Bad Ideas Never Die in Florida

binellishtr

great post..

Walker Dog

If Gladesman only knew how that apparently meaningless word "robust" came to be part of the discussion on Florida deer.

Thanks for the laugh, Frank!

Walker Dog

gladesman said:

Added info bonus - At the 1st GFC meeting I attended in Tallahassee at my expense many years ago my purpose there was to oppose 2nd and 3rd phase quota permits in Big C being proposed by the infamous NPS. At that meeting I asked a question that had been on my mind for a long while - Has GFC ever checked to see if deer in Florida were edible? You would have thought I said the F word 10x in a row - the answer was "stunned silence" by the powers that be and a change the subject answer that wasn't an answer. Now they've never even done that and someone believes they will maintain a deer herd's health - I hope nobody is that dumb.

The stunned silence wasn't shock from the grandeur of the question. It was a polite way of answering your question without highlighting the ubsurdidty of it. Similar to them saying "Bless your heart".

gladesman

To reinforce my contention that FWC could begin a process to remove NPS from management of Big C in partnership with Florida's - Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund - 2 screen shots from FDEP's (when current FWC commisioner Michael Sole was Secretary of FDEP) 2009 comments will follow.

Very amazing how truly amazing priority needed management actions that would help wildlife such as preventing further harm from NPS or other federal entities are forgotten about and allowed to continue while other currently potential random rule change proposals (that may happen to align with internal staff or leadership's desires) from the public gain high priority and are moved ahead repeatedly after failing the 1st  or 2nd try.

gladesman

2nd of 2 screen shots pasted below from pg 5 or 9 of FDEP's comments - that the 1 of 2 image link in the  previous post presents -

gladesman

Walker Dog I truly appreciate your attempt at interpretation of the  words of my post but IMHO unless you were in the room that day and personally viewing the body language of GFC's commissioners especially chairman Tom Rainey and director Col Robert M Brantley - you or anyone doesn't stand a chance of understanding what I and others witnessed that afternoon.

Another comment that day that stunned folks into silence was when a really young man (maybe mid 20s) who wanted to get in the alligator farming business and complained about unnecessary rules controlling to doing that and enumerated them and then brought up his blockbuster comment on how  "lily white" the GFC agency was at that time. OMG everyone including me had their mind blown - knowing he was right - very quickly he was asked (like right after the comment) to get with staff  - he didn't quite catch on and repeated his accusation a time or two - then he got their drift and shutup - I do believe he got a permit for an alligator farm. So funny/sad how one can get what they want from a science based agency.

gladesman

Walker Dog said:

If Gladesman only knew how that apparently meaningless word "robust" came to be part of the discussion on Florida deer.

Thanks for the laugh, Frank!

You're Welcome Walker Dog

Since you allude to knowing why the - apparently meaningless word "robust" is a trendy part of FWC jargon nowadays possibly you could share and enlighten us with your knowledge.  Thanks in Advance - I truly desire to know.

Walker Dog

That was the word the stakeholder rep from ECC pushed hard for to describe what the goal should be for the states deer herd. She got it included in the plan. Might be meaningless to some but she felt it was important. 

gladesman

OMG - OMG - hey I have had some serious disagreements with my fellow ECC delegates now and then - don't recall the ECC internal discussions on that word - kind of shows how what one says/writes etc. can come back and bite any of us. Thanks Again I really needed to hear that and have a good Laugh did. 

Walker Dog

Youre welcome. We can all use one every now and then.

Walker Dog

I don't particularly like the use of the word, personally. I would have preferred something different. Still don't see where you get that it's actually biting anyone though. But hey, to each their own!

gladesman

Not that  that a specific word or words can bite anyone - I just perceive their use as being part of a coordinated orchestrated narrative by proponents to drive folks to accept a rule that I consider useless, unnecessary and legally abusive to be worrisome since I have seen this type strategy work. Now truth be known I have used same strategy now and then - won't say it isn't effective.

