RMEF Bailing on Blue Collar Sportsmen?
- Thread starter brocksw
- Start date
BuzzH
Well-known member
That was the beginning of the end....and you had to be willfully ignorant to not recognize what kind of shit was about to go down.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
I would be careful, not to mistake a wrecking ball for a pendulum.
Things don’t always swing back.
My comment is not, in any manner, supporting one party over another. My comment is specific to the differences between viewpoints of Montana R and D.
There have always been differences between R and D however, as time's progressed the trenches dug to a point of fixing the other's f-ups versus finding common ground. This mentality has caused the timber, mining, environmental, conservation, to take sides - ALL at the detriment of our wildlife to one degree or another. This involves Governor, Legislative Representatives, and Commissions.
Public Land, Mining, Timber, Environmental, Conservation, Landowners, etc. Montana is not a vision of bipartisan "work together" on these topics (w/ a few exceptions). Montanan's voted for a sweeping Red wave. We are ultimately responsible for what we have. ENTRENCHMENT. Entrenchment = pendulum to fix the other's f-ups.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
I would say the average Montanan hunter doesn’t even know what is happening. Ignorance is bliss. As long as politicians don’t awaken them, it will be business as usual.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
The shoulder seasons were supposed to be a tool tried for a limited period. What happened when the pendulum swung was politicians say they aren’t working so we need more of them plus some. The bottom line is these decisions aren’t about managing the resource or helping the average rancher or giving the common hunter opportunity. It is all about a select few people changing the system to their advantage and their advantage alone.
The reality... look at the past 25 years of our State legislature. (Back to Martz days)
The R and D line. If you don't believe we've become extremely entrenched, view again, we've been digging our trenches for a good while.
Party line votes from 25 years ago to present show the development of political partisan football as bipartisanship eroded.
Timber, mining, environment, landowner, public land, heck use all sectors... we are a divided State. This past election... we voted HEAVY red.
That's the wrecking ball. Not a single administration
The R and D line. If you don't believe we've become extremely entrenched, view again, we've been digging our trenches for a good while.
Party line votes from 25 years ago to present show the development of political partisan football as bipartisanship eroded.
Timber, mining, environment, landowner, public land, heck use all sectors... we are a divided State. This past election... we voted HEAVY red.
That's the wrecking ball. Not a single administration
I see your point and my perception, IMO - hence "perception", this IS the problem.
This is the core problem. If our (chit) two parties actually worked in a bipartisan fashion, we wouldn't have a sweep of red and hard ball landowner over all - majority legislature and governor.
IMO (again), this is directly related and IMO, why RMEF is better suited to stay out of the political quagmire and maintain talks behind the scenes.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
This isn’t a partisan issue per se, but because of how the political landscape has evolved it might look like one. Dems in MT need to appease landowners, who typically vote R. While they may have started the fire, this admin isn’t just pouring gas on it. It is dropping napalm and making it clear who they work for. D and R was never about conservative and liberal. It was about working class vs capital class.
I think it is the responsibility of us non average hunters to awaken the others. Not politicians. I know I've enlightened a few. mtmuley
At the end of the day, this.
When we expect politicians to fix something, rather than ourselves as the ultimate stewards of wildlife and our public institutions, we hand control of far more than elk over to the elected elites.
People, not politicians should be leading the fight in this. @Randy11 is correct when he cites that shoulder seasons were started under Bullock. Schweitzer signed the at or below objectives bill instead of vetoing it like he should have. And as much as I like and admire Steve Bullock, he was not as strong on this as I personally would have liked.
But also, the agency hasn't been advocating for elk for a long time either, and under Bullock, they had the latitude to do so. They didn't. When we pushed for the new Elk/Deer planner position instead of a grizzly planner in 19, I was told by the top staff that "there's not a problem with elk." I laughed.
There's gold to be mined in political conflict over elk management. Politicians see it and get greedy. It's time for the citizens to take back control here.
RMEF, since this is a thread about them, is likely to be a big part of this solution as they are able to influence folks we can't - namely the folks sitting on the second floor of the Capitol.
I appreciate RMEF's measured approach and that statement, if anyone thinks it's milquetoast, just sent a shiver down the backs of folks in Helena.
Nice work, RMEF.
Another example of my stupidity hypothesis.
New word added: "Milquetoast". Thanks Ken... Apologies, thanks Ben.
RMEF's behind the scenes work is akin to faith based religion. "Have faith we are doing what you expect of us. Thank you for your tithes to continue. We'll share the success of your money along the way."
"RMEF is in the process of reviewing and analyzing the proposed changes to Montana’s 2022 elk hunting season. We strongly believe the following principles should guide all plans and/or proposals related to elk management.
RMEF supports:
- science–based wildlife management
- healthy elk populations maintained at both biologically and socially sustainable levels
- hunting as the primary tool for managing elk populations
- impactful programs designed to increase hunter access toelk on both public and private lands
- appropriate distribution of elk on public and private lands
- maximizing hunting opportunity and quality
- recognition of the role private landowners play in providing elk habitat during critical seasons
- simplification of unnecessarily complex hunting regulations
Specific to the proposals recently shared by FWP, RMEF has concerns regarding the proposed reduction in limited entry permits on public lands and corresponding increase in general licenses available on private lands. Our primary concern is that this proposal has not been sufficiently vetted with stakeholders and additional engagement is necessary to ensure such a change would provide an effective outcome.
RMEF encourages its members to be informed on these proposals. The best source of accurate information is FWP’s regulation documents. Elk management in Montana is complicated and it is important that every stakeholder has a voice."
As shared by Brocksw earlier.
Just released less than an hour ago.
RMEF’s Statement on Montana FWP Elk Hunt Changes
RMEF is in the process of reviewing and analyzing the proposed changes to Montana’s 2022 elk hunting season. We strongly believe the following principles should guide [...]www.rmef.org
Certainly. And then there are some of us who have been railing on this for decades.
"I got vision & the rest of the world wears bifocals."
Butch Cassidy (Paul Newman)
Regardless, we spend so much time worrying about what others are doing instead of just doing.
That's why there's a citizens elk campaign. Let's get busy fixing this.
Someone needs to get busy and fix the donations portion of this. RMEF is fantastic to support and all aboard with the intent behind the citizen's elk campaign though fix it.
Elk Lives Matter, Ben. Sunday's no exception to the rule.
Haha! Just sayin' $ is at the door though it walks away the longer it's been down... and it's not been down since this morning.
