|
Author
|
Topic: Aerial gunning in S.D. gone??
|
Wily E
unknown comic
|
posted June 05, 2011 06:29 AM
On the topic of SD losing it's aerial hunting program, let's start here .....
SD State Statute 40 – 36 – 1. Department of Game, Fish, and Parks to cooperate with federal agency in control of injurious wild animals. The Department of Game, Fish, and Parks shall cooperate and enter into cooperative agreements with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service or any other agency in the control and disposition of coyotes, feral dogs, fox, prairie dogs, and other wild animals in this state that are injurious to livestock, poultry, game, land, and the public health.
I'd say that's pretty clear.
Wildlife Services Aerial Hunting Program in South Dakota and Why Funding for the Aerial Program Was Lost
A letter dated April 20, 201, signed by GF&P Secretary Jeff Vonk, was sent to Bill Clay, Deputy Director of Wildlife Services in Washington, DC in regards to the loss of Federal funding for WS aerial hunting program in South Dakota. This was without question the most unprofessional letter I have seen between two agencies in my career and it’s just one of many examples of how this program has been mismanaged by GF&P. Keep in mind that State statute 40-36-1 mandates GF&P to “cooperate” with other agencies and enter into “cooperative agreements” with those agencies. Jeff Vonk’s letter states, “I must say that I continue to be extremely disappointed by your decision to completely eliminate your part of our partnership” and “South Dakota producers have received very little aerial predator control service this year, and now WS has decided to completely leave the state”.
I'd say it's pretty clear that GF&P secretary Jeff Vonk is accusing WS of "deciding to leave" the SD ADC program.
The reason SD lost their Federal funding was because our Federal funds were still considered an “earmark” and congress cut all earmarks. There was no decision on the part of Wildlife Services to cut our funding, congress made that decision. That is a fact.
In a Briefing Statement entitled Wildlife Damage Management Program Restructuring that was sent out by GF&P in Nov. 10, 2008, states “A cooperative program agreement between GF&P and USDA Wildlife Services was developed and signed in September 2008. This partnership will “protect” the federal funds in future years because they will now be part of the USDA annual operating budget instead of an annual ear mark”.
The only question that should be on the table is who was responsible for assuring that SD’s Federal WS “earmarked” appropriation would become part of Wildlife Services direct operational budget?
Prior to these recent Federal budget cuts, WS representatives told GF&P administration repeatedly that they needed to contact their congressional delegation to have SD’s earmarked Federal funds placed into Wildlife Services direct operational budget. USDA/APHIS/WS cannot lobby for funding for South Dakota. It was GF&P and other SD Stakeholders responsibility to ensure that our “earmarked funds” would become part of Wildlife Services operating budget.
It’s not like GF&P didn’t understand that SD's Federal ADC funds were threatened to be cut. In a recent GF&P document entitled “Animal Damage Control Program Reorganization” it states, “Over the past two years, there have been significant changes in federal grant-in-aid allocations through this program and Wildlife Services is no longer able to provide dollars directly to the state to fund the ADC Program. These changes were brought about in large part due to the efforts of the US Congress to eliminate ‘non-federal pass through funds’ (commonly referred to as ‘ear marks’) in the federal budget”. As a result of the change, to the manner in which federal funds are appropriated, GF&P was compelled to enter into a cooperative agreement with USDA APHIS Wildlife Services to ensure that federal funding would be made available in future years to assist in the delivery of important ADC predator control services. Under this cooperative agreement, Wildlife Services funds and manages the aerial predator control component of the ADC program while GF&P continues to provide predator and nuisance animal 'ground operation services'.
I'd say that pretty much proves that GF&P knew these funds were threatened to be cut.
If GF&P had been successful in lobbying to have these Federal funds placed in WS operational budget then had WS taken a 10% cut nationwide, SD’s Federal funds should have only been cut by 10% instead of losing all their Federal funds.
