WildWill
Well-known member
Is it true he was one of the driving forces in ending spring bear season?
Governor Polis appoints three new members to the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission
- Thread starter TheGreek
- Start date
MtnElk
Well-known member
This thread came up last night amongst a few HTers and I'll write here what I said last night:
1. My biggest concern is that we are appointing people to "parks" openings onto a commission that sets the direction of both PARKS and WILDLIFE. I know it's a pipe dream, but what should be created is a parks commission and a wildlife commission, with the Executive Team of each commission working together on joint issues. That alleviates the issues of ANY appointees being extreme - on both the Anti and For crowds
2. I think it is appalling to appoint any extreme appointees. Just as I don't approve of two of these individuals being on a wildlife commission, I also would not want a S3 supporter on the commission as well. The issue with anti hunting appointees is that out of the gate they are in opposition to a large portion of the mission and governing policies of the department. If anything it clogs up real work that could be accomplished.
The two issues above spilled over into the wolf issue this year. I am not diametrically opposed to introduction, though I think it should have been at the recommendation of biologists, not voters. But my biggest issues are a) that we didn't explicitly state that they will be managed as a game species once objectives are met and b) that Polis ignored a rare bipartisan effort in his congress to delay introduction until we had an explicit ruling from the feds. I strongly oppose partisanship and both of those played to that issue. It's beyond frustrating.
1. My biggest concern is that we are appointing people to "parks" openings onto a commission that sets the direction of both PARKS and WILDLIFE. I know it's a pipe dream, but what should be created is a parks commission and a wildlife commission, with the Executive Team of each commission working together on joint issues. That alleviates the issues of ANY appointees being extreme - on both the Anti and For crowds
2. I think it is appalling to appoint any extreme appointees. Just as I don't approve of two of these individuals being on a wildlife commission, I also would not want a S3 supporter on the commission as well. The issue with anti hunting appointees is that out of the gate they are in opposition to a large portion of the mission and governing policies of the department. If anything it clogs up real work that could be accomplished.
The two issues above spilled over into the wolf issue this year. I am not diametrically opposed to introduction, though I think it should have been at the recommendation of biologists, not voters. But my biggest issues are a) that we didn't explicitly state that they will be managed as a game species once objectives are met and b) that Polis ignored a rare bipartisan effort in his congress to delay introduction until we had an explicit ruling from the feds. I strongly oppose partisanship and both of those played to that issue. It's beyond frustrating.
This is a big issue. And as I’m sure you’re aware hickenlooper joined up the commissions into one not long ago, 2013? I dunno.
I think it’s a problem that needs to be undone, but it likely won’t. Cpw has been through iterations of that back and forth thoug, so who knows.
As @Oak has pointed out before, regardless of who is on the commission, the workload is too much for one commission to responsibly handle… at the risk of putting words in his mouth
I have no idea. What I do know is that Amendment 10 passed in 1992 and Skiba retired from CDOW in 2010 with 23 years of service. It would be unusual for a CDOW employee to be the "driving force" behind a wildlife management ballot amendment.
CDOW Mission:
To manage and protect wildlife and their habitats, while providing opportunities for the public to hunt, fish or simply enjoy the wildlife in the state.
State Parks Mission:
To enhance and provide opportunities for the public to enjoy the outdoors through a variety of recreation opportunities.
Merged CPW Mission:
To perpetuate the wildlife resources of the state, to provide a quality state parks system, and to provide enjoyable and sustainable outdoor recreation opportunities that educate and inspire current and future generations to serve as active stewards of Colorado's natural resources.
Oopsie...
To manage and protect wildlife and their habitats, while providing opportunities for the public to hunt, fish or simply enjoy the wildlife in the state.
State Parks Mission:
To enhance and provide opportunities for the public to enjoy the outdoors through a variety of recreation opportunities.
Merged CPW Mission:
To perpetuate the wildlife resources of the state, to provide a quality state parks system, and to provide enjoyable and sustainable outdoor recreation opportunities that educate and inspire current and future generations to serve as active stewards of Colorado's natural resources.
