MT Legislature - Week 5

[mdunc8]

SS, I have a perfectly clear idea how the system works. I don't need an explanation from you. I appreciate the offer though.

You're providing an example of one individual who you apparently didn't care for. I know nothing about the person you're whining about. Maybe he was a terrible biologist. Maybe he wasn't. Apparently he was good enough for FWP since he's still working for them. I'm not aware any population matrix that incorporates how many critters you have hanging on your wall. If you do, I'd love for you to enlighten me. I know plenty of great biologists who would rather be out slapping a golf ball around all fall than out in the woods chasing big hairy mammals. That doesn't make them a bad biologist. That's the problem with folks like you. You want to lump everyone into a few categories and lead your life presuming we all think the same way.

A good biologist should have an unbiased view of how he/she should be monitoring and assessing their respective critters according to the mission of Fish, Wildlife & Parks. That mission does include hunting, but unfortunately for you, it includes many other facets. If you don't like the fact that birders, ranchers, sledheads, outfitters, businessmen, etc. all get to voice their opinions, then you need to figure out a way to get the mission statement and goals of FWP changed. Until then, you shouldn't be surprised that FWP doesn't manage our fisheries and wildlife exclusively for your enjoyment because you're not the only "paying customer".

A biologist's job is to provide managers, and yes the commission as well, with the past, current, and estimated future condition of the plants and animals they're responsible for. In no shape or form should your opinion, or mine for that matter, enter into the equation. That's what managers and commissioners are for. Voice your opinion to the ones who actually make the decisions. Folks like yourself, and others on here, have been around these parts much longer than I, and probably many of the biologists have been, and likely have some valuable insight to offer, but direct it to ones who make the decisions.

 

[tjones]

".

A biologist's job is to provide managers, and yes the commission as well, with the past, current, and estimated future condition of the plants and animals they're responsible for. In no shape or form should your opinion, or mine for that matter, enter into the equation. That's what managers and commissioners are for. Voice your opinion to the ones who actually make the decisions. Folks like yourself, and others on here, have been around these parts much longer than I, and probably many of the biologists have been, and likely have some valuable insight to offer, but direct it to ones who make the decisions.

This may be the way you think it should be done, but its not the way it works. Bio's across the state listened to elk working groups, ag folks and just about everyone else to pick socially accepted not science base EMP objectives, and that is one reason we are in the shape we are in statewide.

Also tentative proposals start with the local bio's. If its bad that is by far the best place to kill it. Wait for it to get to the commission and you will have very tough sledding.

 

[mdunc8]

Yes, they provide their opinion, which is probably heeded by the manager more times than not, but the managers and commission are ultimately responsible. We are responsible for offering what hunters want. Not what the biology indicates is appropriate.

For anything to make it out of district, it has to go through the manager. Get him/her on board and you're better than having a biologists on your side without support of the manager.

Lets say I get a job next year over in Shooter's backyard and I'm responsible for monitoring the Bitterroot and its trout. Shooter calls me every other day trying to get me in to increase the creel limit. I hear from him enough and he's successful in warping my thinking. I then go to my manager and suggest changing the regulation. He doesn't buy it. Maybe because he found out I don't fish, which therefore precludes me from being a good biologist. Now Shooter has to spend the following year calling the manager every other day to get what he wants done. He could have saved himself a year if we would have just started with the person actually responsible for making the decision.

It just seems like a more efficient and effective use of our time to be talking to the ones making the decision rather than trying to get two people on board when it only takes one. Moreover, if you look at the demographics of the people coming out of graduate school these days. I would argue that there's just as many who don't fish or hunt than do. Most all of the old school guys do and are more likely to side with the hunting and fishing crowd than many of the younger folks.

 

[Lawnboy]

Like I mentioned before I'm sure this state has some good bios and managers but I personally can attest to the fact that there are those who are burned out and just are counting thier days to retirement.
I watched my dad do all this research and documentation on stocking lakes,stream issues etc... only to have the next biologist who ultimately has the say on stocking not give a rip. I watched multiple lakes that we fished here when I first moved here basically go barren because they didn't want to put forth the effort.
The local biologist told me that we couldn't cut back on Bridger doe and buck tags because there would be outrage from the local sportsman who want close opportunity so now your lucky to see 30 deer in a day and the tag allocations are still crazy high. I guess this is the social side of managing at the expense of the animal.
I know it's easy to be an arm chair biologist but like I said I got to see growing up with one how dis functional the system can be even with ones that are truly trying to do their jobs.

