RMEF vs NMWF Re: Valles Caldera

[JFWRC]

Lines are being drawn-Will be decided in the US House.....For Sure,

Oppose S. 285: Valles Caldera National Preserve Management Act

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation is among 25 outdoor conservation organizations that remain opposed to Senate bill 285 which would designate the VCNP in north-central New Mexico as a unit of the National Park System (NPS).

The New Mexico Wildlife Federation (NMWF) is circulating supposed ?FACTS?
that are inaccurate regarding S. 285, such as:

HUNTING & FISHING GUARANTEED BY LAW:
This is NOT a given. The NPS, which prohibits hunting in its parks, allows hunting in most preserves but the bill language still allows it to be shut down. The NPS or the Secretary of Interior may, at any time, elect to terminate any or all hunting on the VCNP. While a recent amendment strengthened language to that effect, the bill states the Secretary may still implement ?regulations closing areas within the Preserve to hunting, fishing, or trapping.? S. 285 does not provide any long-term guarantee toward sustained hunting. Language also states management and operations of the VCNP may be coordinated with the Bandelier National Monument where hunting is prohibited.

VCNP TAGS GO TO OUT-OF-STATE HUNTERS:
VCNP wildlife officials maintain these are blue collar hunting opportunities, not high dollar hunts designed for the rich. The state quota formula remains in place on the VCNP, as across all of New Mexico (84% to residents, 10% to residents or nonresidents with an outfitter and 6% to nonresidents without an outfitter), as an effective method offering equitable hunting opportunity for the average sportsman and woman.

VCNP USED AS ?ELITIST? SYSTEM TO BENEFIT RMEF & OTHER ORGANIZATIONS:
The NMWF seems to be trying to create a perception that RMEF is selling hunting tags on the VCNP for its own profit motives. RMEF has a long and proven track record to the contrary. RMEF supports the VCNP by accepting 4 elk and 8 donated turkey tags, placing them up for auction as a fundraising mechanism, and then returned nearly $40,000 to date for on-the-ground VCNP land and wildlife conservation projects.

VCNP IS A FAILED EXPERIMENT
This year?s lottery will raise $320,000. Original legislation called for the VCNP to become financially self-sufficient by raising funds for land and wildlife management. The elk hunting program is a major player in this arena. Elk hunts are lottery based with one lottery ticket for a bull/either sex hunt costing $30 apiece or $20 per ticket for antlerless-only hunts. (Antlerless hunts are available only for New Mexico
residents.) There is a limit of 20 tickets per hunt code with people entering as many of the 14 hunt codes as preferred. The average purchase is 3.5 tickets per customer. (Again, the 84%-10%-6% resident formula from above applies.)

Additionally, habitat management is not a priority for NPS. It lives by a ?let it be and nature will manage? mantra, which will not serve the VCNP well if we are to expect it to remain open access for sportsmen and active hunting.

Under current law, the VCNP will become another unit of Santa Fe National Forest, allowing the U.S. Forest Service to become the managing agency.
This is the preferred rout as the USFS has vast experience with wildlife and habitat management. While claiming to represent New Mexico sportsmen, the NMWF supports the least appealing option to sportsmen of transferring the Valles Caldera to the National Park System.

Read the bill language here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s285/text

--------------------------------------------

Connect with the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/RMEF1 Twitter - https://twitter.com/RMEF YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/user/elkfoundation
BlogSpot - http://rmefblog.blogspot.com

--------------------------------------------

This e-mail advertisement was sent to XXXXXXXXXX.com. You received this e-mail as a valued supporter of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. If you prefer not to receive e-mail offers like this one from the RMEF in the future, you may Click Here http://newsletter.rmef.org/UC000886NDQ0NzA3.HTML. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation is located at 5705 Grant Creek Rd, Missoula, MT 59808.

 

[mbb]

Hunting is never a given. It can be taken away by the current management. Fires often result in closures by the Forest Service and hardly anyone freaks out when that happens. A Game and Fish Department can shut down hunting and fishing if they so choose. There is nothing special in this language. It's a straw man.

I really don't understand this fear of the Park Service. I haven't seen a specific example where hunting has been curtailed for a suspect reason in an established preserve. And Bandelier's history has nothing at all to do with a new preserve. Bandelier is a monument and was established at a time when elk were extirpated from the area so of course hunting wasn't contemplated. That could actually change if the legislation is altered - a process that would be made easier if the Caldera were a national preserve.

