Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,684
There’s been a common thread of initial feedback from folks who read this proposal for the first time.
Almost everyone has some particular small preference that would preserve their particular preferred opportunity. What type of retained/improved opportunity suggested varies widely but there’s always a common theme. There’s recognition that something needs to be done for the health of the resource and reluctance to lose a preferential opportunity.
Center concept of the entire proposal is acceptance that in order or retain opportunity or improve upon it in the future it is necessary to accept short term sacrifice to allow opportunity to develop.
Everyone, myself included, is going to have to give up some preferences for the resource to flourish.
As long as the hunting community retains the attitude that reduced “opportunity” is only okay if it happens to someone else, improving wildlife resource management in Montana is going to be a difficult task.
Almost everyone has some particular small preference that would preserve their particular preferred opportunity. What type of retained/improved opportunity suggested varies widely but there’s always a common theme. There’s recognition that something needs to be done for the health of the resource and reluctance to lose a preferential opportunity.
Center concept of the entire proposal is acceptance that in order or retain opportunity or improve upon it in the future it is necessary to accept short term sacrifice to allow opportunity to develop.
Everyone, myself included, is going to have to give up some preferences for the resource to flourish.
As long as the hunting community retains the attitude that reduced “opportunity” is only okay if it happens to someone else, improving wildlife resource management in Montana is going to be a difficult task.