UPOM suing FWP over elk regulations

[Eric Albus]

Are you guys literally arguing on hunt talk while you're supposed to be listening to the presentations at PLPW, which you both are members of?

Guys, respectfully, probably not the best look for you.

Agreed

 

[drifter52]

Are you guys literally arguing on hunt talk while you're supposed to be listening to the presentations at PLPW, which you both are members of?

Guys, respectfully, probably not the best look for you.

Don't think they care what anyone thinks

 

[Big Shooter]

Don't think they care what anyone thinks

You and Ben Lamb are both correct!

 

[Eric Albus]

and I can multitask

 

[drifter52]

You and Ben Lamb are both correct!

Figured as much

 

[drifter52]

and I can multitask

They teach you how to do that in outfitter school
Or did you learn how to do that here in hunt talk?

 

[DFS]

There are a lot of good outfitters and landowners out there. It’s sad to see things going like this. When they chose to burn down elk hunting with governor Greg and director Hank at the helm they lost me and I hope they get exactly what they deserve. Montana does not need to be the toilet bowl of the west both “sides” choose to keep it that way.

 

[SwaggyD]

There are a lot of good outfitters and landowners out there. It’s sad to see things going like this. When they chose to burn down elk hunting with governor Greg and director Hank at the helm they lost me and I hope they get exactly what they deserve. Montana does not need to be the toilet bowl of the west both “sides” choose to keep it that way.

Please learn how to use punctuation.

But they won’t get what they deserve.

 

[SwaggyD]

For people that are smarter than me (which is almost everyone), does this lawsuit have any merit? Or will a judge look at it and chuckle like I did when I read it?

 

[Ben Lamb]

You and Ben Lamb are both correct!

Rod,

You & Eric are both board members of MOGA. If you think that your positions both on PLPW and MOGA don't demand a bit of decorum, then I'm not sure the sportsmen & women of Montana are going to be able to put much faith in your positions, your words or the organization that you both are decision making members of. For voting board members of any organization to take an approach that the group they volunteer on and pay dues for does not represent them in specific matters is somewhat disingenuous, especially in light of how the SB 143 issue came down last session and especially how MOGA has commissions and boards stacked in your favor (Fish & Wildlife Commission, PLPW & The Parks & Rec board).

How we talk to each other matters. Here's my pledge - I will do my level best to be professional and thoughtful and empathetic while remaining a strong advocate for the things I'd like to see. This kind of toxic rhetoric is killing good intentions and ideas. I expect you to call me out when I don't live up to my own standard, but I'm going to hold you guys to that standard too simply so we can hopefully start to build some trust. Because right now, there is none. We are all passionate about this issue and there's a lot at stake. A little grace on both sides can help calm this down to a level where common sense can start to prevail.

@Eric Albus has put out some good stuff for folks to think about, but then we devolve into name calling. Yesterday's PLPW is a good example of where we could start to build trust, rather than reinforce resentment. Marcus Strange showed up yesterday to deliver updates on the work the elk coalition was doing in the landowner-hunter space, but what ended up happening is far from that. It went from an exploration of a group that's trying to de-escalate to one where Marcus was put on the spot to answer for the ills of all hunters. Meanwhile, your fellow outfitter is publicly stumping for Texas Billionaires to get the front of the line for trophy bull permits.

I recognize you guys feel like you don't need to negotiate or talk to your own fellow Montanans, but the path that you setting down is just more of the same in 6 months when the legislature gavels in.

I also realize that Paul will print this out and wave it in front of people's face to show just how mean I am.

That Coalition wants to work with PLPW. Will PLPW work with them or will they keep trying to sandbag good people? I think that's what most folks really want to know.

 

[Eric Albus]

They teach you how to do that in outfitter school
Or did you learn how to do that here in hunt talk?

On the ranch

 

[Eric Albus]

Rod,

You & Eric are both board members of MOGA. If you think that your positions both on PLPW and MOGA don't demand a bit of decorum, then I'm not sure the sportsmen & women of Montana are going to be able to put much faith in your positions, your words or the organization that you both are decision making members of. For voting board members of any organization to take an approach that the group they volunteer on and pay dues for does not represent them in specific matters is somewhat disingenuous, especially in light of how the SB 143 issue came down last session and especially how MOGA has commissions and boards stacked in your favor (Fish & Wildlife Commission, PLPW & The Parks & Rec board).