Oopsie...
wolfpup
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2015
- Messages
- 454
This seems like a better candidate than the others to me. He was with CDOW for 23 years and is active hunter and angler. Has to live by the same rules we do. I can get on board with his ideology of "pro intact ecosystem", but reintroducing an animal to a place that the animals were either smart enough to get out or dumb enough to stay doesn't seem right. I only have small biography and employment history to go off of. I stand by my original statement then with this additional tid bit. The lawyer and county commissioner don't seem like a good fit for us as hunters and anglers.
bayoublaster7527
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2017
- Messages
- 408
Absolutely. Gave some comments just today during public comment period at the commission. Plenty of time to develop a reasonable, well-constructed argument before the hearing. So what constitutes a “personal attack”? If that includes holding an individual accountable for their stated beliefs and the stated goals of the organizations they were a part of or worked for, well then I guess all we have is personal attacks.
bayoublaster7527
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2017
- Messages
- 408
What’s missing from the merging of those two statements? You guessed it, HUNT and FISH! I have to think it was intentional.
I think that's perfectly reasonable, and I think we have all seen examples on this forum of "personal attacks."
corndog1
Well-known member
All you folks in Colorado could move to Wyoming. Apparently they have the best game management in the country and is not a far move.
Nick87
Well-known member
While not colorado I feel your pain.
Bullshot
Well-known member
States need to pass their own internal “electoral college” rules before every rural citizen is simply made a serf of radical weirdos living in the city. Want an example? New York. Dysfunctional power arrangement, Albany and NYC (and immediate suburbs) just crushing the character and soul of the rest of the state. honestly I can’t believe the rest of the state hasn’t seceded. To think that 99% of Colorado will be lorded over by those in Denver/Boulder/Colorado Springs makes me very, very sad for you.
Nick87
Well-known member
I could give you another example...
Bullshot
Well-known member
I assume you mean the state I try to get across as fast as possible with as few stops as possible on my way through on 80? The one I dread the MOST. The one I try not to ever sleep in for fear of getting hassled or arrested simply for possessing a firearm. The only one I worry about getting shot if I get caught in a construction detour and google maps is feeling frisky with the re-route (Well that’s not totally true, there’s also a few miles to the east where I’d rather piss myself than stop for a restroom).
The rest of that state is probably nice. But it’s a lost cause politically.
WYelker
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2021
- Messages
- 468
He did not help at all. I was at a meeting in Aspen and he was clearly not opposed to the idea at all. While not flat out supporting it, he was not opposed at all. There were other CPW officials who were clearly more concerned and against the issue. I recall Broderick, Will, a Guy named Gary all were clearly not if a of the ban. But he was clearly not opposed…
Last edited:
TheGreek
Well-known member
I believe a CDOW bio named Tom Beck was a big proponent of the spring bear ban in the early 90s.
www.westword.com
Loaded for Bear
Tom Beck began hunting forty years ago, shooting squirrels outside his tiny hometown of High Springs, in north Florida, when he was six years old. As he grew, so did his enthusiasm for hunting. This year he bought five separate bow-hunting licenses in three states, and last month he killed...
BackAngler
New member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2023
- Messages
- 2
Polis appointed Marie Haskett in 2021 to the sportspersons/outfitters seat
BackAngler
New member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2023
- Messages
- 2
Hackett, Otero, Skiba and Bailey all hunt. Phillips might.
one ate E grain
Active member
I'd like to say thanks to all who have made the effort to take part in supporting hunting in Colorado. I personally haven't done much of late. I wasn't aware of how anti hunting Polis actually is, or maybe he isn't but his husband for sure is a radical animal rights nut. He is term limited but he isn't the problem. Our society is disconnected from the animals it eats.
Frankly I see very little to change the current direction of things here. I guess the only bright spot is that with climate change we should be seeing more winter range and better habitat for elk.
It's certainly possible, and indeed very likely, that every single appointee is anti hunting, even if they themselves hunt. Just how it goes.
I've shot a lot of elk and my kids grew up eating elk and deer, and I'm grateful, we didn't have much money back then and the good quality meat was a godsend.. I can see an end to public land hunting by regular people in the future. It will become like Europe, a thing for the very wealthy on private land.
Frankly I see very little to change the current direction of things here. I guess the only bright spot is that with climate change we should be seeing more winter range and better habitat for elk.
It's certainly possible, and indeed very likely, that every single appointee is anti hunting, even if they themselves hunt. Just how it goes.
I've shot a lot of elk and my kids grew up eating elk and deer, and I'm grateful, we didn't have much money back then and the good quality meat was a godsend.. I can see an end to public land hunting by regular people in the future. It will become like Europe, a thing for the very wealthy on private land.
Similar threads
