Jim Cox

[Bailey]

How does this clown get picked to hand out the money for projects? Who in the world selected this backwards thinking goof.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[h2ofwlr]

Let me guess, this is about the moist soil management issue, right? A pet project for you, correct? So a single issue and if anyone did/does not support your view point, they are the enemy? Correct? How am I doing thus far? So how about being transparent as to your real motives? But you could not have that, as then you'd look like the immature ignorant fool that you are.


He was picked because of his background and passion in conversation, many do not know he was on the MN River Valley Trust after he was the MWA Pres that restored accountability to the org around 12 years back after Exec Dir McGinty ran it into the ground and publicly embarrassed the Org as a whole. And that while he was on the MRVT BD they bought thousands of acres of land to the SW of the TC area that is open to the public, including hunting. And as a OHC board member he stood up and defended for us conservationists and hunters against the politicians that wanted to raid the Outdoor Heritage Fund for projects not related to wildlife (as the voters had intended it to be used for). That is who he was/is. FYI he has been off the OHF Bd for about a year now.

So instead of bashing him, you should be giving thanks to him for literally the thousands of hours of his time that he volunteered over the 6 years that he was on the OHCouncil for defending that the $ was spent as intended.

'nuff said.


For those wanting to know where the OHF $ thus far was spent; http://www.lsohcprojectmgmt.leg.mn/map/

[get-n-birdy]

Here's the rub Fowler:

They didn't support the 3 wood duck limit or the teal seaon.

Perception is 9/10ths of reality. And the reality is many waterfowl hunters don't trust they have hunters best interest in mind. Conservation is great, but so is hunter opportunities. They seem questionable on the first and non existent on the latter.

If I wanted to support conservation efforts, along with hunter opportunities, I'd join pheasants forever over DU, Delta or the MWA. Just an opinion, not based on much other than perception.

[Bailey]

Here's the rub Fowler:

They didn't support the 3 wood duck limit or the teal seaon.

Perception is 9/10ths of reality. And the reality is many waterfowl hunters don't trust they have hunters best interest in mind. Conservation is great, but so is hunter opportunities. They seem questionable on the first and non existent on the latter.

If I wanted to support conservation efforts, along with hunter opportunities, I'd join pheasants forever over DU, Delta or the MWA. Just an opinion, not based on much other than perception.

You got it. Not supporting the teal season made zero sense. Every other state has one but once again Minnesota has to be special. From what I've read the MWA was a very vocal pop I don't you pick up Andy because the benefit of me

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[Bullet21XD]

Restored the mwa's accountability.....

That's precious. The mwa always has been and always will be a joke.

[h2ofwlr]

Just keep looking into the mirror when you say that Ron "I always have been and always will be a joke."

Jim was not even the MWA pres when the wood duck or teal season came up. So he did not speak for the Org. But yes he was a past Pres of the MWA, was on the MRVT before the OHC, and was serving on the OHC. So he was "involved" in outdoor issues and why possibly the Strib interviewed him. He was not speaking forany org, including the OHC. He spoke on his own accord.
I'm not sure about what the MWA stance was on the Woodie limit as I don't remember. Quite possibly because they never took a stance.
But yes the chapter delegates when polled at the semi annual meeting were not in favor of the early teal season 22 months ago. But Brad (ED) assured me when I talked to him that the MWA never sent a letter of their position to the DNR nor did the DNR ask them what their stance was.
And just to be clear, I was one of the few that contacted the MWA state office and expressed that they support the trial early teal season. But 90+% of their feedback 16-22 months ago was not to support it. So why didn't more rank and file members from this site contact them back then and politely express their support for the early teal season?
When I talked to Commissioner Tom about 16 months ago, he said the vast majority of the 1 on 1 conversations with him regarding the early teal season were not in favor of the early teal season. I was in the minority as I did ask him to do the trial 2 years (the season was set for 2014 already). Again, where is the rank and file hunters asking him for the early teal season? Hey at least I tried to get the teal season to happen, unlike many that didn't say boo and are now bitching about it.
This is how I look at it, if you don't go and vote, you should not bitch about the politicians that got elected. Similarly if you did not contact the DNR on outdoor issues, then stop bitching about it now when you are not pleased on the decisions made when you sat silent and did nothing.

"I don't you pick up Andy because the benefit of me" Huh? Sorry but something must have gotten scrambled. And who is Andy?

[Fish Felon]

I've done a lot of looking into a multitude of conservation related finances lately in an effort to expose a conflict of interest and make the MWA look bad in the public eye. I figured one had to exist and that citizen taxpayers or donors were getting bilked out of precious conservation funding that was being used inefficiently or wasted altogether by not being accounted for properly. I simply couldn't wrap my head around how else the numbers could pencil out. They didn't make any sense.

So I started digging. There was just enough under the first stones I was turning over to keep someone as manic as myself going until none were left uncovered.

I didn't get to all the stones because I didn't have to. I found everything I needed to find and then some. It was so much more than I ever bargained for, to the point where I was just sitting on the floor exhausted and surrounded by countless printed pieces of paper. Most had highlighter on the critical parts and a few notes scribbled on them to help turn them from blank sheets of paper into puzzle pieces. Once I was done puttng them in place I just sat there stunned by the combo of sleep deprivation and absolute amazement.

I found what I needed to find........and that was finding how completely and utterly wrong I was about everything. My harsh views towards the MWA were extremely misguided. I was upset because I wasn't able to see the beauty of the Monet in front of me but I was looking at it with my nose only inches away from the painting. Once I stepped back and could see the big picture it was lovely. I certainly appreciate the artist for their magnificent work.