How we talk to each other matters. Here's my pledge - I will do my level best to be professional and thoughtful and empathetic while remaining a strong advocate for the things I'd like to see. This kind of toxic rhetoric is killing good intentions and ideas. I expect you to call me out when I don't live up to my own standard, but I'm going to hold you guys to that standard too simply so we can hopefully start to build some trust. Because right now, there is none. We are all passionate about this issue and there's a lot at stake. A little grace on both sides can help calm this down to a level where common sense can start to prevail.

@Eric Albus has put out some good stuff for folks to think about, but then we devolve into name calling. Yesterday's PLPW is a good example of where we could start to build trust, rather than reinforce resentment. Marcus Strange showed up yesterday to deliver updates on the work the elk coalition was doing in the landowner-hunter space, but what ended up happening is far from that. It went from an exploration of a group that's trying to de-escalate to one where Marcus was put on the spot to answer for the ills of all hunters. Meanwhile, your fellow outfitter is publicly stumping for Texas Billionaires to get the front of the line for trophy bull permits.

I recognize you guys feel like you don't need to negotiate or talk to your own fellow Montanans, but the path that you setting down is just more of the same in 6 months when the legislature gavels in.

I also realize that Paul will print this out and wave it in front of people's face to show just how mean I am.

That Coalition wants to work with PLPW. Will PLPW work with them or will they keep trying to sandbag good people? I think that's what most folks really want to know.

Ben, you may hold the coalition in high regard and that’s your prerogative. I need to sit and talk with them to see who and what they’re about. At this point I look at them about like I would look at myself and some of my like minded buddies forming a “citizens mule deer coalition”….how much credence would or should I have?

 

[Big Shooter]

Rod,

You & Eric are both board members of MOGA. If you think that your positions both on PLPW and MOGA don't demand a bit of decorum, then I'm not sure the sportsmen & women of Montana are going to be able to put much faith in your positions, your words or the organization that you both are decision making members of. For voting board members of any organization to take an approach that the group they volunteer on and pay dues for does not represent them in specific matters is somewhat disingenuous, especially in light of how the SB 143 issue came down last session and especially how MOGA has commissions and boards stacked in your favor (Fish & Wildlife Commission, PLPW & The Parks & Rec board).

How we talk to each other matters. Here's my pledge - I will do my level best to be professional and thoughtful and empathetic while remaining a strong advocate for the things I'd like to see. This kind of toxic rhetoric is killing good intentions and ideas. I expect you to call me out when I don't live up to my own standard, but I'm going to hold you guys to that standard too simply so we can hopefully start to build some trust. Because right now, there is none. We are all passionate about this issue and there's a lot at stake. A little grace on both sides can help calm this down to a level where common sense can start to prevail.

@Eric Albus has put out some good stuff for folks to think about, but then we devolve into name calling. Yesterday's PLPW is a good example of where we could start to build trust, rather than reinforce resentment. Marcus Strange showed up yesterday to deliver updates on the work the elk coalition was doing in the landowner-hunter space, but what ended up happening is far from that. It went from an exploration of a group that's trying to de-escalate to one where Marcus was put on the spot to answer for the ills of all hunters. Meanwhile, your fellow outfitter is publicly stumping for Texas Billionaires to get the front of the line for trophy bull permits.

I recognize you guys feel like you don't need to negotiate or talk to your own fellow Montanans, but the path that you setting down is just more of the same in 6 months when the legislature gavels in.

I also realize that Paul will print this out and wave it in front of people's face to show just how mean I am.

That Coalition wants to work with PLPW. Will PLPW work with them or will they keep trying to sandbag good people? I think that's what most folks really want to know.

When I stated that drifter and you were both correct…what I meant was that you were right that we should not have been arguing with you guys during a meeting and that he was correct that we don’t care what people think of me/us. I wasn‘t saying that I didn’t care about anyone’s opinion. Just so that’s cleared up Ben. I would feel terrible if you were upset with me.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Ben, you may hold the coalition in high regard and that’s your prerogative. I need to sit and talk with them to see who and what they’re about. At this point I look at them about like I would look at myself and some of my like minded buddies forming a “citizens mule deer coalition”….how much credence would or should I have?

