Wyoming Game & Fish requests Feds: “Let the hunters remove the goats”

wyosam

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
130
I have learned that studies and data can easily be interpreted however the entity funding the research would like it to be. There are too many variables. I realize it's the best option to gather information we currently have, unfortunately.

Even sheep were not native at some point. I don't buy the native vs not native argument. Interesting discussion though. Someone will always be disappointed.

Buzzh nailed it on the head I think.

This may show my ignorance and misunderstanding of the subject, but why would high $$ sheep guys care about sheep they can't hunt in a NP?

The elk management plan seemed super controversial there, but I don't see that happening with this.
Those were game and fish studies, which in Wyoming means paid for entirely by sportsman’s dollars. What is not to get about the native vs non-native? Goats are there because we moved them to the area. Sheep were here when we got here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Malenurseevans

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2020
Messages
23
Location
Idaho
Those were game and fish studies, which in Wyoming means paid for entirely by sportsman’s dollars. What is not to get about the native vs non-native? Goats are there because we moved them to the area. Sheep were here when we got here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The funds may be paid for by sportsman, although in this example indirectly through tax dollars, but if the federal government is providing the funding you can bet your a$$ they have influence. I think it would ignorant to believe their isn't strong influence and politics involved. It's the federal government dude.

And I "get" the native vs non native. I just don't buy into it.
Screenshot_20200122-075022_Chrome.jpg20200122_075209.jpg
 

Attachments

Malenurseevans

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2020
Messages
23
Location
Idaho
Not true, show me the research...its all based on "coulds" and "maybe's"...
This 👆. Taking some biologists presentation of the study is WAY different than reading the study yourself. I'm telling you, studies and data are easily manipulated. Just look at the "data" on "global warming" lol
 

wyosam

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
130
This . Taking some biologists presentation of the study is WAY different than reading the study yourself. I'm telling you, studies and data are easily manipulated. Just look at the "data" on "global warming" lol
I’m disturbed as a fellow nurse about your view on research and science in general.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

wyosam

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
130
This . Taking some biologists presentation of the study is WAY different than reading the study yourself. I'm telling you, studies and data are easily manipulated. Just look at the "data" on "global warming" lol
That was the biologist that did the study. G&F employee, means sportsman dollars. No general funds to game and fish in Wyoming. Movement data was shown clearly on a map, with time stamps of who was where and when. We know that when sheep carry those pathogens in their nose, other sheep sharing space with them are much more likely to get pneumonia. That is because it is spread around when they feed. Are a goat’s nostrils farther from the feed than a sheep’s?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

wyosam

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
130
The funds may be paid for by sportsman, although in this example indirectly through tax dollars, but if the federal government is providing the funding you can bet your a$$ they have influence. I think it would ignorant to believe their isn't strong influence and politics involved. It's the federal government dude.

And I "get" the native vs non native. I just don't buy into it.
View attachment 148589View attachment 148590
Pittman Robertson money is not general fund tax dollars, it is collected as an excise tax on hunting gear. Sportsman’s dollars. Research I’m referring to was federal, it was game and fish. Just because it is in the park doesn’t mean it is federal research.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Malenurseevans

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2020
Messages
23
Location
Idaho
Pittman Robertson money is not general fund tax dollars, it is collected as an excise tax on hunting gear. Sportsman’s dollars. Research I’m referring to was federal, it was game and fish. Just because it is in the park doesn’t mean it is federal research.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sounds like you got it all figured out bro. But despite what you may think, Wyoming fish and game (and their studies) are not infallible.
 

Malenurseevans

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2020
Messages
23
Location
Idaho
That was the biologist that did the study. G&F employee, means sportsman dollars. No general funds to game and fish in Wyoming. Movement data was shown clearly on a map, with time stamps of who was where and when. We know that when sheep carry those pathogens in their nose, other sheep sharing space with them are much more likely to get pneumonia. That is because it is spread around when they feed. Are a goat’s nostrils farther from the feed than a sheep’s?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I just showed you that federal funding helps pay for the research. Sure it's tax dollars from sportsman, but sportsman don't get to choose how it gets distributed. The federal government does. Which means that if wyoming fish and game want the funding they have to play by the federal government rules. Sportsman have no say in it.
 

Malenurseevans

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2020
Messages
23
Location
Idaho
I’m disturbed as a fellow nurse about your view on research and science in general.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's ok with me. Pharmaceutical companies are notorious for paying for research that provides data just how they want it interpreted.
I realize that it's the best we have, and I believe in evidence based practice, but I'm not dumb enough to believe studies and the people who conduct them are infallible. Money and politics are far too often influencing information given to the public. I just believe in keeping that in mind. But if you want to place your total unquestioning loyalty and trust in wyoming fish and game go for it dude.
 

Bubblehide

Senior Member
Joined
May 13, 2015
Messages
886
That's ok with me. Pharmaceutical companies are notorious for paying for research that provides data just how they want it interpreted.
I realize that it's the best we have, and I believe in evidence based practice, but I'm not dumb enough to believe studies and the people who conduct them are infallible. Money and politics are far too often influencing information given to the public. I just believe in keeping that in mind. But if you want to place your total unquestioning loyalty and trust in wyoming fish and game go for it dude.
Dude, if you don't read the methods section of research, you simply are left unable to know if there is any value to it at all. But the opposite is very true, if you read and understand the methods section of research, you will what what in the research has any value, and to what level. But if the research has not been duplicated with similar results, despite reading the methods section, it could still be garbage. Kinda like that old saying, garbage in garbage out. But, a well designed and run research study is often GOLD.
 

Malenurseevans

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2020
Messages
23
Location
Idaho
Dude, if you don't read the methods section of research, you simply are left unable to know if there is any value to it at all. But the opposite is very true, if you read and understand the methods section of research, you will what what in the research has any value, and to what level. But if the research has not been duplicated with similar results, despite reading the methods section, it could still be garbage. Kinda like that old saying, garbage in garbage out. But, a well designed and run research study is often GOLD.
Definitely bro. I'm not saying it doesn't have value. My experience has just taught me to be cautious, even when it comes to solid research that is "often" (but not always) GOLD.
Im officially over this topic lol. My opinion is they should not eliminate the goats completely and especially using the method chosen. Feel free to disagree. Signing out...😂🤣
 
Top