State agency Poll

[Jerry Jeffer]

I like Mark Baker's comment that many sportsman don't understand the system. I'm not sureI can do this here, but I would recomend a book called "know Hunting" It tells alot about how the system works and what we as sportsman can do about making it work for us.

[Tree man]

I didn't vote because I don't think that the Yes or No questions were adequate for the situation in Colorado. I do believe that most of the biologists and DOW folks in general want to do well. I've met with some fisheries Biologists who enhanced my favorable impression....HOWEVER, I have 2 problems with the DOW in Colorado. One involves politics-part of that isn't the DOW's fault-When the legislature imposes stupid rules and the ever-pending threat of an ill concieved referendum hangs over their heads the DOW has to play politics and kowtow to certain groups. I don't like it. It is wrong...but it isn't necessarily the DOW's fault.
My other complaint is pure DOW polical jockeying and job self justification= attempted micro-management of wildlife resources. Surely every thinking biologist knows that game populations cycle naturally.
Furthermore, I find it extremely annoying that small game seasons are short and don't coincide with archery big game seasons. What possible scientific justification is there for having a short Rabbit season?.... I suspect that this is going back to politics and an attempt to keep hikers from meeting boys with firearms but it is ridiculous. Time for a letter to the DOW. We should at least have archery squirrel and rabbit seasons during the Elk season-It could not possibly have a measurable effect on small game populations.

[paleFace]

this past year i sat on the Game Departments 10 year deer planning committee.  the committee was made up of reps from various groups with different interest regarding the states wildlife. the information and data collected from this year long mission is what the Game Department will use to determine among other things harvest limits for all huntable game. i felt that the game department kept hunters on top of the list, keeping our interest as one of the key priorities as well as management tools for keeping wildlife populations in check. i give our bioloigst an A here in Virginia.

[Izzy]

I think a lot of the problems are caused by rumors individuals and private groups spread like the stocking of lions and coyotes or the guy who knows a farmer who shot 400 deer on nuisance permits.NY has some fantastical wildlife resources,world class.Not a booner on every hill but good quality in most regions.And not just the game,we have a good amount of protected open space and incredible fishing.When I see a problem it may be only from my perspective and you cant please all,all the time.There is always room for improvement and with limited budgets which is probably the biggest downfall here, needed change doesnt always come.

[tim roberts]

Caleb,
Livin' in Utah I had to answer no to both questions, and that is one of the main reasons why I won't hunt in Utah any more.  The Wildlife in Utah are managed mainly for the "Trophy" crowd, and the high fluttin conservation groups.  
On the other hand though, had I answered to questions with reguards to Montana, where I hunt I would have had to answer a strong yes.  Mark is right in his statement about the great job that the folks from Fish Wildlife and Parks do.  Also I have to thank the good people of the MBA who have committed time and engery to help and keep the opportunities that are in Montana there.
>>>Tim------->

[Basic Instinct]

If they could manage The Game like a bank account in Oregon, we would have 2 times the animals we do now.  They seem to not care about overhunting most of eastern Oregon Elk heards. We have some units so infested with hunters, Both in state and out of state hunters, that you cannot hardly find a place to hunt without running into someone else. It's all about how many $$$ they can make, Not wanting to miss 1 dollar from limiting tag numbers.  I like the chance to hunt, But also like a quality hunt as well. I have emailed the F&W about 6 times and they will not give a straight awnser to me as to why they will not limit the amount of tags in some area's. Any way I better stop there.

[wtpops]

Here in "CalEfornYa" its all about politics, not whats best for animal and human.

[swamper]

in nj ...it's all about the money

[Recurve50LBS]

In my state of NJ, the bunny huggers and the politicians seem to have things all screwed up. They won't listen to the biologists who are educated by the way when they make suggestions like culling our ever growing black bear population. I guess the tree huggers find the bears cuddly and the politicians are only out for the votes of people in the state that don't live in bear country. I'd like to see the politicians change their minds after a bunny hugger gets bitten in their south 40. I just hope it don't come down to having a child or two seriously hurt to change these folks minds. But I'd like to see our biologists listened to and the proper actions taken.

[Clint B.]

I have no complaints about my state fish & wildlife conservation agency. I have asked some of their employees why their monthly publication has less actual hunting articles than in the past & much more focus on hiking, nature observation, etc. They answered that this is necessary to keep the majority non-hunting population, who mostly reside within our cities & urban areas, interested in the outdoors. Most of them will never hunt or fish. They will never be "with us" but hopefully, by attracting them to other outdoor activities, while at the same time educating them about fish & wildlife management, they won't be "against us".

[Plumbob]

I was heavily involved with my state and local hunting clubs for the better part of ten years. In that time I interacted with our region biologist, supervisor, commissioner etc.regularly. In the end I realized why so many were sour and foul about the IDFG. They made me that way, and at one time I was there biggest supporter.

Say what you want about my attitude but I sat across the table from them eye to eye more than once, our IDFG is not " Above Board".

The C.O.'s are a differrent story, I trust them.

[billy on the road]

Just a thought ..
as I read through this post, it struck me that most of us in 'fly-over-country' seem fairly comfortable with COs, but mistrust the higher ups. When you move to the more populated or migrated-to areas the mistrust rises. There are exceptions I'm sure.
I wonder if some/most of the distrust is rooted in self preservation of 'the way it was' .
I live in Indiana and agree with those who said our state is above average. But, the City of Indianapolis is very unfriendly to hunters. It has lots of space to allow the urban deer hunt but, no space allocated.
It fits into the migration category.
Educated,professional,non-hunter/fisher types who have romanticized what/where 'wildlife' should be.
Their weekend walks or afternoon jogs through a state park should never ever have to face reality,that's saved for tv shows. Fuzzy or furry critters should always be there in healthy, or not; condition because the people want to see them there, in the 'woods'; just like they used to be.
Wildlife Management is good for the animals and education would be good for the people.
Hope that makes sense.

[paleFace]

after reading into this thread a little more i see the question was not just about the biologist but the entire game departments. well i need to clarify things a little. the biologist seem to have the hunters at the for front, however the agancy as a whole i think is more concerned with the money it generates as well as the political aspect. perfect example is the recent addition of crossbows into the archery season. if the crossbow is considered archery equipment then why is there a seperate license and fee for hunting with a crossbow.