Transcript Ideas on dealing with Legislatures, Game Departments and

Ideas on dealing with
Legislatures, Game
Departments and Game
Commissions
Legislature
Two Branches that a bill must pass
through

Senate
 House
 Each branch has various committees through which each bill must
pass prior to being voted on the floor or by all the members.
 If the bill fails to pass out of committee, it will die
 This is the best place to kill a bill or promote a bill
 The bill may also be amended in Committee prior to reaching the
floor for a vote.
 This is where compromise or back door policies are introduced
 Adding on amendments can be a way to sneak in a
provision that may fall below normal monitoring radar and
can happen quickly.
How can you efficiently operate in
this environment?
Monitor the legislature on you own



Takes a lot of time (travel, bill review ect.)
Involves making contacts with your legislators and or
sportsman’s caucus
You must know how each bill is progressing on a
given day





Internet is prime tool, Legislative web sites let you track bill
and read the bill text, amendments and present form
EG. WWW.Leg.WA.Gov/Legislature/
You must know when the key hearing dates are.
You must know who supports a bill and who does not.
You must know who the key committee members are.
Have a lobbyist work on your behalf


Expensive, however there are ways to share the cost
Tag on with other groups HOW????

Form a special interest group.
HHC (Hunters Heritage Council), made up of 50 sportsman’s
groups in Washington State is a political action group.
 Washingtonians for Wildlife Conservation ,WWC. is a fund
raising group with an outdoor agenda and has a part time
lobbyist to push HHC agenda items.


Partner with other organizations

SCI, Fisherman, Commercial Fisherman, ect.
What can you expect from this type
of shared lobbing/oversight




Expect to pay yearly dues (HHC is 1500.00)
WWC is $250.00 per year
Expect weekly updates on legislative bills
Access by email or phone with the lobbyist to
discuss various bills or topic that interests you
 Emergency Email requesting your immediate
action on legislation
 Access to various legislators
 The ability to introduce legislation through a
sponsoring legislator
You will waste your money unless
you are prepared to act quickly and
decisively in a crises.
What can you do to influence a
legislator, or committee?

Phone calls



Letters



Fine if you have a lot of time
More personal than Email
Emails




A real voice (paid or volunteer)
Phone calling services (auto call and message)
Reaction can be almost immediate
Can reach many inexpensively
Can tailor your message and requested response
Testimony


Personal, A strong impression, often coveys commitment
A must for committee hearings
How can you prepare to
act?
Organize your members by district
so that you can target specific
legislators.
(Important because a legislator
will respond more to a
constituent than a general state
voter)
 Have
all your members phone
numbers and emails ahead of time.
Have an effective Email tree
(requires member emails and updating)



Must be quick, (within hours) we live in a rapid electronic
society
Must have background info and contact info in the email
message and it must be easy to use by the members of your
organization
Must have a specific message to convey (do not just ask
them to oppose or support something). You need to give
them an example of what you want them to send and instruct
them how to send this message and to whom the message
should be sent.


Anti hunting groups are experts at this technique.
Must have all available links to committee members and for
accessing information on the legislation in question.
High Priority Alert
Washington State Bowhunter Members
Senate bill 6135 is currently before the Senate Ways and Means committee.
It will allow the Wildlife Department and or the Fish and Game Commission
to raise the fees on hunting and fishing licenses, without public review, by as
much as 10% per year. There will be a hearing in the Senate Ways and
Mean committee within 36 hours.
We s ugg est that you immediately email the members of the Ways and
Means committee legislators listed below and voice your opposition to this
bill.
WSBÕs official response is as follows;
Dear Se nator:
We wo uld like to let you know that we are opposed to SB6136. It is
unfairly deprives the hunting public of due process when a state authority is
granted the unchecked power to assess fees, in this case, in increments up to
10% of the existing fee, per year, where any portion of the fee or license
goes into the wildlife acco unt. The cost for a hunting and fishing licenses
has already reac hed a level where some segments of the public cannot afford
to purchase them. Additional and perhaps repetitive increases will only
disenfranchise more sportsman at a time when we are desperately trying to
recruit outdoor oriented individuals, especially young people. We strongly
encourage you to not support SB6136 and to instead explore ways to obtain
additional funding for the WDFW out of the state general fund and general
budget.
Respectfully;
Steve Link
President
Washington State Bowhunters
Senator Margarita Prentice, [email protected]
Senator Karen Fraser, [email protected]
Senator Craig Pridemore, [email protected]
Senator Joseph Zarelli, [email protected]
Senator Dale Brandland, [email protected]
Senator Mike Carrell, [email protected]
Senator Darlene Fairley, [email protected]
Senator Brian Hatfield, [email protected]
Senator Mike Hewitt, [email protected]
Senator Steve Hobbs, [email protected]
Senator Jim Honeyford, [email protected]
Senator Karen Keiser, [email protected]
Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles, [email protected]
Senator Eric Oemig, [email protected]
Senator Linda Evans Parlette, [email protected]
Senator Marilyn Rasmussen, [email protected]
Senator Debbie Regala, [email protected]
Senator Pam Roach, [email protected]
Senator Phil Rockefeller, [email protected]
Senator Mark Schoesler, [email protected]
Senator Rodney Tom, [email protected]
Testifying in front of a
legislative committee.