Stop and think about this, why would WS come to SD, sign a cooperative agreement with GF&P, move staff and their families, set up operations, then just “decide” to pull out and move again? It takes a real stretch of the imagination to believe that particularly in contrast to how hard WS has worked to provide a high quality ADC service to the livestock producers in this state. I just wish I knew whether GF&P not lobbying to get SD’s Federal “earmarked” ADC funds into WS direct operational budget was another oversight on their part or whether it was intentional.
Jeff Vonk’s letter goes on to say, “I now believe that signing the MOU with WS was a mistake based on false promises”.
First off, GF&P is mandated by law to enter into agreements with other Federal agencies as shown above. Second, as GF&P was reducing ADC services 30% statewide during their recent ADC / WDM restructuring effort (without a corresponding 30% reduction in income to justify it), WS was obtaining additional Federal funds for SD through ATOC, which is the Federal WS aviation training facility, for a new $206,000 Top Cub airplane and to hire two full time gunners for SD at a cost of $100,000. These funds were above and beyond the normal WS “earmarked” appropriation of $415,000 to SD’s program for a total Federal contribution of $721,000 to the SD ADC program for FY “10”.
As a perfect example of WS commitment to our ADC program, during the ADC / WDM restructuring effort, GF&P fired the ADC trapper in Perkins Co. Wildlife Services turned around and picked him up as a gunner now GF&P wants people to think they are more concerned about the loss of the aerial hunting program in SD than WS?? Yeh, right!
Jeff Vonk’s letter goes on to suggest that “South Dakota producers have received very little aerial predator control service this year” which is incredibly misleading. Prior to the loss of our Federal funding, WS expanded their aerial hunting operation east of the river which meant that WS was trying to cover the entire state with one plane. WS was in the process of trying to obtain another plane (surplus from the border patrol) to station east of the Missouri River that would meet the Federal aerial hunting safety standards which could have been used seasonally under contract. At the same time, the Perkins Co. plane was being refurbished and this took longer than anyone had expected. Safety is job one with Wildlife Services when it comes to aerial hunting. Let me add that our WS pilot is the most effective and efficient aerial hunting pilot I have ever worked with and I have worked with some good pilots. Not once in two years did they lose a coyote for me that they made a pass on. Contrast that with some private contract pilots working for predator control districts that are satisfied to kill one coyote out of a pair.
In FY “10”, WS killed 2,275 coyotes in Western SD by aerial hunting. In FY “09” and FY “08”, GF&P took 2,243 and 1,538 respectively in the entire state by aerial hunting. Those are the facts.
Now thanks to GF&P unwillingness to “cooperate” with WS and secure our Federal funds, there is a good chance we will lose the best pilot we ever had. There is no question that the relationship between WS and GF&P has been antagonistic in this state and the letter above is a perfect example of why.
Don't suppose anyone needs to wonder why I don't work for GF&P anymore?
I won't apologize for having a low tolerance level for the mismanagement of the ADC / WDM program in SD and how that has led to a corresponding increase in livestock losses. My devotion has always been with the livestock industry in this state rather than protecting a system that places personal agendas ahead of state mandated responsibilities.
My post at the beginning of this thread was GF&P grounds for recently forcing me to resign. So much for the first amendment. Incidentally, that post came from my office in my home, my personal computer, and my own time.
As always, I will accept any and all consequences for stating the truth.
~SH~
[ June 05, 2011, 08:36 AM: Message edited by: Wily E ]
IP: Logged
|
|
3 Toes
El Guapo
Member # 1327
|
posted June 05, 2011 07:22 AM
Holy Batshit Huber! Sorry to hear it.
--------------------
Violence may not be the best option....
But it is still an option.
Posts: 1034 | From: out yonder | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted June 05, 2011 08:01 AM
Beyond, sorry to hear it! I hope things improve.
gh/lb
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
nd coyote killer
HUNTMASTER PRO STAFF
Member # 40
|
posted June 06, 2011 12:27 PM
Definetly their loss!!!
