Agricultural interests steer Colorado’s wildlife management

BrentD

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
2,415
Location
In the middle
Most of the CPW bio's I've talked to are not inclined to want to be in politics.


Just to be clear too, I'm no fan of this commission, for a myriad of reasons.
Of course not. No career professional wants to be directly in politics, but at least one needs to be
Alternatively, the head of the wildlife division could be and he or she coached by the field folks.
 

Zach

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
3,303
Location
Gods Country, Colorado
Of course not. No career professional wants to be directly in politics, but at least one needs to be
Alternatively, the head of the wildlife division could be and he or she coached by the field folks.
Bob Broscheid
Director of Colorado Parks and Wildlife
Ex-Officio/Non-Voting Member
Denver, CO
E-mail Address: bob.broscheid@state.co.us

Bob Broscheid is an avid outdoorsman who loves Colorado and its abundant natural and recreational resources. Broscheid took the helm at Colorado Parks and Wildlife in December 2013.

He holds a bachelor's degree in Wildlife Management from Arizona State University and is a graduate of the National Conservation Leadership Institute. Prior to becoming Director of Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Broscheid was a biologist, Habitat Branch Chief and Deputy Director of the Arizona Game and Fish Department.

He enjoys hunting, fishing, backpacking, mountain biking and golf. Most weekends, Bob and his wife Dana are having fun discovering all of Colorado's outdoor opportunities.



Go Figure...
 

Oak

Expert
Joined
Dec 23, 2000
Messages
12,411
Location
Colorado
Absent a gubernatorial change and different commissioners, what is the course of action for CO sportsmen?
Terry, are the recommendations to US Forest Service by the commission published in any fashion? and who at USFS do the letters go to for having these leases terminated?
Colorado sportsmen need to communicate their concerns to the Parks and Wildlife Commission, and they need to engage the NEPA process with substantive comments every time there is a proposed USFS or BLM action involving domestic sheep in bighorn sheep habitat.

The Commission does not provide recommendations to the USFS. That is done by CPW staff in the capacity of a cooperating agency. Recommendations of the state wildlife agency carry significant weight when it comes to managing non-T&E species. Director Broscheid has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Colorado Wool Growers Association that states:

"CPW and CWGA agree that closure of active domestic sheep allotments on public land will not be recommended based solely on the potential for interaction between domestic and bighorn sheep."

Director Broscheid has said repeatedly in meetings that he refuses to believe the issue is as simple as removing domestic sheep from bighorn sheep habitat, and that he is more interested in working to find solutions that leave both bighorns and domestics on the landscape.

The problem is that when the state agencies do not advocate for effective separation of the two species, it lets the federal agencies off the hook and makes it easier for them to sign decisions that continue to jeopardize wild sheep. That leaves litigation as the only option for bighorn sheep advocates. Although their professed goal is less litigation, a complicit state wildlife agency will only lead to more litigation.

I'm going to leave you with a couple of CPW Commission audio clips from earlier this year. The first is of Colorado Department of Agriculture Commissioner Don Brown addressing the Commission at the January meeting in Denver. The relevant portion is about 5 minutes long, and this link should begin at the appropriate spot: https://youtu.be/HJxuq5P_3_8?t=27m33s

The second clip is from the May Commission meeting in Grand Junction. The link begins with Ag. Commissioner Brown discussing issues related to federal lands in Colorado, and then he moves on to talk about attending the statewide bighorn sheep working group meeting 2 weeks earlier. Chairman Howard asks him a couple of questions when he is done, as well as Commissioner Dale Pizel (ag representative), and Director Broscheid interjects his thoughts on the process. The relevant segment is about 14 minutes long: https://youtu.be/l0zkecWXzcc?t=45m36s
 

Dinkshooter

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
7,244
Location
Colorado
It has appeared to me that wildlife management and hunting has been CPWs dirty little secret for several years now, kind of like the gay cousin no one in the family talks about.
 

Zach

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
3,303
Location
Gods Country, Colorado
BHA is a 501 (C)(3) Nonprofit and unable to endorse anyone unless they began their own Political Action Committee.
So they can/will/have issues statements regarding a candidates/representatives position(s) but cannot outright support a candidate if I understand correctly.


I still think the commission needs to be steered in a different direction regardless of who wins the CO Governorship.
 

Ben Lamb

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
10,588
Location
Helena
So they can/will/have issues statements regarding a candidates/representatives position(s) but cannot outright support a candidate if I understand correctly.


I still think the commission needs to be steered in a different direction regardless of who wins the CO Governorship.
Correct. They can ask candidates for their positions as a way to educate their membership on issues germane to their mission. They cannot endorse anyone one unless the set up the proper vehicle to do so.

I defer to the smart CO minds (and Dink) on the later.
 

Zach

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
3,303
Location
Gods Country, Colorado
Correct. They can ask candidates for their positions as a way to educate their membership on issues germane to their mission. They cannot endorse anyone one unless the set up the proper vehicle to do so.

I defer to the smart CO minds (and Dink) on the later.
#metoo
 
Top