Introduce yourself and state who you represent
 Keep your comments short, clear and to the point
 You must know your subject matter, questions may
be asked (If a question is asked, you are winning!)
 End your testimony by requesting that they take a
specific action (eg. “please vote no on this bill”
 Dress professionally
 Do not argue
 Thank them for their time
Form a bowhunting coalition within
your state.
 It
will give you more clout
 It will give you a broader contact list
 You will be better networked when a
crises does arise
 It will spread out the work load
 Should be made up of archery groups in
your state (modern, traditional, target)
Sportsman’s Caucus

Get to know the legislative members of your states
sportsman’s caucus or work with other sportsman’s
groups to try and form one. This is your information
conduit into and out of the legislature. It will better
enable you to introduce legislation, monitor legislation
and defeat legislation. Working from the inside out
rather than the outside in. Do not be afraid to
schedule a meeting with the caucus or one of its
members if you are dealing with a very important
issue.
Dealing with State Fish and Game
/DNR Departments
General organizational levels
 Head
of departments may be politically
appointed. The rest are State
employees
 3 Basic levels
 Statewide
Bureaucrats
 Regional
½ and ½
 Local
Biologist and field
personnel / science
 **recognize their different priorities
All 3 may have different agendas
 Often
best to start at the local level to
get science on your side and then work
your way up the policy ladder.
Eliminates the “have to check with the
bio” excuse
 Try and make contact in person rather
than by phone or email.
 Put a face and personality with your
requests.
Determine who the decision makers
are at the top level. Get to know them.
Personal contacts are everything.
Methods for meeting the decision
makers






Invite them to banquets, send them your
newsletter
Personal visits to their office
Attend wildlife planning meetings and make it
a point to testify and talk with game
department personnel
Volunteer for hunting advisory committees
Emails
Offer to fund or provide labor for a project
Where do you start in having your
policy adopted by the department?
Learn about the public resources that the
department has available and prepare the facts
that will back up your request.







You need to be on the department’s email and
mailing list (this is a must!!!)
You need to read the reports (this is a must)
Harvest reports (your source for using their science)
Yearly game status reports (often contain conclusions
and quotes that go beyond public data)
Game management plans (state wide and by herd)
Learn how to use the departments stats and reports
to support your view. (draw your own conclusions)
You need to become the expert of your topic

Very valuable at a hearing, which may only be attended by
the bureaucratic level. You may know more of the actual
science than they will.
Go beyond department data by looking
at what other states do or have
published on the topic
Game departments are often not
against change, they are against
creating more work
It is important to create a solution
rather than just asking for a solution.
You are then giving them the answer
rather than asking them to figure one
out.
 Eg.
If you want deer opportunity in a
unit you must present a solution and
explain why that is the best solution.
 Take into account all factors such as
harvest, access, other user groups and
the health of the game herd. Then
make your recommendation.
Let the department know and publicly
testify that you support an agenda that
the department is pushing. They
won’t forget and you may need a
return favor.
How do you introduce a change?
The most successful and preferred method
is to get the department to recommend your
proposal as a regulation change.







Use your connections
Back up your request with science and data
Must be done far ahead of time (a year if poss.)
(you may have to work from biologists on up)
Must be willing to anticipate opposition
It will often depend on personal relationships
You must provide them with a solution
Try and get other user groups on your side
Attend all public input meetings and
make sure that your item is on the
discussion agenda or survey.
If you have a game commission you
may be able to have them mandate
that the department act upon your
recommendation.
Try forming a State Game Management
Advisory Council (GMAC), made up of various
user groups: hunting, forestry, range,
conservation ect. that will review hunting related
regulations and make policy recommendations to
the game department. You should meet 4 times
per year with the game department. You may
have to get your game commission to mandate
this type of program.

