Bowsite.com

Dear Mr. xxxxxxx,

Thank you for contacting my office regarding Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Thank you for your positive comments regarding my nominations to the Parks and Wildlife Commission. My belief is that hunters and anglers are the chief stewards of Colorado's fish and wildlife, who contribute a lions share of the funding for the agency through license and permit fees, as well as excise taxes and fishing and hunting equipment. I have striven to make appointments to this governing body with candidates that have a deep involvement with outdoor recreation. Since hunters and anglers do fund most of the agencies budget, I will continue to make appointments that serve the very best interests of Colorado's sportsmen and women. I will not put corporate interests ahead of sound wildlife management. I believe hunting and fishing and those who participate are the cornerstone of sound wildlife management practices.

With regards to the season setting process, I have been assured that all stakeholders have a seat at the table in it's development. However, I have also asked our Director of Natural Resources to review the process, to ensure priority is given to sportsmen and women of Colorado, where it does not conflict with sound wildlife management practices.

With regards specifically to archery, I am quite aware of it's popularity as a method of take. I agree that ensuring our hunting and angling traditions must continue, and wildlife managers must embrace these methods which attract more participants, especially with current trends that show hunting becoming less popular. It is noteworthy that archery is attracting more youth, women, and minorities, which are among the groups that I asked the commission to consider when adopting rules and regulations as we go forward. We must continue to make opportunities attractive to these groups, in order to achieve a growing trend in the outdoor heritage.

Rest assured that the current staff is taking all of these options in mind in the development of future hunting and fishing season, bag limits, and regulations.

I have forwarded your email to the Director of Natural Resources and the Parks and Wildlife Commission, along with my comments listed above. I was given assurances that sound wildlife management and conservation principles will be first and foremost of consideration, as well as the considerations of the hunting and fishing public.

Please feel free to contact my office should you have any other concerns.

With Warm Regards,

The upside is that he definitely read it before it was sent to you, and probably learned something from the staffer's response.

Google contact gov polis.

I think it's better than "not negative about bowhunting " It actually casts bowhunting and archery in a positive light.

I mentioned on an earlier post that this gov would be good for hunting and conservation in general based on his commission picks and his dnr director pick.

Just because he is a D doesn't mean he's not a conservationist, as most D's are.

If an R had written this response there would be nothing but praise and accolades here.

What? Hunters are conservationists. People who are against hunting and different forms of hunting are preservationists, and are virtually always Ds. The huge majority of hunters are Rs, and know it's the Ds who are coming after hunting. There is a monumental difference between "conservationists" and "preservationists".

Take a look at the judges who are shutting down the wolf hunts, the grizzly hunts, east coast bear hunts, every other hunt against the recommendations of professional biologists. They are all Dem appointees, most of the recent ones being Obama appointees. The people who put anti-hunting measures on the ballots? All liberal Dems. The authors of every anti-hunting bill that gets introduced in any legislature in America? Dems.

Not to say that there aren't Dems who are conservationists. Centrist Ds who hunt and get it (which Governor Polis is certainly not). I have a difficult time with some hardcore lefties who hunt and call themselves "conservationists" after actively campaigning for Obama, knowing full-well he would appoint anti-hunting judges up and down the line, which has sadly proven true. That's a topic for a different thread. But to say "conservationists, as most Ds are" is a huge reach.

And he didn't write the response anyway so it doesn't really matter. +1 fubar.

you have a valid, undeniable point that it's the activist minded federal judges who are making these poor decisions in favor of the AR groups who petition them. I did not take that into consideration and I should have taken, as who appointed these judges (but don't forget the senate had to approve them, and I'm sure that it wasn't by 100% D votes only)

Lets look at these facts also:

His pick to head DNR is an avid hunter and conservationist, his commission picks are avid outdoors folks, with 2 of them avid hunters, and one other who has shown positive support to archery (Vardy). And this letter whether he wrote it or not (still had to approve it's release) shows that at the very least, he understands bowhunting is popular and it's popular amongst the groups he publically said he is trying to outreach to become involved in hunting.

And the fact that he responded shows that he's interested in hearing from his constituents.

We can also go down the road that a good portion of R's are pushing the "sell/transfer the public lands" idea, but that would turn this thread into a bash fest.

Just for the record, I am an unaffiliated voter. I've been called roadkill, by both sides. But I don't follow a party line., but lean mostly conservative because it seems to align with my belief's the most,......but not always. I don't advertise to candidates who I affiate with to count on my support. Let them earn my support.

I do give credit to the staff committee Governor Polis assembled to vet and pick the DNR director and the commissioners. It appears they did a pretty good job and selected good people to appoint. I think you're a bit naive about how the process works.

The points I made in my last post are still valid, that so far, his department and commission level appointments in DNR and CPW commission are good ones, and his response shows, at the very least, concern.

His transition and appointment team included: Bill Ritter (D), Roy Roemer (D), and Bob Shaffer (R).

His chief of staff (which is one of the most important with regard to advising him on policy) is Lisa Kaufmann. Her duties are: Control access to the governor and manage the governor's calendar; Monitor the flow of information to the governor on policy issues; Oversee gubernatorial Cabinet and staff; and Manage and communicate the governor's policy agenda to the state legislature and the public.

She was born, raised and educated in Tunkhannock Pa, an area rich in the hunting culture (that's where I was born and raised). She hunted there; has a degree in biology/natural resources. She does have a grasp on the natural resources issues.

Just sayin' and not trying to give you a brief history lesson. I trust you know all these facts.

The biggest concern is who will head the CPW agency. Whoever is picked will direct the agencies efforts. I'm not sure how this agency head is picked, civil service comm, Pwc, or governor. Maybe someone can chime in who knows....

Blessings to you, Lou

Chickenlooper was way worse than Polis. Chicken is a hilary style democrat..

Now that a precedent has been set, maybe more emails should follow see if the message 'strays'

They used us to promote a resident fee increase, and we obliged. Then cpw issued the first ever bull only otc license before the elk population data was released. The data showed the GMU was above population goals.

This was nothing more than a test of the waters to see if they could further limit bowhunting.

The outfitters and ag leaders testified at commission meeting to further limit bowhunting.

Jaquomo was correct that we are not negotiating from a position of strength. What could telegraph more strength then having the chief executive officer of our state responding to our requests.

Google contacting Gov Polis. There will be a link to a page to voice your concerns.

As I said it was done many years ago, during the bgss process and I think it swayed alot of opinions.

Being proactive is a better strategy that wait and see what happens. The cost of doing nothing is huge.

While an in depth bowhunting workshop might be of value to commissioners and bowhunters, someone else needs to step up and do it. If there are volunteers, contact me. Eden Vardy expressed an interest to me in getting a bow and shooting, I told him to go to a pro shop and shoot a bunch of bows which is the same answer I would give to anyone. If someone can take a personal approach that lives in Pitkin or Garfield counties, let me know. I think he said he has an archery range on site at his farm. I will bring the concept to the board and seek direction and volunteers.

Not trying to toot my own horn, just saying I have bandwidth challenges, and know when to say no.

The time it was done 20+ years ago it was on a suggestion to Conrad from me since I worked with him. The situation was similar, there was some hints that CPW was looking to shorten the bow season.

30+ years ago, when I was a rep for United Bowhunters of Pa, I did the same thing, just prior to going to the game commission asking for a 3 week extension of our season from 30 days to 51 days. They were very leary of this request as they typically had a 3-4 week break between bow and rifle seasons. We were looking to fill that gap. It turned out to be a great public relations ploy, and the commission approved our request. It changed the direction of the conversation in favor of the bowhunters and I think it will have the same result here.