8andcounting
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2013
- Messages
- 3,313
Don’t think I quite agree with the second paragraph of your post … they deserve to get hammered on this but yes everyone be kind be an adult . Be polite
Montana FWP makes seismic shift in elk permits
- Thread starter Ben Lamb
- Start date
The director's office has been the driver of this process. The Commission is new. I think they get a chance to make the right decision before we come unglued on them. The commission has been moving this in a better direction, but the director's office has created a confused, convoluted mess that even I can't follow, and I've been doing this for 20 years.
Every time we turn around, there's a layer to this onion we didn't see. That's either by design, or by incompetence. I don't know which it is.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,733
Worsech and headquarters handed this ball of crap to the commissioners. In most cases the commissioners are just trying to do what they can which is spray potpourri on it. They definitely don't deserve to get hammered. Hank deserves to be sent back into retirement.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,733
This. Much better said than what I tried to write.
Wind Gypsy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2017
- Messages
- 1,832
Worse than just dumping it on the commissioners, he gave them a steaming pile of $hit and already started pointing the blame on them for any backlash on what is approved. I feel bad for them having to sort through it all but if they think it's unreasonable they should just reject it!
Yes today is the big day. We will find out if rich a$$holes control Montana or the 99 percent have a voice. Very interesting. I wonder if the people that have a say, who are involved hunt public land or private. Biggest thing, I think is what does gianforte think. Something like this,a guy would think the governor would release a statement. Officially let us know where he stands. Instead of hiding behind a loser like worsuck.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
All we are left with is reading between the lines. But it should come as no surprise. As the old adage goes, "You are judged by the company you keep, and the amount of money you spend suing the state to prohibit public access to a river you greedily tried to claim as your own."
Or something like that.
4ohSick
Well-known member
Can't believe Worsech just hit at the citizens elk coalition for not including other groups. You mean like sportsmen were included in crafting these proposals?? 
Can't believe Worsech just hit at the citizens elk coalition for not including other groups. You mean like sportsmen were included in crafting these proposals??
Both are valid points.
I can think of three landowners in that coalition, and the meetings with Ag groups are starting so that discussion will be inclusive and informed by all stakeholders. The coalition spent the last 2 months working on getting up & running relative to season setting. Perhaps if the process were not so convoluted and disjointed, that kind of work would have been farther along.
8andcounting
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2013
- Messages
- 3,313
Yeh ok I agree . Thanks Ben
they sent an action alert to their members and they've been working diligently behind the scenes to find a better outcome. RMEF has done good work on this.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
This has been stuffed down members throats for too long without tangible results
I can give you tangible results:
In 2015, RMEF was instrumental in killing the attempt to zero out Habitat Montana. They did so by sending an alert, and working diligently behind the scenes. That alert generated hundreds of comments to the legislature. They also weighed in on the transfer of public land issues and helped ensure that their membership was tuned in to what was happening. Their advocacy helped kill the transfer movement in Montana.
Throughout the season setting processes over the last 13 years that I was aware of, RMEF worked closely with the local chapters to bring comments to bear that helped ensure better outcomes.
When RMEF endorsed the Roadless Area Release Act in 2012, they quickly reversed direction after more detailed analysis and their efforts there killed a bill that would have eliminated the Roadless Area Conservation Rule throughout the United States.
In 2017, RMEF CEO David Allen was a speaker at the Public Lands Rally, as was KC Walsh (current commissioner) despite being pilloried by some groups and people.
RMEF may not have social media all over the place on this stuff, but it is critical to remember that just ecause you don't see something on social media, does not mean that there's nothing happening. I'd love RMEF to toot their own horn more on the state level stuff they do, because it's generally well developed and thoughtful approaches, versus storming the castle. Both have their place, and given RMEF's mission, size & approach, I think they do a good job.
Even when I disagree with them, which happens from time to time on policy, or like when they were advocating for a constitutional right to hunt and fish that we were opposing due to concerns about private property rights. I never had a angry conversation with them when we were debating the issue, and at the end of it, I think everyone had a much better understanding of their approaches, and how effective they can be.
I heard the same thing "slight"=40%
Irrelevant
Well-known member
My rebuttal: Montana elk.
Also, didn't you make the same, behind the scene's claim about RMEF helping guide the selection of the current FWP director?
Where are they on corner crossing? Prescriptive easements? I just read an article in Bugle this morning titled, "Access is Conservation"