The GMAC should have various committees
which work on such topics as harvest
allocation, access onto private lands, and
tribal issues.
If all else fails you can bypass the
game department by;
-going to the game commission
-going to the legislature (most
difficult)
**Both may cause hard feeling with
your game department so make sure
it really matters!
Game Commissions
Elected, Appointed, Hired
First priority
 Get
to know the members
 Start immediately, do not wait for a crisis.
Personal relationships mean everything!!
How?




Attend all meetings and testify, even if it is just to say
they did a good job. Always identify yourself and what
group you represent. Wear organization name tag at
all meetings.
Talk with the members, especially non-hunters,
during breaks and find out what they are interested
in. If its ducks then talk ducks. It is often better not to
talk bowhunting in the beginning.
Be non confrontational or you will be shut down
Try and organize a bow shoot prior to a meeting at a
local range

( In Washington we do a commission archery demonstration
every couple of years).

Get to know the commission secretary
(he or she will often control agenda items,
agenda times and commissioner access)
Late agenda items often fail simply because
everyone wants to get home. You want your
agenda item to be one of the first discussed!
 Invite Commissioners to your banquet
 Send them each issue of your newsletter
 Be multi issued…not just bowhunting (be
willing to testify about other hunting issues
besides bowhunting, be a team player.
Build up your alliances

Try and unite all your state bowhunting
groups into a coalition…why?
 More members mean a louder voice. In
Washington we have 3 groups:


WSB, TBW and WSAA
Try and meet the leaders of the other user
groups ML, MF, Disabled. You may need
their support.


Game management advisory council or like
volunteer groups facilitates this.
Attend other user group Banquets to make
contacts and wear your organization name tag!
What if a bad idea is introduced or
you want to push a proposal?
Before the meeting
The best chance of defeating or
introducing something is before the
decision-making meeting.

Use your connections to contact key players
ahead of time
 Figure out what the best argument for
convincing that individual member will be.
Send a letter, send an email, make a phone
call or make a visit in person.
 For a non-hunting commission member the
issue might be proper public process and not
about hunting at all. ( You have to realize that
what would convince you might very well
have no importance to the other person)
Deer Management Change In The Entiat Game
Management Unit # 247
WDFW 2007 Proposal
Reduce Archery late season antlered Mule deer permits from
310 in 2006 to
52 in 2007.
Why the change?
Muzzleloader are to be giv en 6 antlered Mule deer permits in this unit.
Since all 3 user groups would have buck permits in the same unit, the
resource allocation formula would have to be used to divide the buck harvest
in the permit season among all 3 user groups based on their success and
hunter numbers in that unit.
Why is this a problem?
Dividing Mule Deer buck harvest in a permit situation, through resource
allocation, does not address the general season harvest inequities that may
exist in harvesting the same class of animals.
Modern Firearm Arc hery
( 2005 3 point or better) general
buck harvest in the Entiat unit
164
3
The prior system allows a biologist to balance this type of unit or Pmu
harvest inequity by using a permit allocation system that are not tied to a
specific, mandated, formula
This is not just a minor year to year change in permit
allocation due to user group success. This is a major
change in buck management and allocation and little or
no public inpu t was sought. Such a major change
should have, like the loss of antlerless oppo rtunity in
region 3, been introduced to the hun ting pub lic more
than 4 days prior to adoption by the commission.
Alternative
1) Move the 6 Muzzleloader buck permits from the Entiat unit to
either the Manson or the Swakane unit.
(this would preserve the new Muzzleloader opportunity and would
take the Entiat unit out of the mandatory Resource allocation
formula)
2) A harvest goal of 72 antlered animals has been established, in
the Entiat unit, in 2007. 44 bucks were taken, in the special permit
season by Modern Firearm hunter in 2006. 44 of the 72 bucks in
2007 would go to Modern firearm hunters. No net loss from last
year.
3) The remaining 28 bucks would be allocated to archers and their
permits would be based on past success rates (38.5%) which would
result in 73 permits to be split between the 2 halves of the late
season. Biological Bu ck population concerns in this unit would be
satisfied. It should also satisfy any overcrowding complaints.
4) Over the coming year the department can present their data, and
reasoning behind converting the Entiat unit to a Resource
Allocation formula unit for antlered permits. Alt ernatives that
might lower user group harvests and maintain or expand
opportunity should be reviewed. A Resource allocation formula
may be inevitable but it should be discussed. 4 days are simply
not enough time for either the public or the Fish and Wildlife
Commission to examine this proposal.
Have numbers and information to back
up your request

