members not have the ability to start a trades apprenticeship?

And I know it's not always that easy. It may not happen for that generation, but they can educate their kids/grandkids to make better life decisions. Generational patterns are hard to break but once again, those are individual decisions that people make.

Some, yes. All? No.

I sometimes have to remind myself that we're not all equally blessed with the same skills. Our population plots as a bell curve on everything skill, topic, and ability. That includes intelligence, planning, and decision-making. There are people who plot further back on all those curves. Do they intrinsically deserve less than you simply because they are who they are?

Honestly, we're bridging over into something I struggle with as a parent. Do I hold my kids to the same standards even if one is less ____ than the other? Is that fair, or just, or simply life? My son will likely always struggle with decision making, and he will certainly have to pay a price throughout his life for that shortcoming, but how much do we as a society set fundamental barriers against people simply because of who they are? There are days I'm right there with you @Fire_9, but I guess today isn't one of them.

 

[Fire_9]

Some, yes. All? No.

I sometimes have to remind myself that we're not all equally blessed with the same skills. Our population plots as a bell curve on everything skill, topic, and ability. That includes intelligence, planning, and decision-making. There are people who plot further back on all those curves. Do they intrinsically deserve less than you simply because they are who they are?

Honestly, we're bridging over into something I struggle with as a parent. Do I hold my kids to the same standards even if one is less ____ than the other? Is that fair, or just, or simply life? My son will likely always struggle with decision making, and he will certainly have to pay a price throughout his life for that shortcoming, but how much do we as a society set fundamental barriers against people simply because of who they are? There are days I'm right there with you @Fire_9, but I guess today isn't one of them.

I definitely agree that not everyone is created equal but I'm guessing you haven't been around the trades much. There's a niche for everyone and I've worked with some pretty low functioning people that make a better living than most college graduates. They'll have to make some sacrifices but there's a lot of opportunities out there for people that are willing to work.

 

[Irrelevant]

I definitely agree that not everyone is created equal but I'm guessing you haven't been around the trades much. There's a niche for everyone and I've worked with some pretty low functioning people that make a better living than most college graduates. They'll have to make some sacrifices but there's a lot of opportunities out there for people that are willing to work.

Fair point, I have not

 

[Straight Arrow]

This antithetical flipflop is so confusing. Last week it was an argument for Public Land Transfer to the states as the feds are mismanaging public lands. Now this week it's turn over wildife management to the feds because the states are mismanaging ... furthermore they won't send me the inexpensive tags I want and deserve!

 

[WanderWoman]

I’m not going to articulate this as well as I’d like to. In addition to everything @Hunting Wife said, I’d think federal management would open up/shine a light on the whole public process part of game management to many more of the anti-hunting-leaning crowd. Also imagine trying to set seasons and getting litigated into oblivion. I could see it being the end of wolf seasons, trapping, etc.

 

[BackofBeyond]

I definitely agree that not everyone is created equal but I'm guessing you haven't been around the trades much. There's a niche for everyone and I've worked with some pretty low functioning people that make a better living than most college graduates. They'll have to make some sacrifices but there's a lot of opportunities out there for people that are willing to work.

If you can’t finish school, you can always finish concrete.

 

[TOGIE]

them animal rights activists would splooge in their pants if all wildlife and hunting management authority fell under one roof in this nation.

 

[Flatbrimmer]

Hey i just wanted them to have their own thread for it.

It’s your thread now, chief…. Lol

 

[Flatbrimmer]

They need to get this thread back on track. So let’s say ht’er A wants to box ht’er B and is willing to pay the money for it. At the same time though ht’er B wants to box ht’er C and is willing to pay the money for it how do we settle that? I know we got a couple legends on here that would bring some good money in. Problem is they may wanna pay the money to box someone else

We’ve been here before….

 

[Flatbrimmer]

I do think that resident tags should be more expensive, perhaps at least the cost of a tank of gasoline. I also think that some sort of limited entry or choosing your weapon are worthy of debate.

The era of OTC going most anywhere you want to go for deer and elk, has contributed to where we are presently.

Don’t you kill nice bulls every year here?

I’m willing to pay a lot more for a tag but at the same time, I spend a LOT more than one tank of gas and most years don’t even kill an elk. I’d be better off saving up for a turner high fence canned hunt. It’s no wonder Randy paid for a fly in landlocked hunt. Money kills animals here. So hearing from someone that’s killed their share of elk that it should cost everyone more, because they themselves could afford more, brings its own slimy touch to the conversation.

 

[Treeshark]

This antithetical flipflop is so confusing.

I was just thinking the same thing, but from a different perspective.

If I’ve gotten this viewpoint right from several posts on this: the feds are apparently completely clueless on how to manage wildlife/hunting, and yet they are somehow the best ones to manage everything else on federal land?