 

[onpoint]

mdunc8, here's just a little food for thought for an up and coming biologist such as yourself. One of the main "fathers" of wildlife management was a hunter name Aldo Leopold, a fact I'm sure not lost on you. I know the demographic is changing, but I got a feeling most folks on this site are "dinosaurs"....that's the demographic you are dealing with here. There was a time that most management biologists were hunters and fishermen, and that helped make them supremely able to relate to their main constituents-hunters and fishermen. That same time was the era that got us to the wealth of resources we have today. Yes things do change....but is good to be mindful of history and what has worked before-still does work today. I'm also quite sure a lot of people on this site are more than eager to help biologists get there job done....don't underestimate the value of having us dinosaurs in your corner.

 

[sweetnectar]

OK for now the commisioners are screwing the hunter by limiting archery tags based on the non biological BS. We know that governments go bad so we put in place ways to check government and limit their powers to screw us all. So let the legislature check the commisioners. We have to remember the Govenor's appoints these commisioners and if he backs them he will simply veto the legislation. It is amazing to me how people go bad but the bios go bad as well.

 

[tjones]

Yes, they provide their opinion, which is probably heeded by the manager more times than not, but the managers and commission are ultimately responsible. We are responsible for offering what hunters want. Not what the biology indicates is appropriate.

For anything to make it out of district, it has to go through the manager. Get him/her on board and you're better than having a biologists on your side without support of the manager.

Lets say I get a job next year over in Shooter's backyard and I'm responsible for monitoring the Bitterroot and its trout. Shooter calls me every other day trying to get me in to increase the creel limit. I hear from him enough and he's successful in warping my thinking. I then go to my manager and suggest changing the regulation. He doesn't buy it. Maybe because he found out I don't fish, which therefore precludes me from being a good biologist. Now Shooter has to spend the following year calling the manager every other day to get what he wants done. He could have saved himself a year if we would have just started with the person actually responsible for making the decision.

It just seems like a more efficient and effective use of our time to be talking to the ones making the decision rather than trying to get two people on board when it only takes one. Moreover, if you look at the demographics of the people coming out of graduate school these days. I would argue that there's just as many who don't fish or hunt than do. Most all of the old school guys do and are more likely to side with the hunting and fishing crowd than many of the younger folks.

Still, in the real world not the way it works. A local bio listented to a local sportsemen group and Montana got LE mule deer tags in HD 270 and HD 261, proably a couple of the most sought after tags in the state. You will learn in time.

 

[mdunc8]

mdunc8, here's just a little food for thought for an up and coming biologist such as yourself. One of the main "fathers" of wildlife management was a hunter name Aldo Leopold, a fact I'm sure not lost on you. I know the demographic is changing, but I got a feeling most folks on this site are "dinosaurs"....that's the demographic you are dealing with here. There was a time that most management biologists were hunters and fishermen, and that helped make them supremely able to relate to their main constituents-hunters and fishermen. That same time was the era that got us to the wealth of resources we have today. Yes things do change....but is good to be mindful of history and what has worked before-still does work today. I'm also quite sure a lot of people on this site are more than eager to help biologists get there job done....don't underestimate the value of having us dinosaurs in your corner.

Onpoint, I agree with every word in your post. Unfortunately, today there are more stakeholders who get a say in how our resources our managed which turns the system into a giant cluster %#^@. As Lawnboy pointed out, the social and economic side of things plays a much larger role now than it used to.

TJones, I know nothing about the deer herd down there. I would like to imagine it's full of 30" four points and that tags increase every year as it's the section I put in for. However, it seems like everything else down there is going in the crapper, so maybe there's a biological reason for not increasing the tags. I don't know. Just because a manager doesn't give you what you want doesn't mean the biologist in that district is out piss you off.

I'll finish by saying that most of the folks on this site seem to have a decent head on their shoulders and have good intentions. I've learned quite a bit from some of the guys on here. I just think you're wasting you're time complaining to biologists. If you disagree, continue to voice your opinion where you see fit.

 

[shoots-straight]

mdunc8, your delusional ideals are Nobel, yet wrongheaded. In a perfect world, things work as you visualize they should. We don't live in that perfect world. Bio's don't have the luxury to work without political influences. I explained how the games played, because I've been playing it for some time now, and you seemed intent on giving me advice that I didn't request. I don't want a bio that's a non hunter. I've seen what one of those types do, and it not good, and at my age, I don't have enough time to wait for the herds to come back. The last one inherited a big game population that was at the peak of numbers and quality of bulls. We also had worked on our mule deer herd and had the buck to doe, ratios up, and was producing some remarkable deer. After a few years with this guy, he had all our herds headed for the tank, with bull to cow ratio's at emergency levels.

Just because a fella has a document that says they have a degree in "Wildlife Biology", doesn't mean a whole lot to me. Maybe your one of those fellas, I don't know. What I do know is what went on down here. This last Bio set the stage for the fall of our game resources. If they follow department policy and know full well that it's wrong, then their just as responsible in my opinion. If the Bio, on the other hand is a hunter, he has a vested interest in bucking the department's orders, and is more apt to do what's right. That was our clubs thinking on looking for a Bio that was also a hunter.

