Michigan SB 288

[Ben Lamb]

Any body familiar with this? Seems like it could a be a good idea and remove some of the politics behind wildlife management.

http://www.mucc.org/2013/04/the-line-in-the-sand-sb-288-and-scientific-wildlife-management/

 

[ismith]

This is exactly what Montana needs. The endless cascade of BS bills are starting to get tiresome.

 

[shoots-straight]

This is exactly what Montana needs. The endless cascade of BS bills are starting to get tiresome.

This one is all Michigan's.

 

[Ben Lamb]

This one is all Michigan's.

It is, but I could see some applications in MT.

 

[MThuntr]

It definitely has applications in Montana however I would have to include Legislature to the group of anti-hunters that must have non-biased scientific evidence as proof.

 

[Rat Fink]

I was a teenager when proposal G passed. The state ignored it. Michigan is a whole different world of Wildlife management. Some of the most popular fisheries are completely manufactured(Steelhead and Salmon), deer hunters are still allowed two bucks each, and there are not the same types of issues we deal with in regards to landowner relations like we do in MT. Hunters pissed on other hunters during the "Emotional" Dove hunt crisis. Bear hound hunters hate the Bear bait hunters and they used to fight constantly until they basically ruined the seasons. I hope that scientific management happens, but I can tell you for sure if it threatens Salmon, Steelhead, or that precious 2nd buck tag for deer, it faces a serious mutiny.