Walker Dog

I disagree on the ulterior motives but to each their own.

binellishtr

you dont really disagree that the S Fl hunter has been pushed out do you? If so, can you give some facts as to your opinion

Walker Dog

Not at all. I would, however, disagree that the word "robust" has or was ever intended to play any role in it.

Hunters have been pushed out of a lot of places for a lot of reasons. Some are not justified and some are. Public land hunters in s fl have both lost and gained access. No question that the losses have outweighed the gains or that some of the losses have been unnecessary and were only closed due to politics or convenience.

One of my favorite hunting spots has houses on it today. Oh well! It wasn't mine to decide what to do with but I did enjoy it while it was available to me.

Regardless, your question is a different topic than what this thread was started on.

FloridaOD

This made me look up the definition of “ Robust”.

In the face of “ Growth” and “Development” deemed “Inevitable” it is important that we do not have a Timorous FWCC leadership tradition.

gladesman

Not to be picky but I just thought a bit more on what Bullfrog said in his post 52 on pg 2 of this thread regarding how few folks would be impacted by this rule.

I didn't give this much thought at the time but did today:

Bullfrog said (bold font by me):

"Concerning who this will effect, the majority of hunters aren't killing deer. Even considering the estimated legal take, 12% of hunters in Florida take 66% of the bucks. The harvest is very concentrated into the hands of a few. The little bit of sacrifice those few may have to make in the name of game management for the good of all by taking some extra minutes to report a harvest is nothing in the grand scheme of things."

As per this link below to FWC data they paid "Responsive Management" to collect an attempt will be made to illustrate the actual time involved based upon FWC's own data to comply with T&R as previously proposed by FWC - http://myfwc.com/hunting/by-species/deer/survey/

Information used to develop my estimates below are from FWC's Second bar graph and sums arrived at from the text below that bar graph at the link detailing the estimated deer harvest numbers for 2015-2016 season. (see image from data source attached below)

Results being that 96,283 deer were killed - 75,536 on private land - 21,287 on public land.

Using 15 minutes (my estimate of hypothetical time required) to comply with T&R form entries and making a phone call however long after the kill to FWC to arrive at total amount of time taken out of hunters life experience would be as follows:

Total harvest T&R compliance - 96283 X 15 = 1,444,425 minutes - divided by 60 = 24,070 hours

Private Land Compliance -        75,536 X 15 = 1,133,040 minutes - divided by 60 = 18,884 hours

Public Land Compliance -          21,287 X 15 =    319,305 minutes - divided by 60 =   5,322 hours

A more data based interpretation of the level of significance in view of these numbers above is that the total amount of time/minutes/hours that Florida's hunters/customers must give/bequeath/contribute with no remuneration from  FWC due to FWC's promise of prosecution for failure to comply with the/any T & R rule as previously proposed is very very significant.

bgeorge

Well then we should limit each person to only one deer so that nobody needs to be bothered more than 15 minutes in their year.  If you can pass a test and can report your deer in less than 3 minutes you can get a bonus tag.  I think we can get a few people from up north to help train people.  

gladesman

With all due respect bgeorge your interpretation of the context in this post is incorrect. Post illustrates total theoretical amount of time to comply based on 3 data scenarios that are clearly described but that's Ok I get your drift as a proponent of T&R.

bgeorge

No problem I understood the context as a whole but when compared to the needs of the people to comply I do not see it as over the top. Most people spend more time in the crapper in the morning or outside smoking in a day than will take them to comply with all harvest recording and reporting if it come to fruition.  I do not see punching a card or writing on a piece of paper to be overly cumbersome.  I do no see it taking 15 minutes.  As ease as they have made apps to renew licenses from you phone or the web I can not see something that could possibly take near as much time as hanging the animal to clean it.  The worst case I can foresee is someone who would need to call in and go through a ton of prompts just to pick a DMU.  I do understand that some people see any rules as to many.  I think they should be easy to understand and comply.  