Go beyond Department information
Other game departments (near your state)
 Internet searches
 Personal experience


Use the department’s own data to reach a different
conclusion
This is a very important point. Most wildlife
department data is presented in a way which
supports their policy and program. You will have
to pull out the harvest numbers and re present
them in a way which will support your position.
(this usually requires spread sheets and graphs)
* All data and information was provided by the WDFW
Blue Mountains Elk
There should be more bull elk oppo rtunity in the Blue
Mountain Elk herd for all user groups.
Why? There are several contributing reasons.
A major branch antlered poaching ring was eliminated in 2003. Up t o 50 bulls were
taken by this ring.
Over harvesting (up t o 3,000 cows), by Oregon of antlerless elk that spend summers in
Washingt onÕs Wehaha unit, but winter in Oregon, ended several years ago.
The recent School House Fire has resulted in optimum forage conditions for elk in the
foreseeable future.
Since 1995 the Blue Mountains elk herd has contributed over 45% of the t op trophy bulls
harvested in Washingt on State. T his is a disproportionate amount considering the total
number of elk in Washingt on State is around 60,000 animals and the BlueÕs herd is 4,000
animals. T his indicates a surplus of mature, hunt able bulls exist in this herd.
The Blue Mountain herd numbers between 3,500 and 4,000 animal and
approximately 100 bull permits were issued in 2006. The Yak ima herd
numbers between 8,000 and 9,000 animals and approximately 1,300 branch
antlered permits were issued for that herd. There is a good chance, in the
Yak ima herd of drawing a permit and of harvesting a trophy bull while still
achieving herd sustainability.
At the last Fish and Game Commission meeting the WDFW indicated in a presentation
on Washingt on Elk that almost all of the cows, in the Blue Mountain herd, are being bred
in the first breeding cycle. This would seem t o indicate that there exists a surplus of
bulls, in excess of what is needed for ideal first cycle breeding, in portions of this herd.
Bull t o cow ratios in the Wenaha unit are 43 bulls per 100 cows. It would seem obvious
that many bulls in this unit do not contribute t o population growth of the herd.
In 2005 50 branch antlered bulls (2 point or larger) were harvested in the Blue
Mountains. Post 2005 hunting season spike counts indicated that at least 149 spikes
survived the hunting season. This means that at least 99 new branch antlered bulls were
added t o the branch antlered elk population in 2006. Under the current system, the
branch antlered population continues to expand while hunting opportunity has remained
stagnant.
Solution
Issue at least 25% more branch antlered permits for
this herd in 2006.
Low calf survival rates in the Blue Mountains
Calf survival due to predation continues to be of concern, especially in those
units directly adjace nt to the Oregon border. Data from a 2006 Oregon
study of calf mortality, in those Blue Mountain hunting units directly
adjace nt to WashingtonÕs Blue Mountains, indicates that calf survival was as
low as 20% to 25% (other western states average between 40% and 50% calf
survival). Cougars were responsible for 75% of the mortality; bears a nd
Coyotes were 10%. No deat hs were attributed to malnutrition. Summer
calf cow ratios seem to be at historically high levels in the Blues. However,
winter cow calf ratios are below historic levels in some Blue Mountain units.
With our recent mild winters predation is the only factor that could be
reducing the calf population numbers between spring and winter.
Solution
Expand the pilot cougar-hunting plan into the Blue
Mountains
Increase Cougar and Bear hunting opportunity in the
Blue Mountains
Important to keep it simple….You may know
more that the person making the decision…if
you have time, educate them either in person
or with simple bullet point information on your
cover sheet. The details should follow. (realize
that they may never get to them)
Identify
the decision makers, the leaders
and the followers.
On hunting issues, non hunting commission
members usually defer to those that hunt so
you need to concentrate on the hunters

If the Commission decides both fish and
game issues then the fish people will usually
follow the advice of the game people in game
related topics