--------------------
"Sure are cocky for a starving pilgrim" - Bear Claw
Posts: 385 | From: On a hill | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
JeremyKS
Knows what it's all about
Member # 736
|
posted June 06, 2011 04:34 PM
Scott,
Sorry to hear this. Good luck in whatever direction you head.
Jeremy Gugelmeyer
Posts: 369 | From: Texas panhandle | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
UTcaller
NEVADA NIGHT FIGHTER
Member # 8
|
posted June 07, 2011 12:43 PM
Yeah really sorry to hear that Scott.Definitely their loss..Good Luck
Good Hunting Chad
[ June 07, 2011, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: UTcaller ]
Posts: 1612 | From: Utah | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paul Melching
Radical Operator Forum "You won't get past the front gate"
Member # 885
|
posted June 07, 2011 01:00 PM
I wish you ggod fortune in all your future endeavors. Definately their loss big time.
Paul
--------------------
Those who value security over liberty soon will have neither !
Posts: 4188 | From: The forest ! north of the dez. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted June 07, 2011 02:05 PM
Scott, I told you more than a year ago, (maybe two years ago?) when that previous situation was happening to hire a decent lawyer and SUE THE DEPARTMENT!
ABSOLUTELY! DO IT!
gh/lb
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
DAA
Utah/Promoted WESTERN REGIONAL Hunt Director
Member # 11
|
posted June 07, 2011 02:43 PM
That's just the shits Scott. Plain, pure and simple.
I know you'll do well in any direction you choose to go from here though. No doubt in my mind!
- DAA
--------------------
"Oh yeah, they're gonna talk to you, and talk to you, and talk to you about individual freedom, but they see a free individual, it's gonna scare 'em." -- George Hanson, Easy Rider, 1969.
Rocky Mountain Varmint Hunter
Posts: 2676 | From: Salt Lake City, UT | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wily E
unknown comic
|
posted June 12, 2011 08:57 AM
Here's proof positive that the newly restructured ADC / WDM program was a disaster before we lost the Federal aerial hunting program in the state.
From our Annual reports....
July 1, 2007 - June 30, 2008
South Dakota Property Losses - $161,343
July 1, 2008 - June 30, 2009
South Dakota Property Losses - $255,670
July 1, 2009 - June 30, 2010
South Dakota Property Losses - $389,674
A 141% increase in reported property losses in SD since the restructuring of the ADC program.
The destruction of this program is absolutely undeniable thanks to recent decisions made by those in positions of leadership.
Allow me to explain these figures above.
1. These are only the verified losses that we confirmed. Actual losses are much higher.
2. These are the losses that occurred in the presence of a mismanaged ADC program with a 30% reduction in ADC services. Although inadequate, if we didn't provide the level of service we are providing, losses would continue on these complaints. The limited amount of work we were able to do prevents further losses from occuring.
3. These losses occurred in the presence of an aerial hunting program which planned to expand operations into eastern SD. In areas where aerial hunting is effective in reducing predation, livestock losses will triple as a result of a lack of aerial hunting.
4. Producers who receive poor or limited service, due to the limited availability of hours to work complaints or due to inefficiencies in the ability to address complaints, will not request service again which adds to the losses that go unreported.
So, even though these verified property losses are inaccurate and incomplete in comparison to the actual losses that occurred, they show a trend in increased losses due to the mismanagement of the program.
RUN MESSENGER RUN, DELIVER THIS MESSAGE!
~SH~
[ June 15, 2011, 10:38 AM: Message edited by: Wily E ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted June 12, 2011 09:40 AM
Sorry to see and hear about this, Scott.
On a brighter note, if this were the Kansas Department of Wildlife & Parks, they'd be going gang busters right now to market the exploding coyote numbers as told by these increased loss figures as the great way for landowners to make money off wildlife through "ag tourism" by selling access to their ground to hunt coyotes.
Gov't is a fickle bitch.
