|
Post by k9 on Feb 13, 2009 14:30:53 GMT -6
My Director Wayne Funke has gotten ahold of me and asked if I will hold off on my challenge of the decision made by ITA BOD regarding pre staking. He says he thinks this will be discussed at the meeting in April and that after that meeting we can revisit it if need be.
I am good with that and plan to attend that meeting.
Directors I know in the past I have spoken a little at such meetings. My question is, if a number of us show up, will there be a way for each of us to step up and give a brief statement, or do we need to figure out a spokeperson for both sides?
Also Directors, is Ron Andrews the best resource for data regarding complaints over the last few years regarding pre staking? I want to know before that meeting just how many complaints and what areas are they from?
|
|
|
Post by ~ADC~ on Feb 13, 2009 14:35:50 GMT -6
I may just ride over with you to that meeting Bruce if you got room. That way we can speed and not wear seatbelts and not have to worry about a ticket too. ~ADC~
|
|
|
Post by longpond on Feb 13, 2009 15:15:46 GMT -6
Just my 2 cents Bruce but I think it best if with some organizing to have one fella speak and others stand behind him and their statement. Everybody taking a turn at basically saying the same thing will just eat up alot of time. One statement with alot of bodies would be my choice. Again just my 2 cents...............Jeff
|
|
|
Post by longpond on Feb 13, 2009 15:26:42 GMT -6
Anybody wanting to talk needs to be on the agenda.........Jeff
|
|
|
Post by centraliowa (ryan) on Feb 13, 2009 16:19:24 GMT -6
bruce, when you get the speach wrote or presentation ready i would love to have a look at it. not saying i will be able to add anything, but you never know. i will also be at the meeting to voice our objection to the pre-staking decision. Let me know if you need me to research anything or need any help.
ryan
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Feb 13, 2009 16:19:48 GMT -6
Kinda what I was thinking too Jeff. No sense in rehashing over and over again the same issues.
I do see where there could be a split in the discussion though, once we get into the fact that snaring VS water trapping are somewhat two different worlds.
I think both are important, but I think they are in fact very different when it comes to this issue.
Whomever plans to come to this meeting, lets get our heads together and pick a spokes person for the pro side of it. Those of you against should also pick a person, and lets keep it streamlined for the meeting.
Of course if anyone disagrees you have the option to speak if you wish.
Jeff or any Directors, without naming a person, can you just put on the agenda that a "spokesperson" for the pro side of prestaking is going to speak, and we will name that person later?
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Feb 13, 2009 16:24:05 GMT -6
I think the best way to do this is for each trapper who wants to assert his opinion to write his Director and/or the President with that opinion. Might not hurt to send the same message to Ron Andrews. Make your specific points as you see fit.
At the actual meeting, one representative makes general points for the overall group.
Thanks Ryan and I look forward to seeing you there. I will send you my letter to the Director in my area that I will prepare before the meeting.
As far as speaking goes I will be waiting to see who will be speaking on the pro side of this, because I think Jeff is right. If we all get up and speak we will bog this meeting down something terrible.
|
|
|
Post by centraliowa (ryan) on Feb 13, 2009 16:33:27 GMT -6
i agree one person to speak. i have all ready requested for the director for this area have two items on his agenda
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Feb 13, 2009 18:29:07 GMT -6
I guess before we write off more than one speaking, how many plan to show up? If only a handful maybe all could say something if they keep it short.
For sure it sounds like me, Riverrat, ADC and Centraliowa will be there.