Eric, the world is run by those who show up.

I understand that MOGA is a trade organization but it is also the face that the outfitting industry presents to Montana as its lobbyist testify in favor of more opportunity, more of a limited supply of tags diverted to benefit its members, and attempt to leverage the issue of “over objective” to eliminate either sex permit areas.
Whenever it comes to setting management policy, MOGA may as well mean “More for us, screw everyone else and the resource.”

A member of MOGA speaking up in favor of the resource and equitable allocation of tags for all shareholders might be a lonely voice among MOGA, but I can guarantee you it wouldn’t take long to gain credibility with everyone outside of MOGA.

 

[bigsky2]

Ben, you may hold the coalition in high regard and that’s your prerogative. I need to sit and talk with them to see who and what they’re about. At this point I look at them about like I would look at myself and some of my like minded buddies forming a “citizens mule deer coalition”….how much credence would or should I have?

It's easy for you or I or anyone to sit around with their buddies over a beer and talk about how we could fix all of our elk and deer management problems. Nothing gets done that way though. Just the fact that they have actually started the group, got all these other groups and landowners to come together, and is making the effort deserves respect and credence in my opinion. I think we have enough history to see that just relying on FWP isn't going to work.

 

[golfer]

@Eric Albus and @Big Shooter, yesterday during the meeting of the over objective elk herds why was scientific management not addressed? Seemed like the hot topic was more along the lines of how do we give the landowners more bull tags? Would either of you get rid of your prized bulls in you cattle herds first if your numbers got outta hand? Or would you trim back the cows in the herd?

 

[Big Shooter]

@Eric Albus and @Big Shooter, yesterday during the meeting of the over objective elk herds why was scientific management not addressed? Seemed like the hot topic was more along the lines of how do we give the landowners more bull tags? Would either of you get rid of your prized bulls in you cattle herds first if your numbers got outta hand? Or would you trim back the cows in the herd?

Actually, the topic of giving landowners more bull tags did not come up, some good ideas on the 454 program were tossed around, but nothing about more. You are correct in saying that biology was not mentioned aside from Eric bringing up the idea of cows only the last 2 weeks. Answer to your question about our cow herds……we have to actually “manage” our numbers so they don’t get too big for the environment. We do it annually and have since the beginning of time. Very good analogy though.

 

[bigsky2]

Actually, the topic of giving landowners more bull tags did not come up, some good ideas on the 454 program were tossed around, but nothing about more. You are correct in saying that biology was not mentioned aside from Eric bringing up the idea of cows only the last 2 weeks. Answer to your question about our cow herds……we have to actually “manage” our numbers so they don’t get too big for the environment. We do it annually and have since the beginning of time. Very good analogy though.

Does PLPW view the 454 program as a tool to manage elk? If you can't speak for the group, do you view it as a tool to manage elk? I watched the discussion around the program yesterday and that question kept going through my head. When I found out they were taking public comment I tried to type something up quick but didn't quite finish before they stopped taking comment.

 

[golfer]

Actually, the topic of giving landowners more bull tags did not come up, some good ideas on the 454 program were tossed around, but nothing about more. You are correct in saying that biology was not mentioned aside from Eric bringing up the idea of cows only the last 2 weeks. Answer to your question about our cow herds……we have to actually “manage” our numbers so they don’t get too big for the environment. We do it annually and have since the beginning of time. Very good analogy though.

I applaud Eric for stating the last two weeks of the season being cow only. I think something was said about possibly giving an additional bonus point to landowners for some sort of cooperation? I missed that part of the discussion yesterday. Would you be willing to explain that a bit more?

 

[golfer]

Actually, the topic of giving landowners more bull tags did not come up, some good ideas on the 454 program were tossed around, but nothing about more. You are correct in saying that biology was not mentioned aside from Eric bringing up the idea of cows only the last 2 weeks. Answer to your question about our cow herds……we have to actually “manage” our numbers so they don’t get too big for the environment. We do it annually and have since the beginning of time. Very good analogy though.

One other question, if ranchers have to “manage” their numbers so they don’t get too big for the environment, what do you feel is such a tough task to manage the elk so they don’t get too populated for the given areas?