Jim Cox

[Bailey]

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.

I could maybe understand the enough is enough argument if I saw other states declining the teal seasons, but they don't. Other states have guys who hunted the 30 day seasons as well. As far as landwehr's 1 on 1 conversations who are they with? I have never once been surveyed by the dnr and I have written these guys alot. They don't want to survey guys like me because I disagree with them. They survey who they want to get the results they want. Yes fowler you are right Minnesota will never see a teal season with landwehr because he has a god complex and frankly really doesn't care what guys like me think. If I recall he wrote a pretty sarcastic letter back to somebody on here who dare question his almighty teal decision. I actually did hunt teal Fowler but it was in Wisconsin!

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[Fish Felon]

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 any time soon.

They're telling you that because that's what they've been told to say if they want to be a true conservation minded duck hunter. Had all the press been about how great the prospect of a teal season is than they'd be saying the same. That's the unfortunate power of the press when it's not a free press or devoted to fair and impartial journalism....as well as the unfortunate power of Sheeple.

First off, the 20% mistake number is no longer a valid argument. They banked on that the first year and had egg all over their faces when it backfired, ROYALLY. So all that leaves for a hurdle is the stupid survey they made up. Yes, made up. Have you read the questions and if so, have you ever taken a course in statistics? Because if you read those questions and honestly think they're not phrased to intentionally lead the respondent to answer a certain way you are either on crack or you failed statistics, or both.

I've already got one statistics professor at an acclaimed university to come to the same conclusion after passing the survey along to him and being extremely careful not to show or infer any of my opinions to potentially pass along a bias. I friggin' guarantee this guy is way more accredited than whoever wrote those questions and there's no way they're going to convince a patsy unless said patsy is willing to ruin their reputation by stating they're responsible for writing that garbage and then have to defend those questions being an unbiased way of getting the appropriate data without it being skewed.

Who in the hell wrote those questions?

[h2ofwlr]

"They"??? Tom is the boss, his 1 on 1 conversations with waterfowl hunters have been 2/3 against the early teal season. That is indeed the heart of the matter in that 2/3 are against it.

As for the survey questions last winter, I mentioned it last summer on a topic, I agreed they were poorly written. No idea who wrote the questions.

If you all want to question the DNR way of doing things (or inactions on their part like not properly maintaining existing habitat), go right on ahead, but leave these guys out of it: As Jim Cox, Roger Strand, Brad Nylin, the MWA, the WDS, DU, etc etc had nothing to do with why we are not having an early teal season.

The no early teal season is because the rank and file waterfowl hunters did not overwhelmingly support it. Yes that is sad, but that is the cold hard reality of it.

[Bullet21XD]

Getting opinions from hunters is an easy way to manipulate stats. I could interview "1 on 1" 50 guys that I could guarantee would be against a teal season, and another 50 that would be for it.

That...fouler...is the real problem. Hunter opinion, for or against, any regulation...should never be a factor. I'm sure if Landwehr had "1 on 1" conversations with 100 hunters under the age of 30, there'd have been nearly 100% support for a teal season.

You seriously need to get out of the house. You're losing what little ability to think rationally you had.

[Bailey]

"They"??? Tom is the boss, his 1 on 1 conversations with waterfowl hunters have been 2/3 against the early teal season. That is indeed the heart of the matter in that 2/3 are against it.

As for the survey questions last winter, I mentioned it last summer on a topic, I agreed they were poorly written. No idea who wrote the questions.

If you all want to question the DNR way of doing things (or inactions on their part like not properly maintaining existing habits), go right on ahead, but leave these guys out of it: As Jim Cox, Roger Strand, Brad Nylin, the MWA, the WDS, DU, etc etc had nothing to do with why we are not having an early teal season.

The no early teal season is because the rank and file waterfowl hunters did not overwhelmingly support it. Yes that is sad, but that is the cold hard reality of it.

Again who did they survey? I would say 80% of the hunters I know fully support a teal season. Pretty much everyone on this board supports a teal season. Landwehr talked with the guys he knew would not support it period. He did not want it and was going to make sure he could find guys who opposed it.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[Fish Felon]

Hunter opinion, for or against, any regulation...should never be a factor.

Exactly.

What makes it worse is less than a year before Landwehr was testifying in court versus HFW about how the DNR always uses the same methods to initiate seasons and that's from a scientific management based approach blah blah blah blah blah...

...which was obviously a lie since not only has he admitted the teal season was based on a question of ethics but he's proud of it. He's not even trying to bullshyte us nicely, he's responding to the emails from disappointed hunters he supposedly works for with angry Eff You emails back!

[Nershi]

The DNR only pulls the scientific card when it fits their agenda. The way we set our game laws has become way too politicized.

I voiced my opinion to the DNR when the teal season was proposed but I shouldn't have to and they shouldn't listen to me anyways. I'm nothing more than an armchair biologist. They should use the scientific information available to them and set laws accordingly.

As for the MWA. You are an organization that gets its funding primarily from hunters. Taking a stance against more hunter opportunity is biting the hand that feeds you. They definitely lost some donors with that one.

[Fish Felon]

If you all want to question the DNR way of doing things (or inactions on their part like not properly maintaining existing habits), go right on ahead, but leave these guys out of it: As Jim Cox, Roger Strand, Brad Nylin, the MWA, the WDS, DU, etc etc had nothing to do with why we are not having an early teal season.

Look Al, I've already made a pretty big 180 on guys like Cox because you're right. After looking into all the details there's a ton of stuff being done and I was pretty blown away at the amount of influence they have, the funds they're able to leverage (with the giant majority outside the MWA) and the amount of work being accomplished efficiently. It's not like it was a couple decades ago when a project would be announced and they didn't break ground on it for five years no matter if it was MWA, DU, PF, whoever. It took a really long time to get stuff accomplished. It's amazing how coordinated the effort is and fast they're getting stuff done. I wouldn't doubt they're doing more in a year or two now than an entire decade then.

And you're also right on the need for guys like Cox in general and the LSOHC especially. We want a bulldog in their for the inevitability of politicians trying to raid those funds...because that's pretty much a constant threat. It's great having a bulldog on your side but it's also not so great when they're not on your side; and therein lies the rub with Cox and these guys. With all the work he's doing for something I really agree with and appreciate I'll give him the respect he more than deserves to not bash him when he speaks out and I don't happen to agree.

With that being said, you're fooling yourself if you think these guys didn't influence the teal season decision. Just do yourself a favor and instead of trying to rewrite how it all went down, which I've previously documented extensively, just place the blame on Landwehr. Ultimately it was his decision alone to make (his words) and if you feel it was the wrong decision then put the blame on him. Bottom line, he shouldn't ever let himself be influenced on these type of decisions. His role is too important.

[HnkrCrash]

Fish Felon = Sellout

Let the hate out!

[Bailey]

Fish Felon = Sellout

Let the hate out!

Lol

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk