Visit the Team Iceshanty Proshop
I advocate that the Bull Trout is not an endangered species, it is being used as a way to eradicate other non-native species just because there is a cynical group that feels that all streams, rivers and lakes in the West and mountains should be reverted back to total natural environments for their fishing pleasure.
His manager said they don't generally stock brook trout west of the Divide because they will interbreed with bull trout. The former fisheries manager said "Did you ever hear the one about the horse and the barn door?"
try not being so self serving and viewing the world how it somehow makes your own world better...jokes on you..all the crap you b***h about is your own judgement.
just cause you can't catch and eat a certain species to your liking..you wanna destroy 1000's of years of natural balance
f off..its a part of a balanced ecosystem...native species deserve repect
With all due respect CCC, we live in a democratic republic in which our viewpoints are supposed to drive policy. So yes, I will happily express my viewpoint when appropriate and will smile and point to the First Amendment in my defense. You seem to imply that we must accept the viewpoints of those in power...I imagine Jefferson, Adams, Washington and the like would have something to say about that. You call it a "spiel," I call it responsible citizenship. Please re-read my original post. Not once did I advocate the destruction of "1000s of years of natural balance." In fact, I wanted clarification regarding the protection of the bull trout and why our state's policies appear to be contradictory in that regard. The post is literally about the stocking of bull trout after all. And yes, I prefer to eat perch over rainbow, but again, you're woefully off-base regarding my palate. I'm fortunate enough to live and fish in an area where we can harvest one bull a year and find them to be absolutely fantastic table fare. I'd love for them to restored, I merely wanted to know why our approach to their restoration appears half-a**ed. Your beloved Georgetown is plum full of non-native species. Are you showing the natives "respect" by promoting the destruction of the kokanee, brook trout, and rainbows?
Here is a brief run down of the officers.TU National President Christopher Wood has donated to Democratic Senatorial candidates and was a member of President Obama’s 2008 Department of Agriculture Transition Team. The Associated Press reported that Wood, a high-ranking policy staffer in the U.S. Forest Service during President Bill Clinton’s time in office, was initially favored to be President Obama’s nominee to head the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service. Wood was reportedly denied the post because he was a registered lobbyist from 2002 through 2007. (Obama had pledged not to nominate lobbyists to government posts.)TU’s Vice President for Western Conservation, Robert Masonis, previously worked for the environmentalist group American Rivers; TU’s head lobbyist, Steve Moyer, previously worked for the environmentalist National Wildlife Federation.Trustee Walter Minnick served from 2009-2011 as a U.S. Representative from Idaho as a Democrat.Trustee Kai Anderson is a lobbyist for Cassidy and Associates, representing several solar energy firms, the Pew Charitable Trusts, and the environmentalist Resources Legacy Fund. Before joining Cassidy, Anderson was Deputy Chief of Staff to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada.Trustee Michael Dombeck was Director of the United States Forest Service during the Clinton administration; Wood was his communications aide.Other trustees, including Nancy McKinnon, Valerie Colas-Ohrstrom, and Paul Doscher, have worked for or served on the boards of environmental groups including the Nature Conservancy, the Black Rock Forest Consortium, and the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests.
A conservation organization is comprised of and funded by people with experience in conservation, outdoor recreation and environmental activism? OMG...I’m SHOCKED. Are you suggesting that those funding oil, gas, logging and mining interests in opposition to conservation are not employed by and/or invested in those industries? And, the latter is okay but the former is not?
without getting into politics...which have been explained here very well by others.. my point was that each side of government has its own agenda and lobby and the manipulate the perception of the public to support the agenda no matter the side of the issue....my point is all life has meaning...in balance....my response about the bull trout was not based on political issues..just my opinion that life is needs to be respected..whether its rainbows.....bulls...p erch... we messed so much stuff up..no we have overpopulations of envasive species...management issues...yes the earth's resources are blessed..they build our homes and feed our families....but all needs to be harvested and viewed with the fact that its all connected and our actions matter....finally..... . i guess i could have initially said bull trout are fish too....apologies for that....being buzzed makes the words come out with a little added snark and without buffer...
RuralMT: Next time you see biologist friend, maybe ask him if it's politics, logistics, finances, or fear of an misinformed public that keeps the state from experimenting with bully stockings.
somewhat founded fear that if fishing opened up in certain areas, people might get the idea that the fish have recovered everywhere