I'm glad some unnamed mystery officials think there are blue collar hunting opportunities on the Caldera, but I don't know many folks who can pay over a thousand dollars to hunt a turkey. Not local New Mexicans. If you want to pay to stay the night in a cabin on the property, great, but not everyone can or wants to.

You sure can't have it both ways: these are either blue collar hunts, or they are being auctioned off for as much money as possible. I also find it interesting that the amount RMEF keeps is missing from the statement, only what is returned. I have a suspicion they are not auctioning these hunting opportunities for free.

Regardless, if anyone thinks $320,000 raised by license auctions is making a dent in the current budget, explain why well over $3 million dollars still has to be appropriated by the federal government. They are not even CLOSE to self-sufficient. A preserve would make the Caldera more open to the public for hunting and fishing, protect the resource, save $1 million and greatly increase the positive economic impact to the local communities. That's what we want. The Forest Service simply can't deliver all that. It's not what they do. They do lots of good things, but not the kind of visitor management the Caldera will require.

Maybe some national organizations don't realize or care what local people and local sportsmen want, but a lot of us know the facts as well as anyone and have much more to lose than just some fun auctions if the land is diminished because then the hunting really will go away.

 

[TOPGUN]

>Hunting is never a given. It
>can be taken away by
>the current management. Fires often
>result in closures by the
>Forest Service and hardly anyone
>freaks out when that happens.
>A Game and Fish Department
>can shut down hunting and
>fishing if they so choose.
>There is nothing special in
>this language. It's a straw
>man.
>
>I really don't understand this fear
>of the Park Service. I
>haven't seen a specific example
>where hunting has been curtailed
>for a suspect reason in
>an established preserve. And Bandelier's
>history has nothing at all
>to do with a new
>preserve. Bandelier is a monument
>and was established at a
>time when elk were extirpated
>from the area so of
>course hunting wasn't contemplated. That
>could actually change if the
>legislation is altered - a
>process that would be made
>easier if the Caldera were
>a national preserve.
>
>I'm glad some unnamed mystery officials
>think there are blue collar
>hunting opportunities on the Caldera,
>but I don't know many
>folks who can pay over
>a thousand dollars to hunt
>a turkey. Not local New
>Mexicans. If you want to
>pay to stay the night
>in a cabin on the
>property, great, but not everyone
>can or wants to.
>
>You sure can't have it both
>ways: these are either blue
>collar hunts, or they are
>being auctioned off for as
>much money as possible. I
>also find it interesting that
>the amount RMEF keeps is
>missing from the statement, only
>what is returned. I have
>a suspicion they are not
>auctioning these hunting opportunities for
>free.
>
>Regardless, if anyone thinks $320,000 raised
>by license auctions is making
>a dent in the current
>budget, explain why well over
>$3 million dollars still has
>to be appropriated by the
>federal government. They are not
>even CLOSE to self-sufficient. A
>preserve would make the Caldera
>more open to the public
>for hunting and fishing, protect
>the resource, save $1 million
>and greatly increase the positive
>economic impact to the local
>communities. That's what we want.
>The Forest Service simply can't
>deliver all that. It's not
>what they do. They do
>lots of good things, but
>not the kind of visitor
>management the Caldera will require.
>
>
>Maybe some national organizations don't realize
>or care what local people
>and local sportsmen want, but
>a lot of us know
>the facts as well as
>anyone and have much more
>to lose than just some
>fun auctions if the land
>is diminished because then the
>hunting really will go away.
>


***Just a quick two part question for you Michelle. Do you hunt and what organization do you represent?

 

[Sierra]