[ June 12, 2011, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: Cdog911 ]
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wily E
unknown comic
|
posted June 12, 2011 12:38 PM
C Dog,
I know different state governments would put a different spin on this for different reasons. Different states may very well promote recreational coyote hunting as a solution rather than the need for a professional, accountable ADC program to address these complaints. Both have been tried and tested and there is a good reason most states have a well managed program in place. There is also a good reason why most states are under USDA/APHIS/WS.
As far as recreational hunters solving these problems (I know you are not promoting this), if one simply looks at the fact that the Midwest coyote calling event, with it's 130 teams consisting of mostly above average skilled coyote hunters only kill 30% of the coyotes they see during the contest, the typical recreational coyote hunter will contribute very little to solving coyote predation problems. Most recreational coyote hunters want to hunt where the coyotes are the thickest rather than hunting where the problems are occurring.
I realize that ADC men are not born with the knowledge required of the job but most good ADC programs have experienced men training the new guys rather than having the misguided belief that any recreational coyote trapper or caller can become a professional ADC man without proper training.
It's funny how the average recreational coyote hunter is right there to create the image that they can assist with these coyote problems just for land access. I know the skill levels of the average coyote hunter and I know the skill levels of the average coyote that survived past the first calling season. Most recreational coyote hunters make the predation problem worse by creating call shy coyotes. Heck, even some ADC men I know would rather work cattle ground with lots of coyotes in the summer months rather than spending time chasing a pair or two within 4 - 6 miles of sheep and actually do some good. Yet another problem associated with mis-management that doesn't understand the difference.
We used to have a well managed, professional, accountable, cost effective, and efficient ADC program. Now we have a few trained ADC / WDM specialists without adequate hours to address the number of complaints they have in districts too large for them to to cover which results in stress overload, we have untrained newly hired WDM specialists that can't handle complaints efficiently because they haven't been properly trained which creates repeat visits to the same complaints, and we have company "yes men" that don't care how much livestock loss occurs because being a "good little soldier" pays the same as caring about livestock and property losses that are occuring as a result of poor management decisions.
Now would mentioning this be considered having a negative attitude ("bitching") or just someone stating facts about needed improvement in ADC management decisions? Depends on where you sit I guess.
If you still have my private email address, send me your snail mail address so I can send you a copy of the Cook Ranch Study. I have a copy to send you.
~SH~
[ June 13, 2011, 03:18 AM: Message edited by: Wily E ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted June 12, 2011 01:13 PM
Keep fighting the good fight, Scott.
Say, could you nudge your buddy to send me a couple group photos of our time in Nevada? He said he would but it hasn't happened.
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted June 12, 2011 05:34 PM
Scott,
If it makes you feel any better - and I doubt it will but will post this so others can see how the gov't spends and saves money - I've spent the past three days dealing with serious changes to my own job. Was advised Thursday afternoon that city mail routes had been restructured and I am losing my route assignment that I've had for the past 8 years. Only choices are to go to another city and commute fifty to a hundred miles one way five days a week or accept a part-time position with no guarantee of hours beyond 2 hours a week. I'd be getting a LOT more than that, but here's where the dumb fucker factor goes through the roof.
The Postal Service, in its myopically limited infinite ignorance, determined that they needed to reduce the number of routes in every city by cannibalizing one route, adding that time to other routes to round them all out within ten minutes over 8 hours, and in doing so, eliminated my route. Now, after all the data moving, and brain farting, they managed to add a quarter hour of OVERTIME to four routes, while at the same time reducing my route only by 50 minutes - less than an hour. In trade for that 50 minutes a day, three of us will convert to a new status that gives us about a buck and a half per hour raise to cover the 5,000 hours of uncovered time that resulted from their actions. Without getting into all the lurid details, the government is tickled shitless that they saved themselves 50 minutes a day off the clock, but have yet to realize that they're paying out almost four hours a day at time and a half to people who have just gotten a buck and a half raise per hour to do it. They saved that fifty minutes and will spend tens of thousands of dollars a year in extra wages thinking that they've reduced the amount charged against labor costs. In any other company, that 5,000 hours on the clock would mean you hire two more fulltime people at 2080 hours of regular rate pay a year, and give the rest to a temp. Nope, in the USPS they give you a raise and make you work a bunch of it at time and a half because they think it will save them money. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Your former employer isn't the only doofus behind a gov't desk.