There's a lot of Bios, that are really happy with the fact that the wolf has overshot his prey base, and those elk numbers are crashing. I don't want those bio's in my hunting grounds.

I will take a Bio that's a hunter any day over a non hunter. If he's swayed by his personal feeling's so be it. He's the one I want here.

 

[mdunc8]

Well apparently you suck at playing the game if all your herds are in the crapper as a result of the nonhunting biologist that should have never gotten the job in the first place.

You may not want a nonhunter for a bio, but chances are you'll end up with one before it's all said and done, so you may want to prepare yourself.

When you sign on as a biologist, or any other job for that matter, you're agreeing to work under your agencies mission. I would hope that FWP isn't letting a bunch of biologists with useless degrees run around the woods attempting to fulfill their own objectives. No I'm not a biologist, but I'm sure you can ask the other folks on here who are and see how long they would have a job if they ignored the directives of those above them.

 

[shoots-straight]

Well apparently you suck at playing the game if all your herds are in the crapper as a result of the nonhunting biologist that should have never gotten the job in the first place.

You may not want a nonhunter for a bio, but chances are you'll end up with one before it's all said and done, so you may want to prepare yourself.

When you sign on as a biologist, or any other job for that matter, you're agreeing to work under your agencies mission. I would hope that FWP isn't letting a bunch of biologists with useless degrees run around the woods attempting to fulfill their own objectives. No I'm not a biologist, but I'm sure you can ask the other folks on here who are and see how long they would have a job if they ignored the directives of those above them.

Our club had nothing to do with hiring the last Bio. We never had one that wasn't a hunter, and never had a second thought about it. I wasn't even concerned about F&G rules and regulations, because the game was in such great shape, and the opportunities were great. That's about the time the F&G came up with the "ELK WORKING GROUP" (see above posts)

I explained all of that, but your comprehension skills are what suck. I didn't say we always have won either. In fact while this DB was our Bio, barriers were designed to keep us from having any imput. he was a much better manipulator than Bio.

That's what went wrong IMO. When things are good, hunters aren't attentive. I was as guilty as the next hunter. I was involved for around 15 years in our local sportsmans club, we had accomplished the limited entry mule deer tags that are nationaly sot after. We introduced brow tined bull regulations, some of the first in the state. Not just the branch anterled version. The brow had to extend at least 4". We had some of the best bull to cow ratios, with a growing herd of elk. We had a great archery only area, that I consistantly took 7 deer a year from.

I had 3 kids to raise, and a busy career to look after. In a period of less than 5 years this new Bio showed up, and set the mechanics in place for disaster. After a confrontation with this Bio, I and others re entered the battle.

I don't think you understand what I've written. We have already had a non hunter bio. You missed that? As long as I'm involved, we'll look for a hunting Bio.

As far as sucking at what I have accomplished, you don't have a clue what has been done. I know for a fact, that if I and others I associate with hadn't entered the battle when we did, the Bitterroot game herds would be far worse off.

I'd like to know from what experience your speaking? I mean, a genius like yourself must be involved for sure. You think the Bios and "managers" have your best interests in mind. That might be the case if your a rancher, or land barren. Laffin!

PS, we don't ignore the higher ups. They know me on a first name basis. As I said in the begining, you start the process with the local Bio. If you wait to see what's on the tenatives, it's already too late to do anything about it. You have to be pro-active, not re-active.

 

[mdunc8]

I guess will have to agree to disagree on what the responsibilities of a biologist are and should be I never said anyone had my best interests in mind. Quite the contrary especially given the diversity of people adding their .02 these days.

I do appreciate the fact that you've have been involved in the game much longer than I have, which isn't very long at all, and seem to be quite active in what gets done over there. From prior posts, you seem to be well informed and I agree with a lot of what you post. Some not so much. But at least you have done your homework, which allows me to empathize with most of what you say although I don't agree with all of it. I vote to move on to a new topic until we can finish it over a beer next time I'm over your way (although at this point I doubt you'd waste your time with me) I still think you're wrong though

 

[BuzzH]

The bottom line is this...if you want things to run correctly you need to get involved in the pre-decisional process.

Trust, but verify...everyone and everything.

 

[wingman1]

SS what bio pissed you off? LN or JV? When did we ever have good bull to cow ratios?

 

[tjones]

I can't believe any sportsmen living in the Bitterroot over the past 10 years would have to ask either one of those questions..

 

[wingman1]

I can't believe any sportsmen living in the Bitterroot over the past 10 years would have to ask either one of those questions..

It was a rhetorical question Einstein.

 

[RockyDog]

they are referring to John Vore, who was a wolf loving disaster for our bitterfroot elk

 

[tjones]

Ya right wingman. School me then on bull/cow/calf ratios for the past 10 years.