Yeti GOBOX Collection

MT wolf EIS comments

So, are any of you wolf haters going to comment this time, or will you just wait 'til the comment period is over and then bitch about the decisions?
biggrin.gif
 
well, IT, seeing ya want to be antagonistic. I don't about you but my comments to the powers that be are ===
This plan of treating the wolves along the same lines as lions and black bears looks the best route. I do not agree with asking for fed money to support our FWP tho. I believe we should support this wolf management with MT FWP funds.
We support our own then we aren't welfare and will not be held hostage at the whim of the any fed administration.
 
LA, Great! I hope all the wolf haters decide to comment this time, having learned the hard way that those of us who do get involved on the ground floor just laugh at the late arrivers when they bitch about being left out. FYI, my origional comments were that wolves should not be re-introduced, but allowed to increase on their own if possible. At the time we already had about twenty five naturally occurring wolves in ID. And even though my advice wasn't taken I, at least, knew I had made my opinion known. That's one reason why I don't bitch about wolves.

Please re-think having the MT FWP pay for everything. I don't know if FWP gets funds from the MT general fund, but if they don't why should sportsmen pay for all wolf management? Except for being able to say, "We're paying for this so keep out of it!" to everyone else, hunters and fishermen wouldn't get much benefit. And how about the tourist industry? Will it benefit? How about all the non hunters and fishermen in MT who are in favor of wolves? Should they help pay for the management? I know all the pitfalls, too, but dumping management costs for all species on hunters and fishermen doesn't seem equitable---especially for non game species.
 
"Please re-think having the MT FWP pay for everything. I don't know if FWP gets funds from the MT general fund, but if they don't why should sportsmen pay for all wolf management? Except for being able to say, "We're paying for this so keep out of it!" to everyone else, hunters and fishermen wouldn't get much benefit. And how about the tourist industry? Will it benefit? How about all the non hunters and fishermen in MT who are in favor of wolves? Should they help pay for the management? I know all the pitfalls, too, but dumping management costs for all species on hunters and fishermen doesn't seem equitable---especially for non game species."

The sportsmen pay for most everything wildlife now. And yes, fwp does NOT get any money from the general fund.
 
IT, what lala land are you from? When did any state program cost less than a million bucks a year that has this much emotion attached to it? This program is going to need a dozen fulltime PR folks, another dozen directors and AD's, I can foresee a whole division within the FWP just for wolves. The sportsmen are much better off by keeping their moneys seperate from the general fund for the simple fact that sportsmen PAY for their own stuff. As soon as FWP goes to the general fund then sportsmen will be funding everything else in the state while the wildlife will get the short end of the stick again. You sure sound like a big brother type.
 
LA, I understand all the ramifications. I'm just asking questions to see what you think. How many Montanans is it going to take to manage 400 wolves?
biggrin.gif
How many bears and lions ya got up there and how many people do ya need to manage THEM?
biggrin.gif
I could manage every wolf in MT by myself!
rolleyes.gif


<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 03-29-2003 21:01: Message edited by: Ithaca 37 ]</font>
 
IT ya probably could, and take care of the cats and bears too. MT isn't that big and we don't have that many.
 
Sitka Gear Turkey Tool Belt

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,224
Messages
1,951,601
Members
35,085
Latest member
dwaller4449
Back
Top