If the commission has a wildlife subcommittee,
see if you can set up a meeting with them to
discuss the topic
Find the experts in your organization and use them
(biologist, doctors, scientist, public speaker)
 Prior to the meeting sound out the game department and
get an idea of how they stand on an issue. Do not be
afraid to oppose a department policy if you have good
data to support your position.
 Important to have the right people from your group do
the talking. They must have the correct answers

At the meeting
Stick with one issue (2 max)
 If
you need to try and change a
proposal on the day it is voted on,
realize that:
 It may be difficult
 Success will rely on
how well you are
prepared and how will you present.
 Pick only one issue that you really feel you
want to change and put all your effort in it.
 Too many issues will only confuse and
distract the decision makers
Keep it simple and to the point.


Your handouts should be in large print, Multi colored,
use bold type for important items and writing should
be one page or less. Graphs can be added.
You need to do the following




Identify yourself and the group you represent
Identify the problem or issue
Present the facts to support your case
State your solution

Suggest to them the exact action they need to take in order to
support your solution or idea


eg. We would like one of you to make a motion to amend this rule
as follows. (this is very very important)
If you do not have time don’t confuse them or argue
something that they will not understand. You will not have
time for a complicated explanation.
A NEED TO BALANCE THE LOSS OF ANTLERLESS
OPPORTUNITY AND HARVEST IN REGION 3
REGION 3 ANTLERLESS DECREAS
OPPORTUNITY
E IN ARCHERY
2005 FULL 30 DAY EITHER SEX SEASON September 1- 30th
2006
ANTLERLESS SEASON REDUCED TO 15 DAYS September
16TH Š 30th
2007
NO ANTLERLESS SEASON
ARCHERY ANTLERLESS HA RVEST PER
WD FW HARVEST STATISTICS
2005 399 ANIMALS ( 8.74% OF TOTAL ARCHERY DEER HARVEST
IN THE ENTIRE STATE)
2006 Archery General Seaso n ????????? ??????
Antlerless permit harvest per user gr oup
Modern Firearm
157
Muzzleloader
30
Archery
16
WE WOULD RES PEC TFULLY ASK THE DEPART MENT AND
COMMISSION TO:
SHARE THE ANTLERLESS OPPORTUNITY LOSS AMONG ALL
USER GRO UPS BY DECREASING ALL ANTLERLESS PER MIT
OPPORTUNITY IN REGION 3.
GRANT ARCHERY ADDITIONAL OP PORTUNITY IN OTHER
REGIONS TO OF FSET WHAT APPEARS WILL BE A
DISPROPORTIONATE LOSS OF ANTLERLESS AND GENERAL
DEER HARVEST OP PORTUNITY IN REG ION 3.
Dress and act professionally