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted June 12, 2011 06:39 PM
Protect us from government. I don't have any problem believing the above post.
gh/lb
edit: and make no mistake, Obama and his progressives are behind these brilliant concepts.
[ June 12, 2011, 06:41 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
TA17Rem
Hello, I'm the legendary Tim Anderson, Field Marshall, Southern Minneesota Sector
Member # 794
|
posted June 12, 2011 07:50 PM
Lance are'nt they also saveing on one less vehicle to maintain or pay milage on????
--------------------
What if I told you, the left wing and right wing both belong to same bird!
Posts: 5064 | From: S.D. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wily E
unknown comic
|
posted June 13, 2011 03:51 AM
I am cognizant of the era we are in of downsizing government programs. As a conservative, I support downsizing government and justifying government programs within the limits of the laws as long as everyone is privy to the facts they need in order for them to make an informed decision on the issue.
That's not what this was about. This was about placing personal agendas ahead of state mandated responsibilities.
Considering the magnitude of this issue, done correctly you would go through the process of considering the collective ideas of the men in the program with many years of experience. All the retired ADC guys I talked to also knew this idea would fail. The process should also consider the thoughts and ideas of the ag producers and citizens we serve. Neither happened. It was "this is what we are going to do and if you don't like it you have other options".
Then when it didn't work, as we knew it wouldn't, they start looking for scapegoats to blame and woe to anyone who didn't blindly support the cause.
I'm not so naive as to realize there is always going to be problems with any government program. There is always going to be many ideas on how to best accomplish an end result.
I would place far more emphasis on experience rather than the opinion of those who have never actually done the work.
~SH~
IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted June 13, 2011 05:01 AM
Don't want to highjack Scott's thread, but where Tim said,
"are'nt they also saveing on one less vehicle to maintain or pay milage on???? "
Actually, no. Of the five routes, one is what we call a "walk out", meaning that right now, the carrier walks the entire route - no vehicle - leaves the office and his first delivery is across the street from the PO, walks all day to his last delivery across the street from the first delivery. With these new changes, that route becomes a "walk and loop" where that carrier will now drive to various park points along that same route where he'll reload his satchel every 40 houses or so and walk a loop from and back to the truck. Considering that our mail trucks only average about 8 mpg, I would have actually converted another route to walk out and lkeft that one as it is and eliminated the use of 2 vehicles, but for some reason, they want to eliminate the green "relay boxes" in the neighborhoods rather than eliminate gas guzzling mail trucks.
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted June 13, 2011 05:35 AM
quote:
but for some reason, they want to eliminate the green "relay boxes" in the neighborhoods rather than eliminate gas guzzling mail trucks.
I had to chuckle at that one. A friggin' tragedy like so many bureaucratic policies, but tears won't come.
Scott, you have my best wishes. You know, when I retired, I gave almost a days notice while cleaning out my desk. Fed up. Never a regret. I know you are too young for a solution like that, but I too know what it's like to have to work with assholes.
gh....lb
edit: incidentally, my hero is the cartoon character Dilbert
[ June 13, 2011, 05:38 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lone Howl
Free Trial Platinum Member & part-time language police
Member # 29
|
posted June 13, 2011 09:25 AM
I love Dilbert! Reminds me of my workplace!
(this is a useless post in this thread but all I got)
Mark
--------------------
When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty.
Posts: 2083 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
tlbradford
Rimfires are MAGIC on COYOTES! If you do your part
Member # 1232
|
posted June 14, 2011 03:23 PM
I wish you the best of luck Scott and hope you land on your feet in a better position.
