Montana FWP opens public comment on Grizzly Hunting Season

[MO Betta]

Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks :: Governor's Grizzly Bear Advisory Council

Governor's Grizzly Bear Advisory Council

fwp.mt.gov

Comment period is open, and doesn't look to have any restrictions on who will be allowed to comment.

 

[Sytes]

Free for our National (and international) ---> Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Biological Diversity, Earthjustice, etc... Those Patagonia Action Works funded groups call to influence our State's GBAC direction...

If I understand correctly, this (GBAC) involves reducing human / griz interaction and not for the purpose to regain State Management of the population(?).
Thus, main comment based on the GBAC charter.

This *should be modified for future public comment. *Should be... Outside influence with respect to ANY State issues needs to be curbed.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Thank-you for your comment. I hope expressing your point of view makes you feel better while we continue to implement politically expedient biological solutions.
Sincerely,
FWP

 

[huntin24/7]

Thank-you for your comment. I hope expressing your point of view makes you feel better while we continue to implement politically expedient biological solutions.
Sincerely,
FWP

I wanted to laugh at this until I remembered it was true. Lol

 

[MO Betta]

View attachment 141773

Free for our National (and international) ---> Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Biological Diversity, Earthjustice, etc... Those Patagonia Action Works funded groups call to influence our State's GBAC direction...

If I understand correctly, this (GBAC) involves reducing human / griz interaction and not for the purpose to regain State Management of the population(?).
Thus, main comment based on the GBAC charter.

This *should be modified for future public comment. *Should be... Outside influence with respect to ANY State issues needs to be curbed.

Yeah, the verbiage didn't read that the comments were about proposed hunting but the Wild Sheep Foundation had shared the link earlier saying that commenting about the Hunting proposal was open. Went ahead and gave a supportive comment.

 

[Sytes]

Yeah, the verbiage didn't read that the comments were about proposed hunting but the Wild Sheep Foundation had shared the link earlier saying that commenting about the Hunting proposal was open. Went ahead and gave a supportive comment.

5. The Council shall have the discretion to examine grizzly bear-related issues that it deems
to be important, including at a minimum the following topics critical to its objectives:
a) Grizzly bear distribution within Montana (including outside of established
recovery zones);
b) Connectivity between ecosystems;
c) Conflict prevention;
d) Response protocols to grizzly conflict in different parts of the state;
e) Transplant protocols;
f) Role of hunting; and
g) Resources for long-term sustainability of grizzly bear conservation.

Well, you're correct. I'm mistaken. "f) Role of hunting".
I suppose I have as many comments open to my keyboard bound fingers as I desire to make. I'll place another w/ a comment in support of State Management of the ESA achieved population objectives as well.
Thanks for sharing the comment link and clarifying the role.

On another note;
It's interesting considering there is no bot prevention for this, "public comment". Some program with say, 40 varied supportive/opposed responses could be created and bot away! Set it for a few thousand, "public comments". Sad, though I would not put it past some of the extreme environmental organizations attempt to do such. Heck, pre-set messages are ready to be sent by many.

This needs much more attention than anonymous public comments.

Ridiculous.

 

[Ben Lamb]

WIldlife is a public trust, owned by no-one and managed by the state or federal gov't for the beneficiaries of the trust, and for the common good (abundant wildlife populations). Should we limit who can comment on this?

The GBAC is like the wolf advosiry council: A diverse group of Montanans who care about the future of grizzly bear management, conflict reduction, etc meet to help the state craft the best plan possible that can withstand litigation & legislative malfeasance.

If we didn't have the wolf plan, we wouldn't have been able to delist. It gave us the moral authority to demand it.

This exercise can result in the same outcome, if the plan is done sufficiently. Part of the ESA delisting criteria is an approved state plan. This is a good thing, send those comments in.

 

[El Jason]

Do some of you really think the form letter comments taken from out of state persons warrant the same consideration as those from local sportsman groups?

 

[MTGomer]

Do some of you really think the form letter comments taken from out of state persons warrant the same consideration as those from local sportsman groups?

Yes, if not more.

See recent HD 313 and 316 wolf quota adjustments.

Bullock/Williams FWP loves that social science aspect of science.

 

[MO Betta]

Do some of you really think the form letter comments taken from out of state persons warrant the same consideration as those from local sportsman groups?