I do support a tag and report system and have never made any indication otherwise.  I believe the current data collection process leave gaps for the youth and senior class.  Minimal charge or no charge I do not care but sign them up.  Kids in particular are proud when they get their license and can be a reminder for years.  It would also give better view into the R3 success rates.  

gladesman

The  estimate of 15 minutes was basing it on a person expending time retrieving items needed from a backpack and replacing them when done and possibly losing some time locating the items needed to comply while not using hi tech apps ( to report but use a piece of paper to manually enter data on to then calling in on a basic flip phone like I use (no frills). Of course the phone call from woods should be optional at the most since not everyone has a cell phone and shouldn't be forced by the gubernment to have/buy one w/monthly fees just for FWC  - e.g. Obama care didn't do so good with that concept - wise Americans only take so much BS from their gubbernment. Each persons time has a value - I believe and think others may agree that our time in the woods hunting is some of our most valuable time ($/minute every minute).

R3 - remember FWC didn't even include it in their strategic 10 year draft plan - a whopper in my book - and I ain't talking hamburgers.

bgeorge

I assume you are referring to the staff report given at the last commission meeting.   It is true that R3 was not in it.  I believe that is because that is a report on a list that was made some time ago and its absence is not part of some bigger picture.  I agree in the fact that it needs to be front and center in the agency and I have not seen the actions to go with the lip service.  That push may have died with Nick but time will tell.  They made it a point to get outside group buy in by getting them to front some of the salary money.  I have not seen complete commitment by all staff in their decision making process to analyse how R3 is impacted.

Florida Bullfrog

Before I parse out the statistics, I’ll get to test out the FWC’s tag and report system in the next week or two. I’ll see how long it actually takes to report a harvest from the field. 

binellishtr

I can pretty much guarantee you that my particular cell provider does not work where I prefer to hunt ... which would mean i'd have to drive 15 or so miles to get reception. Usually after the harvest we consume adult beverages at camp so i'd be hesitant to drive to report a kill

gladesman

Florida Bullfrog said:

Before I parse out the statistics, I’ll get to test out the FWC’s tag and report system in the next week or two. I’ll see how long it actually takes to report a harvest from the field. 

What is the occasion to do this test run you mention. Are you consulting for FWC? Just curious. Try to create the whole scenario of a deer kill including everything from 1 pulling the trigger, 2 calming down after the shot and deer dropping, 3 slowly approaching the downed deer, 4 verifying it's dead (kicking it, eyes open etc.),  - then the report time scenario in no frills mode -  5 locating and retrieving scrap paper or form in backpack, 6 filling out information on form, 7 making call assuming a signal present, 8 writing confirmation number on form. Everything takes time so all steps I mention should be included IMHO plus any I may have left out.

Interested to see results.

Florida Bullfrog

All that should count towards report time is the time it takes to begin the tagging process to thru the completetion of the report. In other words, when everything is done that needs to be done before its time to report and move the deer, that’s when report time starts. Squeezing the shot off,  walking up and checking the deer and all of that shouldn’t count towards report time. A hunter is doing all of that anyhow. That would be like counting scouting time or stand hours for a successful harvest torwards report time. 

I am not consulting with or working for the FWC. My test run will be using depredation permits. They require immediate tagging and reporting of each deer killed. The process is once the deer is down, insert the tag then make a phone call. I suspect it will be a call to an automated system where I punch in the tag number and select the sex of the deer. But I’m not sure.  It could just as easily be a call to a person in India. It will be a good way to test to see what’s already in place and where the system can be improved. 

gladesman

Agreed 100% Bullfrog #297 I did get it  wrong on the TR steps 1-4 (subconscious bias?   but will add - stuffing form into plastic bag then into backpack for safe keeping.

gladesman

OBTW - anyone know why post counts are remaining the same here???

gladesman

Just to get it back to pg 1 for a while

binellishtr

LOL, more bad ideas in the form of a survey have u read them yet