--------------------
"Dan Carey ain't that special" - LB
Posts: 423 | From: Spokane Valley, WA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wily E
unknown comic
|
posted July 12, 2011 09:24 PM
GF&P keeps spinning the blame for a problem they created themselves. More of the same deceptive antics that many of us have come to expect from the administration of GF&P.
On the loss of the Federal Aerial Hunting Program GF&P is telling the public....
"Congress placed a moratorium on all ear marks, and it turns out, South Dakota's aerial predator control program had not yet become part of APHIS's national operations budget," Fisk said. "Our agency is very frustrated that it did not become part of the national operations budget as we were promised."
Listen closely Keith because I know you are reading this. GF&P's knew those funds were still considered an earmark and they knew they were threatened to be cut and I have the documentation to prove it. Pretty hard to change their story when they already put it in writing. GF&P administration was told by WS that GF&P and others in SD that had a stake in SD's ADC program needed to lobby to have those "earmarked" funds placed into WS direct operational budget. DID THEY??? If so, where's the proof??? If they did not, WHY NOT??? GF&P should have realized that WS cannot lobby for their own funding. It was our responsibility to secure those federal funds so they would be protected, not WS. That action would have been consistent with a mandate that directs GF&P to cooperate with other agencies.
It's time for GF&P to accept responsibility for not assuring our Federal funding or was that the intent since GF&P was already reducing ADC services 30% statewide and the relation between GF&P and WS was antagonistic at best?
Who do you think GF&P is kidding by trying to create the impression that ADC services are important in SD??? If ADC services were as important in SD as WDM, we wouldn't have had ADC services cut by 30% would we? It's not like we had a 30% reduction in ADC income to justify a 30% reduction in ADC services as many had been led to believe.
According to the written word again, the surcharge on license sales that funds the WDM program generated $900,000 for WDM yet GF&P spent $1.3 million on WDM services. That means they kicked in $400,000 for WDM but they can't kick in the same amount for ADC??? Hmmm??? Looks like an obvious anti - ADC agenda to me.
Looking for justification? Try SDCL 41 - 6 - 70.1. We saved $300,000 when GF&P took over hunting and fishing license sales from the counties. The first thing listed in this statute for any surplus funds beyond the costs of license sales is a donation to the ADC fund. Those additional funds were not used for the sale of licenses as you claimed at our meeting in RC. GF&P had already showed their cards of a $300,000 savings ($200,000 and 2 FTEs) when they were challenged to defend their claim that they could sell licenses cheaper than the counties. Can't change your story now to fit the situation.
Nope, sorry, the diversion of P/R funds dog won't hunt either. I have a copy of the actual US F&WS audit. The amount doesn't matter. ADC being funded by sportsmans dollars is either a diversion of P/R funds or it's not. According to our own F&WS audit, it's not.
Talk to the states that are contracting with WS for wildlife protection. How about coding 1/2 of all the hours flown in Butte, Harding, Perkins, Meade, and Fall River counties to antelope fawn protection in the months of April, May, and June? If GF&P doesn't believe coyotes can keep a supressed antelope population from recovering, I suggest they research the study conducted on the Pathfinder ranch in WY.
How about coding all beaver work to WDM since beaver east of the Missouri River are a state managed wildlife species with a season? Never mind, that got shot down too didn't it??
It's easy to find ways to fund the ADC program unless someone has an agenda that is opposite of that goal. The truth is going to come out Keith.
Just like it did regarding why Region 1 went from 7 ADC men to 4 by claiming they couldn't find the non-ADC hours yet they were paying seasonals to spray weeds, sign Walk-In areas, and to GPS prairie dog towns. Region 1 even hired another biologist to do the same game surveys we could have been doing during that same time period. Not enough non-ADC hours? Yet another GF&P lie, yes I said lie (intent to mislead), to justify getting rid of those who stood with the livestock producers against the efforts to kill the ADC program. I don't use the word "lie" unless I have proof. The agenda was pretty obvious when GF&P put a man back in Harding Co. within a year.