After you give your presentation stay seated
and ask if anyone has questions
 You want them to ask you a question
(this means they are interested!)
Be prepared to answer any question that is
asked. This means that you need to know
your issue better than the panel, the game
department and any opposition. The bestprepared party will usually win.
 Pictures often speak a thousand words
Use graphs and tables
Tables often work best for educating
someone if you have a lot of time.
Graphs often work better if time is short
and you need to make a quick and
dramatic impression. The following
examples all represent the same data
but in different forms.
1998 Deer Harvest
E xpec ted
E xpec ted P ermit
H arves t
H arves t G enl
S eas on
E xpec ted
O verG eneral
G oal
(% G oal (% S eas on
H arves t T otal
E xpec ted harves ted
U s er
L ic ens e
A c tually S eas on P ermit T otal
of L ic ens e L ic ens e H arves t (%(%
H arves t (%H arves t byor U ndergroup P urc has ed H unted H arves t H arves t H arves t P urc has ed)H unted) H unted)
H unted) H unted)
% H unted harves ted
MF
129987126267 23592
2 4 5 7 2 4 0 4 9 8 4 .4 5 % 8 4 .5 7 % 8 6 .0 8 %
9 8 .4 4 % 8 6 .1 9 %
23598
4 5 0 .8 5
A rc hery
17136 16554
2674
1
2 6 7 5 1 1 .1 3 % 1 1 .0 9 %
9 .7 6 %
0 .0 4 %
9 .5 9 %
3094
- 4 1 8 .7 9
ML
6804
6480
1141
38
1 1 7 9 4 .4 2 %
4 .3 4 %
4 .1 6 %
1 .5 2 %
4 .2 3 %
1211
- 3 2 .0 5
T otal
1 5 3 9 2 7 1 4 9 3 0 1 2 7 4 0 7 2 4 9 6 2 7 9 0 3 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 2 7 9 0 3
0
O verharves ted
or U nderharves ted
(% )
1 .9 1
- 1 3 .5 4
- 2 .6 5
1999 Deer Harvest
E xpec ted
E xpec ted P ermit
H arves t
H arves t G enl
S eas on
E xpec ted
O verG eneral
G oal
(% G oal (% S eas on
H arves t T otal
E xpec ted harves ted
U s er
L ic ens e
A c tually S eas on P ermit T otal
of L ic ens e L ic ens e H arves t (%(%
H arves t (%H arves t byor U ndergroup P urc has ed H unted H arves t H arves t H arves t P urc has ed)H unted) H unted)
H unted) H unted)
% H unted harves ted
MF
138596128531 27230
3 4 1 9 3 0 6 4 9 8 3 .9 2 % 8 4 .1 0 % 8 5 .4 2 %
9 8 .0 2 % 8 6 .6 6 %
29742
9 0 7 .0 7
A rc hery
18786 17396
3173
31
3 2 0 4 1 1 .3 8 % 1 1 .3 8 %
9 .9 5 %
0 .8 9 %
9 .0 6 %
4025
- 8 2 1 .4 1
ML
7764
6913
1476
38
1 5 1 4 4 .7 0 %
4 .5 2 %
4 .6 3 %
1 .0 9 %
4 .2 8 %
1600
- 8 5 .6 6
T otal
1 6 5 1 4 6 1 5 2 8 4 0 3 1 8 7 9 3 4 8 8 3 5 3 6 7 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 3 5 3 6 7
0
O verharves ted
or U nderharves ted
(% )
3 .0 5
- 2 0 .4 1
- 5 .3 5
2000 Deer Harvest
E xpec ted
E xpec ted P ermit
O verH arves t
H arves t G enl
S eas on
E xpec ted
O verharves ted
G eneral
G oal
(% G oal (% S eas on
H arves t T otal
E xpec ted harves ted or U nderU s er
L ic ens e
A c tually S eas on P ermit T otal
of L ic ens e L ic ens e H arves t (%(%
H arves t (%H arves t byor U nder- harves ted
group P urc has ed H unted H arves t H arves t H arves t P urc has ed)H unted) H unted)
H unted) H unted)
% H unted harves ted (% )
MF
136131124601 32638
3 1 2 1 3 5 7 5 9 8 3 .0 6 % 8 3 .0 8 % 8 7 .2 4 %
9 6 .6 3 % 8 7 .9 9 %
33766
1 9 9 3 .0 8
5 .9 0
A rc hery
19225 17904
3395
16
3 4 1 1 1 1 .7 3 % 1 1 .9 4 %
9 .0 7 %
0 .5 0 %
8 .3 9 %
4852
- 1 4 4 0 .8 5 - 2 9 .7 0
ML
8546
7466
1378
93
1 4 7 1 5 .2 1 %
4 .9 8 %
3 .6 8 %
2 .8 8 %
3 .6 2 %
2023
- 5 5 2 .2 3
- 2 7 .2 9
T otal
1 6 3 9 0 2 1 4 9 9 7 1 3 7 4 1 1 3 2 3 0 4 0 6 4 1 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 4 0 6 4 1
0
2001 Deer Harvest
E xpec ted
E xpec ted P ermit
H arves t
H arves t G enl
S eas on
E xpec ted
O verG eneral
G oal
(% G oal (% S eas on
H arves t T otal
E xpec ted harves ted
U s er
L ic ens e
A c tually S eas on P ermit T otal
of L ic ens e L ic ens e H arves t (%(%
H arves t (%H arves t byor U ndergroup P urc has ed H unted H arves t H arves t H arves t P urc has ed)H unted) H unted)
H unted) H unted)
% H unted harves ted
MF
134997116881 30602
4 4 4 5 3 5 0 4 7 8 3 .3 6 % 8 3 .4 7 % 8 4 .1 7 %
