Nemont
Well-known member
.
BigFin Speaks
- Thread starter Nemont
- Start date
Nemont
Well-known member
Oops posted in wrong forum
Not quite how it was stated, but after all, when a journalist is scribing notes, do not expect too much accuracy.
I think it was like this, if I read properly from my notes:
"Businesses all have inherent risk. Those who build a business model around a public asset are taking much risk. Probably more risk than they understand. When the owner of that public asset takes measures to manage the public asset, it should come as no surprise that business models built around such public asset will become disrupted. Yet, such business disruption does not releive the trustees of their responsibility to manage this public asset."
I am already hearing from some of my landowner clients. They are pissed about this, but they know I make a clear deliniation between private property as a sacred cow, and public wildlife as an equally sacred cow.
Not the first time my adherence to private property rights has pissed some of them off. If you beleive in private proprety rights, like I do, and you expect those rights to be respected, then you must respect the rights of other property owners/interests, even if it is a public owner and the property interest is wildlife.
For some reason, too many folks (on both sides) think ownership of one of those two items constitutes grounds for ownership/control of both.
I am probably too simplified in my vision. |oo
I think it was like this, if I read properly from my notes:
"Businesses all have inherent risk. Those who build a business model around a public asset are taking much risk. Probably more risk than they understand. When the owner of that public asset takes measures to manage the public asset, it should come as no surprise that business models built around such public asset will become disrupted. Yet, such business disruption does not releive the trustees of their responsibility to manage this public asset."
I am already hearing from some of my landowner clients. They are pissed about this, but they know I make a clear deliniation between private property as a sacred cow, and public wildlife as an equally sacred cow.
Not the first time my adherence to private property rights has pissed some of them off. If you beleive in private proprety rights, like I do, and you expect those rights to be respected, then you must respect the rights of other property owners/interests, even if it is a public owner and the property interest is wildlife.
For some reason, too many folks (on both sides) think ownership of one of those two items constitutes grounds for ownership/control of both.
I am probably too simplified in my vision. |oo
BigHornRam
Well-known member
Randy,
Your thinking is well thought out and consistant. Keep up the good work for public wildlife.
Your thinking is well thought out and consistant. Keep up the good work for public wildlife.
JoseCuervo
New member
No offense, but, the Mis-quote was pretty dang good. Perhaps better than the actual quote....
T Bone
Well-known member
Big Fin for president
A-con
New member
Kudos to you Randy, well said.
I wonder just how much better the breaks elk hunting will be after a few years of limited archery hunting.
I wonder just how much better the breaks elk hunting will be after a few years of limited archery hunting.
No, it is the youth cow hunt. Rural area with limited game wardens with dads party hunting with their kids. not too mention drought, it has hurt that area in the last few years pushing elk towards the Malta area never to return. then of course poaching is rampant in the breaks.
I rarely run into hunters in the field. Last year we were the only camp for 5 miles any direction. This is good to keep outfitters from taking advantage the state providing business for them. Wish in my industry the state gave me customers. Then you have companies like Cabelas buying ranch land to turn into rich man hunting grounds, can't wait till they have to tell their out of state buyers they won't be able to guarentee a tag.
Not to mention the land owners that double dip by leasing prime elk habitat, not grazing their cattle on it (why not overgraze the state land for our cattle!) and then still drawing from the BMA pool leaving the public a portion of their property that is a field where the elk are only at during the night.
This hurts the DYI the most and the local economies, I guess the Winnett bar will have to raise beer prices!
I rarely run into hunters in the field. Last year we were the only camp for 5 miles any direction. This is good to keep outfitters from taking advantage the state providing business for them. Wish in my industry the state gave me customers. Then you have companies like Cabelas buying ranch land to turn into rich man hunting grounds, can't wait till they have to tell their out of state buyers they won't be able to guarentee a tag.
Not to mention the land owners that double dip by leasing prime elk habitat, not grazing their cattle on it (why not overgraze the state land for our cattle!) and then still drawing from the BMA pool leaving the public a portion of their property that is a field where the elk are only at during the night.
This hurts the DYI the most and the local economies, I guess the Winnett bar will have to raise beer prices!
