That is dumb. Be better FWP.
Montana 2026 Elk Proposal
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
That is dumb. Be better FWP.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
It is should be frowned upon to: (1) Concoct an amendment that folks will have strong opinions on without any warning prior to the meeting (Cebull), and it is a poorly designed process to: (2) To vote on an amendment prior to public comment. The latter is actually going to bog this meeting down even more than it already would be and gives amendments a disproportionate amount of momentum within the process.
These commissioners have incredibly difficult jobs, but as a member of the public it feels dirty and loaded.
These commissioners have incredibly difficult jobs, but as a member of the public it feels dirty and loaded.
MTelkHuntress
Well-known member
I just caught the antelope changes but it was interesting to watch that play out. I think it was Commissioner Walsh that said after the public comment that he no longer supported the amendment but he had already voted yes in the beginning. Then to see commissioners scramble to lower the quota number to somewhat appease the majority to keep the meeting moving forward. This whole process is confusing.
I remember saying a few years ago on here that the commission needs to be elected and getting laughed out of the room. It’s never been more evident to me than ever that this needs to happen. And as for the department I think you could put me in there and I would have more clear answers. This is a chit show.
Schaaf
Well-known member
You are a big shot. Make it happen.
Not surprising with your values.
Dems vote against any const. amendment at the leg. You have to have 100 votes to get one passed.
A cont. referendum costs about $5 million to make it happen.
Plus, I don't think injecting electoral politics into wildlife more than it's already there is a smart idea.
but sure, cheap shots are easier than understanding how shit works.
I’ve seen how it’s worked my whole life for people that don’t have influence. No cheap shots just facts.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
It wouldn't fix anything. It is already a political position. And MT politicians don't have the best track record on listening to voters concern. The Commission has a long history of ignoring public comment and throwing things in at the last minute. Take a look at any wolf-related item. The vast majority of the comments will be pro-wolf, anti-hunting. I do agree the processes is a mess, but I would bet people in other states would have the same view of their meetings, particularly if they don't get what they want. If you find a state that you like, you can move there.
El Jason
Well-known member
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I don't have a dog in this fight, MT elk hunting has always seemed 2nd or 3rd tier compared to surrounding states, but having read through this, I just want to point out how cool it is that @ispeakelk took the time to create a login and provide his contact info here. As viewed from WA there is no way someone here would take the time to do that, and it reminds me of that old saying, the MT is just one small town with really long streets (or something like that).
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,386
This Commission demonstrated a lot of responsiveness to public feedback during this
process and during today’s meeting.
We saw Commissioner Burrows attempt to raise the 900 series antelope quota to 7000 and the commission voted to approve the amendment. After multiple public comments in opposition he amended it back to 5600.
Commissioners Walsh pulled his elk amendment due to public feedback.
Two of the mountain lion amendments were dropped after public comment.
Commisssioner Wargo’s original elk amendment failed passage but he got unanimous approval for having it implemented in Region 1. I think that was due in large part to the amount of positive public support from hunters during today’s comment period. A lot of the other Commissioners didn’t seem to understand the effects of his proposal which was really a shame.
IMO the department really dropped the ball on getting it released to the public two days before Thanksgiving when it had been submitted at the end of September and was the first amendment received.
Multiple other amendments and decisions were affected by in person and online comments today.
Involvement in the process is the price to be paid for gaining influence. If there‘s ever proof to that saying that “the world is run by those that show up” MT season setting and FWP Commission meetings are a good example to see that in action.
Thanks to those of you who commented via Zoom. I could see that it made a difference in multiple occasions.
In my opinion Commissioner Wargo, and Chair Robinson deserve a lot of credit for putting action into what the public land hunters have been complaining about.
Thanks Gerald I know we have our differences but I saw you there today and I appreciate that.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,386
The most baffling thing about today is that it took nearly 30 minutes to try and figure out how to stop killing mule deer does on B licenses on public land….
. Montanans only know how to increase licenses not limit them….
. Montanans only know how to increase licenses not limit them….
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,424
I agree. A raw pretty f’d up process but overall most of the stuff they got right…except the elk b tag stuff but I think that’s coming eventually
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,386
The fact that commissioners aren’t allowed to discuss amendments and proposals among themselves before the meeting to ensure they understand the amendments made it really clumsy today. I could see multiple Commissioners were confused about Wargo’s elk amendment.
Similar threads
