Montana Elk Plan Public Scoping Meetings

[mtmiller]

I think we had 13 or 14 in Havre and was told 17 in Glasgow and 24 in Malta.

My comments are written, but stewing on them for a bit.

 

[TheJason]

I think we had 13 or 14 in Havre and was told 17 in Glasgow and 24 in Malta.

My comments are written, but stewing on them for a bit.

Need me to do a color commentator edit?

 

[Gerald Martin]

Need me to do a color commentator edit?

Start the conversation?

 

[TheJason]

Start the conversation?

Oh I’ll start it alright…

 

[Ben Lamb]

Be polite, be professional and be strong in your statements.

Do not let @JLS or @BuzzH suggest any sporty wording, as much fun as that would be.

 

[TheJason]

Be polite, be professional and be strong in your statements.

Do not let @JLS or @BuzzH suggest any sporty wording, as much fun as that would be.

Okay, Debbie Downer.

 

[TheJason]

Truly, I hope more folks recognize how evil HB42 was and find some way to repeal or amend it. It essentially makes questionable policy a legally binding document. It doesn’t in any way address the validity of an elk population objective, or speak to the methodology of how it was determined. It just says you SHALL manage at or below this number.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Truly, I hope more folks recognize how evil HB42 was and find some way to repeal or amend it. It essentially makes questionable policy a legally binding document. It doesn’t in any way address the validity of an elk population objective, or speak to the methodology of how it was determined. It just says you SHALL manage at or below this number.

The current Senator from Beaverhead County has said the same thing, publicly.

 

[Nameless Range]

Lindsey Parsons, the employee who will be leading the rewrite, is a very receptive and friendly public employee. If you get a chance to talk to her at any of the meetings, I recommend it. Public comment is quite united on many of the issues regarding elk in Montana, and the magnitude of how it will influence the new EMP is yet to be seen, but my impression is she is very open to listening to hunter's/landowners/Montanans points of view. I have appreciated my interactions with her.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Truly, I hope more folks recognize how evil HB42 was and find some way to repeal or amend it. It essentially makes questionable policy a legally binding document. It doesn’t in any way address the validity of an elk population objective, or speak to the methodology of how it was determined. It just says you SHALL manage at or below this number.

Yes, and speaking of Debbie Downer, the Debbie from Beaverhead County who came up with HB 42 was not really interested in wildlife management but moreover removing elk from her ranch and others due to a clearly expressed abhorrence of elk ... IMHO!

 

[mtmiller]

Be polite, be professional and be strong in your statements.

.333 is a good BA, correct?

 

[Straight Arrow]

Be polite, be professional and be strong in your statements.

The very reason some of us do not attend such meetings.
It is much better to write, edit, soften, and employ more tact in expressing opinion ... then let it rest awhile before sending.

 

[Straight Arrow]

The very reason some of us do not attend such meetings.

At an initial shoulder seasons meeting when the FWP "biologist" responded to my point about the much larger number of elk in the smaller sized state Colorado versus the number of elk in Montana, his explanation that if you "flattened out" the topography in Colorado, you would realize the amount of elk habitat area ... was beyond the pale at grasping for straws. I felt as though I had certainly wasted my breath and my opportunity to make a point. He must have suspected that I failed 1st grade geography!

 

[Beignet]

Just out of the meeting in Ovando. A whopping five folks showed up. Made for an intimate night with FWP staff, but a disappointing turnout. One landowner in the mix.

 

[SAJ-99]

Just out of the meeting in Ovando. A whopping five folks showed up. Made for an intimate night with FWP staff, but a disappointing turnout. One landowner in the mix.

FWP can't have these meetings during the season and expect people to show up. It's almost like they do it on purpose...hmmm

 

[Deleted member 18333]

FWP can't have these meetings during the season and expect people to show up. It's almost like they do it on purpose...hmmm

If they had them when there is no season they would have to hold all meetings during a 2 month period.

Your statement is most likely accurate but it is also a BS cop-out.

 

[SAJ-99]

If they had them when there is no season they would have to hold all meetings during a 2 month period.

Your statement is most likely accurate but it is also a BS cop-out.

A cop out? Why do you think they hold public elk planning meetings during the elk rut? FWP pulls this stunt all the time. Agree that it isn't an excuse for not showing up or commenting, but hunters are an easily distracted group this time of year.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

A cop out? Why do you think they hold public elk planning meetings during the elk rut? FWP pulls this stunt all the time. Agree that it isn't an excuse for not showing up or commenting, but hunters are an easily distracted group this time of year.

I'm not saying they don't plan it this way. Its a cop-out to let their plan work.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Just out of the meeting in Ovando. A whopping five folks showed up. Made for an intimate night with FWP staff, but a disappointing turnout. One landowner in the mix.

Chester had 1 person.

The agency scheduled 41 of these meetings, going back to the summer. Most of them have had less than 20 people show up, and there's been some complaints that the meetings were too focused on only the few districts in the meeting notice with no opportunity to help inform the broader EMP planning effort. Summer & Fall are tough times to generate public participation in meetings. Given the timeline on the drafting of the new EMP, and with the Legislative session looming, I think the agency is doing what they can to get as much input as possible. We've been organizing around a lot of these meetings to try and bolster turnout, and in some places it's working well. Others - not so much.

Overall, you still have an opportunity to influence the draft EMP that will follow scoping. Comments on scoping are open until October 15th: https://fwp.mt.gov/aboutfwp/public-comment-opportunities/elk-plan-scoping/hd-info

 

[YukonGold]

Also don't forget region 2 was down most of their staff until very recently. i'd feel really bad for those saps having to run public meetings on an elk plan they've had a week or two to get familiar with. i don't blame them for waiting til now to give their new folks as much time as possible to get familiar with stuff.