9 5 .5 5 % 8 5 .8 3 %
34080
9 6 6 .9 3
A rc hery
18436 16154
3731
27
3 7 5 8 1 1 .3 8 % 1 1 .5 4 % 1 0 .2 6 %
0 .5 8 %
9 .2 0 %
4710
- 9 5 2 .1 7
ML
8518
6999
2026
180
2 0 2 6 5 .2 6 %
5 .0 0 %
5 .5 7 %
3 .8 7 %
4 .9 6 %
2041
- 1 4 .7 6
T otal
1 6 1 9 5 1 1 4 0 0 3 4 3 6 3 5 9 4 6 5 2 4 0 8 3 1 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 4 0 8 3 1
0
O verharves ted
or U nderharves ted
(% )
2 .8 4
- 2 0 .2 2
- 0 .7 2
2002 Deer Harvest
E xpec ted
E xpec ted P ermit
H arves t
H arves t G enl
S eas on
E xpec ted
O verG eneral
G oal
(% G oal (% S eas on
H arves t T otal
E xpec ted harves ted
U s er
L ic ens e
A c tually S eas on P ermit T otal
of L ic ens e L ic ens e H arves t (%(%
H arves t (%H arves t byor U ndergroup P urc has ed H unted H arves t H arves t H arves t P urc has ed)H unted) H unted)
H unted) H unted)
% H unted harves ted
MF
131815113874 28314
4 6 4 3 3 2 9 5 7 8 2 .6 3 % 8 2 .5 6 % 8 3 .4 5 %
9 5 .8 9 % 8 5 .0 1 %
32010
9 4 6 .6 8
A rc hery
18547 16380
3649
53
3 7 0 2 1 1 .6 3 % 1 1 .8 8 % 1 0 .7 6 %
1 .0 9 %
9 .5 5 %
4604
- 9 0 2 .4 7
ML
9159
7667
1965
146
2 1 1 1 5 .7 4 %
5 .5 6 %
5 .7 9 %
3 .0 2 %
5 .4 4 %
2155
- 4 4 .2 2
T otal
1 5 9 5 2 1 1 3 7 9 2 1 3 3 9 2 8 4 8 4 2 3 8 7 7 0 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 1 0 0 .0 0 % 3 8 7 7 0
0
2003 Deer Harvest
O verharves ted
or U nderharves ted
(% )
2 .9 6
- 1 9 .6 0
- 2 .0 5
O verharves ted or
U nderharves ted
(% )
User Group Deer
Harvest Comparison
Archery % Harvested
MF % harvested
totals
Percentage of Archery
Deer Harvest Below
Allocation
totals
ML % Harvested
10
0
5
-5
0
-5
-10
Percent of
Deer
(Under)-harvested
-10
-15
% of Expected
Harvest
-15
-20
-20
-25
-25
-30
-30
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Archery Deer Under-Harvested
totals
t
o t
a
l
s
6000
0
Actual Harvest
Expected Harvest by % Hunted
5500
5000
-500
Number of
Deer
(Under)-harvested
4500
Number of
Deer
4000
-1000
3500
3000
-1500
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
2500
1996
1998
2000
2002
Year
2004
2006
Actual VS Expected Deer Harvest
t
o t
a
l
s
6000
Actual Harvest
Expected Harvest by % Hunted
5000
4000
Number of
Deer
3000
2000
1000
0
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Year
2003
2004
2005
Have the numbers and statistics to back
up your request



If you are going head to head with the wildlife
department, try and create a win/win situation or
something that will allow the department to save face
by giving them a way out. You should try and avoid
making a long term enemy.
Always start any testimony by thanking the
department for the great job they do.
If you prevail over a department policy
recommendation, take the time to talk with the
department representative after the meeting and let
him know you will work with them in making sure the
policy change will go smoothly. Your real work may
only have started.
Learn how to use a power point
presentation if you are able to present
one. It is what most game department
use…be on an even playing field
Never argue with a commission
member




Know when to quit and be gracious if you lose. You
will be returning to fight another day. Do not make a
long-term enemy.
Look at the person when you are talking with special
attention to the decision makers…try not to read from
a script
Make sure that each member has a copy of what you
are presenting.
A delay in a decision can be a win. If all seems lost
request a postponement of the decision until more
information and public input can be obtained.
Multiple testifiers from your group will
help but they must know what they are
talking about

If not a simple “My name is …..and I
support or do not support.” will do.
 Try
and get other user groups to speak up
on your behalf
 Know when to use emotion and what type
of emotion….do not get mad!
If you are successful…be gracious and do
not gloat.
 If you lose, do so with dignity. There will
be another day.