>>Hunting is never a given. It
>>can be taken away by
>>the current management. Fires often
>>result in closures by the
>>Forest Service and hardly anyone
>>freaks out when that happens.
>>A Game and Fish Department
>>can shut down hunting and
>>fishing if they so choose.
>>There is nothing special in
>>this language. It's a straw
>>man.
>>
>>I really don't understand this fear
>>of the Park Service. I
>>haven't seen a specific example
>>where hunting has been curtailed
>>for a suspect reason in
>>an established preserve. And Bandelier's
>>history has nothing at all
>>to do with a new
>>preserve. Bandelier is a monument
>>and was established at a
>>time when elk were extirpated
>>from the area so of
>>course hunting wasn't contemplated. That
>>could actually change if the
>>legislation is altered - a
>>process that would be made
>>easier if the Caldera were
>>a national preserve.
>>
>>I'm glad some unnamed mystery officials
>>think there are blue collar
>>hunting opportunities on the Caldera,
>>but I don't know many
>>folks who can pay over
>>a thousand dollars to hunt
>>a turkey. Not local New
>>Mexicans. If you want to
>>pay to stay the night
>>in a cabin on the
>>property, great, but not everyone
>>can or wants to.
>>
>>You sure can't have it both
>>ways: these are either blue
>>collar hunts, or they are
>>being auctioned off for as
>>much money as possible. I
>>also find it interesting that
>>the amount RMEF keeps is
>>missing from the statement, only
>>what is returned. I have
>>a suspicion they are not
>>auctioning these hunting opportunities for
>>free.
>>
>>Regardless, if anyone thinks $320,000 raised
>>by license auctions is making
>>a dent in the current
>>budget, explain why well over
>>$3 million dollars still has
>>to be appropriated by the
>>federal government. They are not
>>even CLOSE to self-sufficient. A
>>preserve would make the Caldera
>>more open to the public
>>for hunting and fishing, protect
>>the resource, save $1 million
>>and greatly increase the positive
>>economic impact to the local
>>communities. That's what we want.
>>The Forest Service simply can't
>>deliver all that. It's not
>>what they do. They do
>>lots of good things, but
>>not the kind of visitor
>>management the Caldera will require.
>>
>>
>>Maybe some national organizations don't realize
>>or care what local people
>>and local sportsmen want, but
>>a lot of us know
>>the facts as well as
>>anyone and have much more
>>to lose than just some
>>fun auctions if the land
>>is diminished because then the
>>hunting really will go away.
>>
>
>
>***Just a quick two part question
>for you Michelle. Do
>you hunt and what organization
>do you represent?

I would venture to say that "Michelle" belongs to NMWF. They've been flooding these sites to spread their garbage. In my opinion NMWF is worse than PETA. At least PETA doesn't pretend to be pro-hunting. I hope their membership crashes over this fiasco.

 

[TOPGUN]

"I would venture to say that "Michelle" belongs to NMWF. They've been flooding these sites to spread their garbage. In my opinion NMWF is worse than PETA. At least PETA doesn't pretend to be pro-hunting. I hope their membership crashes over this fiasco."


***That was exactly my thoughts when I read her post too!!!

 

[mbb]

Those are my thoughts. I wouldn't say I "belong to" anyone, but to your point NMWF does have many members who both hunt and think a preserve would be the best outcome.

 

[elks96]

Pretty simple to see the more federal control there is the less local control. The feds can not be trusted. They waste money and before you know the whole area could be shut down to everything so they can reintroduce the Mexican wolf.

That area is some amazing land the only reason why it has failed to make a profit is due to all the stupid ass crap/regulation that go with federal money and regulations. I know some damn good ranchers that also outfit who make good money on land that is 1/2 as good here in Colorado.

The simle and plain truth, the more decentralized the control, the worse off we as hunters, off roaders, etc. I also fail to see how everyone think that national monuments, parks etc. are so great. By my house there are hundread of thousands of acres that are closed to everything except hiking.

Sorry but we do not need this, the NPS will spend way more money and we will get way less benefit.

 

[Gator]

so Elk96 who should be in charge of it.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]

 

[WapitiBob]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-22-13 AT 01:06AM (MST)[p]
I see we have more NMWF office help signing up to join the conversation.
We're still missing a cpl....

Quite the love fest going on over at Bowsite. I thought I was reading a David Cassidy issue of Teen Beat mag for a minute.

 

[marburg]

I live right on the border of a popular national Park, have my whole life. In those three decades I have seen a marked change in the attitudes of those who run the park in my neck of the woods. In the last ten years especially, the park has staff have gone from nearly invisible to medelsome. They have locked up all the gates, even those that only touch a tiny sliver of park property, essentially sealing off access to thousands of acres of public land. There is more law enforcement, they get involved in activity that is outside the park borders, and are ever present in the small community outside the park. They are not good neighbors and although hunting is still technically allowed much of the park is no hunting for safety concerns.

Having seen how things have changed in my neck of the woods, there is absolutely nothing good that will come of Valles Caldera becoming a national park. Sorry but if you haven't noticed, the federal government is not a friend of the people anymore.