Honestly would rather have it strictly be from residents of Montana, and the collective groups (of all backgrounds) that function within the state to have the only input. But most states aren't limiting input, and the anti movement does a hell of a lot better job putting the message out to and getting support from those they represent. You've got the likes of the Sierra Club in attendance at meetings, they'll drown you in comments from New Jersey cat ladies.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Yes, if not more.

See recent HD 313 and 316 wolf quota adjustments.

Bullock/Williams FWP loves that social science aspect of science.

False.

Form letters are counted as 1 comment, submitted X times.

The wolf quota issue stems from people who are passionate about wolves and live in the state, a recognition that large quotas around the park are bad for tourism, and do not affect ungulate numbers like some would like us to believe, and that there is value on having people not shoot "named" wolves or that shoot wolves currently being used for research. We both know that reality in wildlife mgt is far more complex that just a yes or no answer.

Bullock & Williams are about 1/3 as intrusive in the process as Maurier & Schweitzer were. Martz & Racicot loved social sciences as well, and instituted the programs at FWP.

Former Chief of Staff, Chris Smith (now with theWildlife Management Institute) has repeatedly said that the social science is as important as the biological sciences. He's correct, whether we want to believe that or not. For example: All of season setting is a social science, not a biological one. The critters will be just fine w/o us going out to whack them. It's the management of the people who utilize the resource that matters.

You can't have one w/o the other.

 

[Irrelevant]

Do some of you really think the form letter comments taken from out of state persons warrant the same consideration as those from local sportsman groups?

Dang, I just read an EIS determination summary from an agency that specifically addressed this. Wish I could remember what and where. The jist was that no, they don't treat them the same. The unique comments always held significantly more weight, to the point where they seemed to allude that the form letters really weren't factored in at all.

 

[El Jason]

The jist was that no, they don't treat them the same.

Correct.

 

[Sytes]

Eh, this "public comment" is about as anonymous as anonymous gets. Entries w/o limit for a single person from anywhere in the world.

This, "Public Comment" is flat out a joke.

Re State or national/international open comment: this is a State executive order for Montanans to assess for Montanans. State appointed committees should not be potentially swayed by other state / country comments.

 

[MTGomer]

Ben makes a great case for canning bios that aren’t allowed to do any biology anyways and hiring a few sociologists to take their place.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Ben makes a great case for canning bios that aren’t allowed to do any biology anyways and hiring a few sociologists to take their place.

Sure, if you want to eliminate hunting. Then we just need to count them to make sure we're not hitting low levels which would trigger a listing.

But biologists do much more than season setting, right? Even in season setting, there are biological implications, especially for large carnivores. Elk & Deer - you've got overall herd health, buck/doe rations, cow/calf rations, setting quotas for herd reduction or limiting harvest for increased productivity, deciding carrying capacity (granted, these issues need POLICY work to bring them back into the realm of what gets used over the political lens). Then there's disease issues which we've not really covered.

 

[El Jason]

IF you guys want to get your hair on fire over this comment process, feel free. It's entertaining.

 

[MTGomer]

there are biological implications, especially for large carnivores. Elk & Deer - you've got overall herd health, buck/doe rations, cow/calf rations, setting quotas for herd reduction or limiting harvest for increased productivity, deciding carrying capacity

Although I’m being a bit sarcastic here about firing bios, I had a longer reply written out where I wrote out this list I just quoted of yours’ almost word for word, where I was going to say, imagine making your suggestions as you’re trained to do with your Master’s degree in biology, based upon these things, and then being told that it all gets set aside due to the social aspect.
That’s what happens with elk and wolves and mule deer and nobody should be surprised when it happens with the G bear.

 

[Sytes]

This brings to mind the recent review of public comments for Idaho's wolf year round hunt... Talk about a taste of entertainment!

The Idaho Fish and Game Commission on Thursday approved nine proposals to extend wolf hunting and trapping seasons following a two-week public comment period in which the commission received more than 27,000 responses from across the world.

Good to see Idaho used a bit of common sense to, at least, identify where the comment originated.


Tax $$$...

 

[Gerald Martin]

IF you guys want to get your hair on fire over this comment process, feel free. It's entertaining.

Those who are frustrated with their public comments not being implemented in management decisions just need to learn to make their comments relevant.

Whenever I am given opportunity to comment on any species management I have always responded that I want fewer elk, more hunting pressure, more predators, and the MT legislature to have more influence in biological decisions regardless of a biologist’s expert recommendations.

So far I almost always see my comments put into practice.
#Winning. #sorelevantithurts