I'm glad I'm on the side of the livestock industry in this state no matter how much it cost me personally because the truth will come out.
Isn't it funny how GF&P can spend $13M on an elaborate outdoor center while our state legislature struggles with how to fund our children's education and ADC services are being cut 30%? GF&P can spend $8.2M on land that could have been spent leasing over 1 million acres of Walk-In hunting for 10 years. I can't believe the sportsman aren't up in arms over such disregard for their money. GF&P has money to burn but they will stand by and watch as livestock producers lose their livelihood because they don't believe in Predator Control. What a sad state of affairs.
Why not come clean with the real agenda here Keith? GF&P administration does not believe in predator control, period. Tell the truth for once and quit being a "rubber stamp" for an obvious anti-ADC agenda. Nobody is fooled anymore.
The loss of Federal dollars didn't justify the 30% reduction in ADC services as you claimed. I have the figures. It costed GF&P $112,000 per pilot annually to maintain 2 full time airplanes. That covers annuals, aviation fuel at current prices, hanger rent, and pilot's salaries. In addition, we supplied the gunners which amounts to 500 hours annually per gunner. That's 1000 hours for two gunners. That comes to around $32,500 in gunner expense. We are now up to $256,500. Then we contracted east river for 150 hours at $140 per hour. That's $21,000 plus 150 hours to furnish the gunners at $4,875. We are now up to $281,275. Throw in administrative costs and unforeseen costs and we are up to $300,000 to run the aerial program like we used to. So don't tell people we could run the aerial program for $200,000 because it cost us $300,000 when we ran it. If you don't know, ask someone who does. That would be a real nice change of pace.
Look at the history of our budget. For many years we received $300,000 of Federal dollars which would have run the aerial hunting program.
Notice how none of our guys are coming to defend the anti-ADC agenda of GF&P?? You can't even get your "company men" to defend it during their county commission meetings when they are challenged on how GF&P spends their money. I'm glad I don't have to explain to a county why they are not even getting $1 in services back for every dollar they contribute when GF&P is matching those dollars 2 to 1. I'm also glad that I don't have to explain to those counties why Pennington County is getting over $30 in servce for every dollar they contribute to pay for urban nuisance animals when those funds are generated from livestock numbers.
If you would like to debate the merits of the information I have presented here, I welcome you to produce anything to the contrary.
Regards!
~SH~
[ July 14, 2011, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: Wily E ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted July 13, 2011 07:00 AM
Scott, you always, always do your homework. Anybody would think twice to enter into a debate and we shall see if your friend Keith will respond, in which case, we wish him luck. What's his full name and title?
It's a good fight, Amigo. Make'em squirm.
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31462 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted July 13, 2011 02:59 PM
When Dwight D. "Ike" Eisenhower was seven years old, his mother took him from his home town - my home town - of Abilene, KS, to Council Grove, KS for a family get together. Once there, young Ike had a terrible time with a large gander that repeatedly run him back to the house when he went to play. His uncle handed him an old corn broom from which all the bristles had been trimmed down to the stump, which Ike promptly used to educate that goose. In a later interview, he told of how that experience taught him a valuable lesson that he referred to often in life as a West Point Cadet, as Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Forces, and as President, that lesson being, "Never engage an adversary except from a position of strength."
Any time I even so much as contemplate challenging you, I am reminded of this quote and how you, whether you are aware of this saying or not, exemplify it very clearly. Best of luck. Sounds like someone needs to blow the whistle.
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
BIG bobcat
PAKMAN
Member # 3863
|
posted July 15, 2011 08:46 PM
I'm sure everyone knows that there are two sides to every story. So far we have heard Wily E's, but I wonder why Wily E doesn't work for the GFP anymore, hmmmmmm, think about that for a bit! I heard that Wildlife Services screwed up bigtime and now are tucking their tail and running. Word on the street is that they are no longer in SD. Never heard a work in the media, just from the neighbors!
Posts: 2 | From: Union Center | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
