T
tjones
Guest
While the blame for shoulder seasons might not land on FWP shoulders, plenty of others issues that need fighting do.
Proposed changes Sweeping!
- Thread starter shoots-straight
- Start date
BuzzH
Well-known member
They're to blame for shoulder seasons too.
They are THE agency charged with Managing a state resource and they aren't doing anything but shoot em up management. Same old same old.They brought the shoulder season proposal forward, did a "pilot" and now recommending 44 other units for shoulder seasons. I used to think a "pilot" program was something to try, evaluate it, and then move forward or not depending on results. Silly me.
The commission will approve it in all 44 units, and guess what, Sportsmen can take a flying leap...and who really cares about elk or proper management anyway?
They are THE agency charged with Managing a state resource and they aren't doing anything but shoot em up management. Same old same old.They brought the shoulder season proposal forward, did a "pilot" and now recommending 44 other units for shoulder seasons. I used to think a "pilot" program was something to try, evaluate it, and then move forward or not depending on results. Silly me.
The commission will approve it in all 44 units, and guess what, Sportsmen can take a flying leap...and who really cares about elk or proper management anyway?
8andcounting
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2013
- Messages
- 3,401
I agree totally this is a joke or at least I wish it was
I've looked at these proposals and I am scratching my head on some of them. Maybe I am out of touch with what is going on out on the landscape. These proposed ideas are based on recommendations from biologists that the Regional Supervisor and Regional Big Game Manager agree upon. That is supposed to be the source of these tentatives we see. I've never seen a biologist recommend early or late shoulder seasons, so somewhere along the way, those got in the proposals at a higher level than a biologist or Regional Sup/BGM.
At this point, I take a deep breath and remind myself what is being looked at here. These are the proposed tentative recommendations for the bi-annual season setting process. Here's what that means.
These are proposals the FWP Commission will decide on as the possible alternatives to be presented during the state-wide public hearing process that occurs in January. What the Commission approves on Thursday is not the final season setting for each unit, rather what is out for public comment. Very often, these tentatives do end up being what is in the final regs.
This is how the next step supposedly works - FWP will hold public comment meetings around the states. Based on what they hear at public meetings and from hunters who contact them individually, they will make final decisions on these proposals in February.
This is how it normally plays out - Everyone gets pissed in December and only a handful show up for the public meetings where comments are taken. Sometimes the Commission chooses to adopt the most popular option they heard at the public meetings. Sometimes they decide to go with options that were not heavily supported at the public meetings and people are left wondering if there was value in showing up to even give comment.
I would encourage everyone to send comments now, and later. I've spoke to two Commissioners today and they seemed open to some other ideas beyond what their biologists and Regional Supervisors have put forth as recommendations in these proposed tentatives. Follow up with attending meetings in your area and take note of the comments given on each proposal. If the comments are heavy in one direction and the Commission goes the other, then some questions need to be asked. And if public comment is heavily slanted toward a proposal and it is ignored, the Department is going to find itself in an even tougher situation with hunters; the group they always asked to come and defend them when the legislature has FWP in their crosshairs.
At this point, I take a deep breath and remind myself what is being looked at here. These are the proposed tentative recommendations for the bi-annual season setting process. Here's what that means.
These are proposals the FWP Commission will decide on as the possible alternatives to be presented during the state-wide public hearing process that occurs in January. What the Commission approves on Thursday is not the final season setting for each unit, rather what is out for public comment. Very often, these tentatives do end up being what is in the final regs.
This is how the next step supposedly works - FWP will hold public comment meetings around the states. Based on what they hear at public meetings and from hunters who contact them individually, they will make final decisions on these proposals in February.
This is how it normally plays out - Everyone gets pissed in December and only a handful show up for the public meetings where comments are taken. Sometimes the Commission chooses to adopt the most popular option they heard at the public meetings. Sometimes they decide to go with options that were not heavily supported at the public meetings and people are left wondering if there was value in showing up to even give comment.
I would encourage everyone to send comments now, and later. I've spoke to two Commissioners today and they seemed open to some other ideas beyond what their biologists and Regional Supervisors have put forth as recommendations in these proposed tentatives. Follow up with attending meetings in your area and take note of the comments given on each proposal. If the comments are heavy in one direction and the Commission goes the other, then some questions need to be asked. And if public comment is heavily slanted toward a proposal and it is ignored, the Department is going to find itself in an even tougher situation with hunters; the group they always asked to come and defend them when the legislature has FWP in their crosshairs.
shoots-straight
Well-known member
To be sure. Once it gets past this stage, it's usually a shoe in for regulations. I hope that there's enough interest to look over this changes and make comments now. Getting a hold of your local Bio and heading off any real damage that could be done now would be advisable.
Yep. These bios are in a tough spot, but it's very helpful to get in touch with them and ask questions/give input. I've already been told of a couple misprints in the proposals already linked above, and have been given more detailed reasons on why some of these decisions are being made.
This link will tell you who to contact-
http://fwp.mt.gov/gis/maps/contactUs/
And this one will tell you how to get a hold of them-
http://fwp.mt.gov/doingBusiness/con...ENF&fwpRegion=ANY&sortBy=region&sortOrder=ASC
RobG
Well-known member
You can listen live to the meeting here: http://fwp.mt.gov/doingBusiness/insideFwp/commission/audio.html
Lots of folks in Helena for the 313 discussion. Not much for turnout in the regions.
RobG
Well-known member
21 people here in r3 (Bozeman), mostly about the 313 changes.
Who the hell was that last guy talking and talking and talking?
Who the hell was that last guy talking and talking and talking?
Frank Rigler
RobG
Well-known member
Rep Kerry white just suggested transplanting elk from the above objective areas to Gardner to provide supplemental food for wolves as well as fund school districts.
I'll ask. Missed it too.
Mind blowing. Thanks Ben.
People need to look at this, it's ridiculous.
This is a GIANT chunk of National Forest which has historically been one of the most productive areas of elk for Region 2. The Angelo Ranch sits at the base of this National Forest and they harbor elk without allowing any public hunting. They are essentially making elk pests on the public land, and any elk that doesn't get killed on the public will promptly be sitting on the Angelo ranch, along with 2-3k of their buddies.
Fish and Game is throwing in the towel on managing this section of the Clark Fork.
TRS_Montana
Well-known member
Originally, I was there to listen to the proposed changes in the rest of the state, but only took the morning off and had to cut out at noon. I REALLY wish they would do more to limit commenters to 3 minutes.
I'm holding out hope that this is a mistake. I'm also going to talk with the commissioners once we're done castigation MBA for not liking crossbows.