That seems like an odd combination of capabilities and shortcomings.

 

[Hunting Wife]

I was just thinking the same thing, but from a completely different perspective.

If I’ve gotten this viewpoint right from several posts on this: the feds are apparently completely clueless on how to manage wildlife/hunting, and yet they are somehow the best ones to manage everything else on federal land?

That seems like an odd combination of capabilities and shortcomings.

I think you are just trying to intentionally obfuscate. That’s your prerogative…no amount of dialogue here will change anyone’s viewpoint, so this is all kind of pointless anyway.

The point being made is that, with regards to wildlife specifically, the Feds tend to be made up of folks much farther removed from the outdoors and hunting culture in particular. I predict you would see a general move away from predator hunting initially, followed by “trophy” hunting. At the federal level, there are many more sympathetic ears to anti-hunting messaging than exists at the level of most western states, because many have little experience with hunting outside of what Disney had taught them. They are also beholden to listen to stakeholders nationwide and at that scale, hunters are a much smaller minority than they are at the scale of most individual western states. NR hunters want more of a say, but NR non/anti-hunters will get an equal say, and they vastly outnumber you. Does anyone even pay attention to how fed scale wildlife decisions go? Grizzly delisting? Wolf delisting? Subsistence vs NR caribou hunting in Alaska?(I realize AK is a special case, but still). Predator management on refuges? Trapping on refuges?

I feel like this entire argument boils down to a few folks saying I’m entitled to a sucker every year, and if you don’t give it to me I’m going to burn your house down. Seems a common trend lately. If we keep doing this, doesn’t seem like we’ll have any nice things left shortly.

My personal feeling: I feel like residents bear the responsibility of housing said game (yes, even those on public land. We all know they don’t just sit there on the public year round), the impacts of users exploiting said resource, the impacts of the resource itself. I think this does give them more investment, and thus more right, to that resource than someone living elsewhere. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one.

Minerals, energy, raw materials, ag products produced on public lands benefit the entire nation and support jobs in multiple sectors nationwide. Not to mention the millions of dollars generated through recreation other than hunting, and the social/mental benefits that recreation provides. If the only value public lands hold for you is your ability to kill something on it, you have an extremely distorted view of the value of that land to this country.

 

[Treeshark]

no amount of dialogue here will change anyone’s viewpoint, so this is all kind of pointless anyway.

I agree with this point for sure, which is why I was hesitant to wade into this thread in the first place.

 

[406dn]

I agree with this point for sure, which is why I was hesitant to wade into this thread in the first place.

Thanks for making me smile... you might be overstating any hesitancy you might have.

 

[WyoCoalMiner]

If I’ve gotten this viewpoint right from several posts on this: the feds are apparently completely clueless on how to manage wildlife/hunting,

You almost got it right. Feds are good at managing ducks but bad at everything else. Ducks = good. All other animals = bad.

 

[Forkyfinder]

no amount of dialogue here will change anyone’s viewpoint, so this is all kind of pointless anyway.

Its not pointless - i bet treeshark changed his mind here more than once and is capable on this topic too. I know i have - and im plenty stubborn .

And even if he doesnt that was a beautifully written rebuttal - that anyone who feels this way about wildllife can read it and if they're open to changing their mind, maybe they do.

One thing id ask - are a majority of the commercial users local? Obviously ag is - but i dont have much knowledge on timber/other uses. I know energy is a crapshoot.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I agree with this point for sure, which is why I was hesitant to wade into this thread in the first place.

I think you took the words "entitled" too personally.

I really hope you have some data, logic, history, or any form of argument you can dutifully present. Why i posted the thread.

 

[Hunting Wife]

You almost got it right. Feds are good at managing ducks but bad at everything else. Ducks = good. All other animals = bad.

Again, people struggle with scale. Does “management” at a national scale make sense for wildlife that roam over square miles? To me, no. For wildlife that move between multiple countries and continents twice each year? Yes. But even at that, the fed involvement is pretty limited to population estimates (due to the international scale of the population), and tracking habitat and harvest.

But still…the states get to determine NR opportunity for waterfowl too. For example: You can only buy one 2 week license in North Dakota as a NR. I believe you must draw a license to hunt waterfowl at all as a NR in South Dakota. The Feds don’t dictate at all how each state chooses to allocate the opportunities within their borders.

One thing id ask - are a majority of the commercial users local? Obviously ag is - but i dont have much knowledge on timber/other uses. I know energy is a crapshoot.

It’s a mix. Energy/minerals is mostly national/multinational, at least the ones I’m familiar with. Ag is more local. Timber can be a mix. Recreation and concessionaires can be all of the above.