Nameless Range
Well-known member
First, Mr. Gianforte seems like a nice guy. He comes off as someone who genuinely loves the outdoors and loves Montana. I appreciate Randy's ability to interview him cordially and to have a productive discussion with him.
I was glad to hear him support Stream Access.
I was glad to hear him say he does not support the transfer or public lands (sort of) and in a recent statement outside of this podcast said he does not support the transfer, "right now."
I like his attitude of focusing on ideas and common goals as opposed to labels.
That said, he could not be more wrong on so much. He is not alone in this, and I'm sure his opponent, Steve Bullock will say things I disagree with too. My thoughts:
1. Complaining about Federal Management of lands without addressing the funding shortages federal agencies face is disingenuous.
2. In spite of the fact that Region 1 met it's timber harvest goals in 2014, discussing the loss of logging jobs and implying it is the government's fault without even bringing up the expiration of the Softwood Tariff reeks of agenda. Also, all this talk of timber treatment is a bunch of wonderful feel-goodery but no one ever addresses the chief concern - Who will pay for it?
3. Logging/thinning/treating the backcountry will do little to reduce the amount of acres burned every summer. Contemporary Forestry Science and Statistics back this up. Just ask Canada about the country that burned up there in 2015.
4. He says that people in charge of State Agencies are driven by ideology - he has said he will change this by appointing a head of industry as director of the DEQ, a landowner in charge of DNRC, etc. When a fox guards a hen house, does it have an ideology?
5. The primary driver of where Elk winter at our latitude is elevation. There is a strong correlation between elevation and aspect and private vs public ownership. Higher = more likely to be public, and less likely to be wintering grounds. Let's be honest about that fact.
6. He claims FWP doesn't care about landowners. There are about 100 pages of discussion on Hunt Talk that are incredibly convincing that they care too much about land owners. He is under the impression that our EMP objectives are based on science, which is utterly false. According to him, if I think Shoulder Seasons are unethical I am an environmental extremist. He said that. Who knew Hunt Talk was so full of environmental extremists.
7. Lastly, because my lunch break is nearly over and I need to get back to my culture of enforcement and not customer service, I think this entire attitude that public employees revel in inefficiency and enforcement stems from an ignorance about what we do.
Thanks for doing the podcast.
I was glad to hear him support Stream Access.
I was glad to hear him say he does not support the transfer or public lands (sort of) and in a recent statement outside of this podcast said he does not support the transfer, "right now."
I like his attitude of focusing on ideas and common goals as opposed to labels.
That said, he could not be more wrong on so much. He is not alone in this, and I'm sure his opponent, Steve Bullock will say things I disagree with too. My thoughts:
1. Complaining about Federal Management of lands without addressing the funding shortages federal agencies face is disingenuous.
2. In spite of the fact that Region 1 met it's timber harvest goals in 2014, discussing the loss of logging jobs and implying it is the government's fault without even bringing up the expiration of the Softwood Tariff reeks of agenda. Also, all this talk of timber treatment is a bunch of wonderful feel-goodery but no one ever addresses the chief concern - Who will pay for it?
3. Logging/thinning/treating the backcountry will do little to reduce the amount of acres burned every summer. Contemporary Forestry Science and Statistics back this up. Just ask Canada about the country that burned up there in 2015.
4. He says that people in charge of State Agencies are driven by ideology - he has said he will change this by appointing a head of industry as director of the DEQ, a landowner in charge of DNRC, etc. When a fox guards a hen house, does it have an ideology?
5. The primary driver of where Elk winter at our latitude is elevation. There is a strong correlation between elevation and aspect and private vs public ownership. Higher = more likely to be public, and less likely to be wintering grounds. Let's be honest about that fact.
6. He claims FWP doesn't care about landowners. There are about 100 pages of discussion on Hunt Talk that are incredibly convincing that they care too much about land owners. He is under the impression that our EMP objectives are based on science, which is utterly false. According to him, if I think Shoulder Seasons are unethical I am an environmental extremist. He said that. Who knew Hunt Talk was so full of environmental extremists.
7. Lastly, because my lunch break is nearly over and I need to get back to my culture of enforcement and not customer service, I think this entire attitude that public employees revel in inefficiency and enforcement stems from an ignorance about what we do.
Thanks for doing the podcast.
