pronghorn management meetings

[Bushcraft]

Even your statement is classless and disrespectful to the tribal partners you are working with. A HUGE THANK YOU........ (with help from). You are an excellent bridge builder(insert sarcasm here)!

The bridge is already built and we have a great working relationship in this regard.  I'm unclear as to why you're trying to cast a negative blanket on these accomplishments.

And for what it's worth, I'm an unpaid volunteer - and a rank amateur video maker at best, and put that audience specific video together specifically for an SCI fundraising event to A) let the SCI members and their guests understand where their money is being put to work, and B) to encourage more people to open their wallets so that we can use those monies for future translocation efforts, tracking collars, aerial and ground counts, etc.

You are still the rep.,  the organization that you rep. took a position.  That position could and should be a wedge in any working relationships that may have been formed. The position is not premised solely on science based management, but on precedent.  It is not on a specific incident but the empowerment of the comanagement platform.  You may have been in a unique position to build bridges but that position to unify has been damaged.

The position doesn't and shouldn't drive a wedge in any working relationship(s) that ultimately want(s) what's best for our fauna, flora, hunters and hunting. The only person trying to push a wedge seems to be you. That's unfortunate and doesn't need to happen.

Bear with me while I try to understand where you're coming from...What exactly is your beef with a co-management platform of federal/state/tribal interests? Any given population base is finite and is prone to management complexities beyond which any singular entity can or should claim sole responsibility and management of.  Why wouldn't you be in favor of an approach that emphasizes the maximum sustainable harvest opportunities of game animals on a fair and equitable basis?

Your rhetoric sounds good but the statement by your organization pulls no punches in its stance.  There is a difference in honoring an agreement and moving forward to perpetuate a finite resource under comanagement and the statement made by SCI.

We are vehemently anti-poaching. Poaching isn't sustainable. It's not right.  We don't agree with harvesting beyond a sustainable, science-based yield. That's our stance. I'm not speaking on behalf of the organization with any of this, but as a board member, I'm not in favor of any legal precedent that would make it easier for poachers to ruin it for the rest of us.

And so I ask again...what is your beef with co-management?

[Tbar]

I am an advocate of comanagement.  The sci statement only speaks of state management.  Do you know the author of the press release? Look at the title of the release. 

[Bushcraft]

I am an advocate of comanagement.  The sci statement only speaks of state management.  Do you know the author of the press release? Look at the title of the release.

At the moment I don't know who wrote the press release, but I'm happy to ask.

I re-read the statement trying to keep your question(s) in mind and didn't necessarily come away with the notion that they were speaking of and arguing for purely state management. Reason being is that when it comes down to it, while there is a USFWS, they don't particularly (and can't)delve into the specifics of state-level species population management. It's a co-management issue. Federal/State/Tribal. Animals wander wherever the heck they want. The federal government exists. State's exist. Tribes and treaties exist. It's a trifecta of management participation. Silo management is *censored* and doesn't work.

The larger issue is ...again, the precedence such a cover-up case unwittingly/unintentionally creates.  I'm sure we can all agree we'd like to try and keep bad-apple poachers like Herrera from using some obtuse treaty language as a crutch to screw all of us out of a fair, equitable and sustainable share of nature's bounty.

[724wd]

So... how about them pronghorn? 

Thank you SCI, Yakama Tribe, and Colville Tribe for bringing pronghorn back to WA!

[Bushcraft]

So... how about them pronghorn? 

Thank you SCI, Yakama Tribe, and Colville Tribe for bringing pronghorn back to WA!

  

Amen brother!

[wheels]

unlees there was a really good fawn crop or getting a lot more doesnt talking management seems like putting  cart way before the horse 

[Bushcraft]

unlees there was a really good fawn crop or getting a lot more doesnt talking management seems like putting  cart way before the horse

The state is legally charged with the responsibility of managing all animals, even those with minimal numbers. I hope the meetings help create more public awareness of, and generate additional interest in, having a lot more pronghorn scooting around the state. They are pretty darn cool critters and it would be awesome to have them thriving again in WA with lots of opportunities for sustainable harvest.

[wheels]

very true i hope it does too