We are extremely fortunate for the work of the MWA and the untold number of groups similar to them. It's easy to complain and be glass half empty versus rolling up your sleeves and getting to work and trying to make a difference. For the first time in a while I'm glass half full and really think that better days are ahead for habitat and hunting in this state as a result of guys like Jim Cox. Very few guys like him are out there and I'm extremely grateful for the state I call home to have one.

Out of my newfound respect, appreciation and sincere admiration for Mr. Cox I'll second what everything Al said is correct and add that it's not even close to scratching the surface of what he's been responsible for accomplishing.

That doesn't mean I agree with his stances on regulations or anti-USFWS rhetoric. The disconnect I had was because I viewed him as using the MWA's accomplishments (or what I perceived as a lack therof) as something to justify why his opinion should weigh more. What if that's not it at all? What if it's the other way around and the only reason why the MWA exists is because of his accomplishments and so he can voice his opinion like he wants to voice it? Some guys need an internet alias to sound off and say what they want and some guys need their own organization to do so.....none of us are that unalike.

I will be proud to support the MWA in the future.

[Bailey]

I've done a lot of looking into a multitude of conservation related finances lately in an effort to expose a conflict of interest and make the MWA look bad in the public eye. I figured one had to exist and that citizen taxpayers or donors were getting bilked out of precious conservation funding that was being used inefficiently or wasted altogether by not being accounted for properly. I simply couldn't wrap my head around how else the numbers could pencil out. They didn't make any sense.

So I started digging. There was just enough under the first stones I was turning over to keep someone as manic as myself going until none were left uncovered.

I didn't get to all the stones because I didn't have to. I found everything I needed to find and then some. It was so much more than I ever bargained for, to the point where I was just sitting on the floor exhausted and surrounded by countless printed pieces of paper. Most had highlighter on the critical parts and a few notes scribbled on them to help turn them from blank sheets of paper into puzzle pieces. Once I was done puttng them in place I just sat there stunned by the combo of sleep deprivation and absolute amazement.

I found what I needed to find........and that was finding how completely and utterly wrong I was about everything. My harsh views towards the MWA were extremely misguided. I was upset because I wasn't able to see the beauty of the Monet in front of me but I was looking at it with my nose only inches away from the painting. Once I stepped back and could see the big picture it was lovely. I certainly appreciate the artist for their magnificent work.

We are extremely fortunate for the work of the MWA and the untold number of groups similar to them. It's easy to complain and be glass half empty versus rolling up your sleeves and getting to work and trying to make a difference. For the first time in a while I'm glass half full and really think that better days are ahead for habitat and hunting in this state as a result of guys like Jim Cox. Very few guys like him are out there and I'm extremely grateful for the state I call home to have one.

Out of my newfound respect, appreciation and sincere admiration for Mr. Cox I'll second what everything Al said is correct and add that it's not even close to scratching the surface of what he's been responsible for accomplishing.

That doesn't mean I agree with his stances on regulations or anti-USFWS rhetoric. The disconnect I had was because I viewed him as using the MWA's accomplishments (or what I perceived as a lack therof) as something to justify why his opinion should weigh more. What if that's not it at all? What if it's the other way around and the only reason why the MWA exists is because of his accomplishments and so he can voice his opinion like he wants to voice it? Some guys need an internet alias to sound off and say what they want and some guys need their own organization to do so.....none of us are that unalike.

I will be proud to support the MWA in the future.

You have seen the light!

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[Bailey]

Fish felon you just need to now join Jim Cox in calling the teal season the stupidest idea! Both landwehr and Cox said isn't 60 days enough for you? We need to quit being so greedy as minnduck hunters and thank our lucky stars Mr landwehr allows us such wonderful hunting opportunities. As for Wisconsin, Michigan Iowa, and other states offering early teal seasons they are just meat HOGS. They need a real lesson is duck conservation from Minnesota.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[h2ofwlr]

Well this is how I look at it. Do/did I agree with Jim on calling it a stupid idea? no. [But if you know Jim, he does not hold back and calls a spade a spade (he did that to a few politicians when on the OHC and ruffled a few feathers as a result) as he was a thorn in their side, rightfully so as some politicians were trying to divert the $ from it's intended purpose]
Do I agree with Bailey's witch hunt on persecuting Jim for his personal opinion? no.
Do I agree with his bashing the MWA because the vast majority did not support the early teal season? no.

But I can understand Jim and other older hunters view point. You need to remember that they grew up on average with 40 day and 4 ducks a day seasons here in MN. 60 day seasons and 6 a day for what is it now, 15 years? That's a 50% jump on days and bag limit. So I get their "when is enough, enough"? mentality.

That being said, I still would have loved to even see a 2 day early teal season as I think that it'd have been fun to try it for certain segment of waterfowl hunters and the species biologically can handle the added hunting pressure.

Now lets get back to reality of what it is: IMHO as long as Tom is Commissioner we will not have an early teal season, or at least not for the next few years. Maybe he'd change his mind, but it'd need to be awfully persuasive. (like 2/3 of the Mn hunters in favor of it and the mistake studies less than 20%). And this past 1.5 years over 2/3 of his 1 on 1 conversations with people are not for the early teal season. And that gentlemen is the heart of the matter and why quit dreaming that it'll change anytime soon.

And bashing, Jim, the MWA, etc will not change the fact that we will not have an early teal season anytime soon.
So quit beating a dead horse as it's getting quite old.