Any others plan to come?
|
|
|
Post by daveplueger on Feb 13, 2009 18:54:55 GMT -6
I hope to be there. Depends on my work load that time of year. One speaker may be all the ITA wishes to put on the agenda. I believe the by-laws state that its up to the president whether or not to grant time on the agenda. One speaker could be appointed and the whole group could draft the message. This way everyone has input through one speaker. Saves time at the meeting, yet pleases everyone. Or at least everyone that knows of the situation and wishes to have their voice heard.
|
|
|
Post by iayogi17 on Feb 13, 2009 19:30:04 GMT -6
I'm going to make it down there. If one speaker works that's fine if we are all on the same page but I think if the BOD hears it from more then one it will set in more. I would start off w/ keep prestaking regs the some, if that wouldn't work prestake 2wks before and everything pulled at the end of beaver season. (I still have weasel boxes froze in ice .) not everyone is in the banana belt. last year I had 2 days to trap beaver in the spring. we get ice up here boy.
|
|
|
Post by iowatrapper on Feb 13, 2009 19:50:15 GMT -6
Where is this taking place?
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Feb 13, 2009 20:14:17 GMT -6
Ames is where it is.
I am OK with just one speaker, but do think we should each send a letter or email to our Directors and President with our own thoughts. Kind of a double effort. I think those should be prior to the meeting, as it could generate some thoughts or questions from our Directors. It is much easier for someone like a Director to absorb information and think it through completely in the privacy of thier own home rather than a meeting environment.
Rather than take an inventory of everyone that is going to be there lets discuss it this way.
Any volunteer who wants to speak to the Directors on behalf of the group? Perhaps from a prepared statement that the group has put together?
Is anyone opposed to just having one speaker? If so please speak up.
How about on the opposed side? Anyone want to speak out for that side?
I would like both sides well represented if at all possible, because I want to see this whole deal put to bed one way or the other.
In fact, if trappers have complained to Directors about prestaking, I WOULD EXPECT TO HEAR FROM SOME OF THOSE TRAPPERS AT THIS MEETING if they want to have any credibility. I can respect healthy disagreements. I can't respect it if a trapper is unwilling to come in and step up. Its easy to let a Director be a mouthpiece and stand up for you. Directors who have had complaints please invite those trappers to the meeting as I imagine most do not read in here.
Longpond how do we get on the agenda? Do we need to contact Craig Sweet?
|
|
|
Post by Kelly on Feb 13, 2009 20:44:25 GMT -6
At this point in time, I plan on attending this meeting. Agree that we should have one speaker, have some sort of statement to be read that all those in favor of have agreed to and/or signed.
It is my understanding(confirmed by Craig Sweet in a recent conversation with him)that anyone wishing to present to the BOD at one of their meetings needs to contact the ITA President to request being on the agenda(It is still at the Presidents descression, could say yes and could say no).
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Feb 13, 2009 20:59:45 GMT -6
Thanks Kelley I do not care who contacts Craig, I will if no one on here has regular contact with him.
I will say this again. I would really like it if some of the trappers who complained to Directors about pre staking could come to this meeting and give thier side of it.
I can't speak for the whole group but I will treat them with respect.
In fact, if none of them will come I think that speaks for itself right there.
I know Dave Plueger does a good job of speaking and knows all the Directors, if willing he would be a good speaker.
|
|
|
Post by ~ADC~ on Feb 13, 2009 21:51:00 GMT -6
I know Dave Plueger does a good job of speaking and knows all the Directors, if willing he would be a good speaker. Since we are volunteering others, lol, I'd like to give k9 aka. Bruce the job of compiling PMs/e-mails from people here into a eloquent speech on be half of the members here and other trappers, like my partner, who are in favor of not banning pre-staking. We can all send him some ideas of things to be included and he put the ideas together and pm it to those who contributed and see if there are any modifications necessary before the final presentation. Will you do that Bruce? ~ADC~
|
|
|
Post by daveplueger on Feb 13, 2009 22:27:53 GMT -6
I agree with ADCs choice. Thanks for the vote of confidence Bruce but April is a VERY busy month at the forestry I work for and getting away on that date could be a problem. I would be happy to send out my comments to you bruce if I cant make it. I think you would do an excellent job as an ambasador to the board.
|
|
|
Post by jdrogge on Feb 14, 2009 2:03:58 GMT -6
Its a pretty long haul but I'm gonna try to make it down, this is a important tool to my partner and I and I don't want to lose it.
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Feb 14, 2009 10:20:30 GMT -6
I would do it if no others step up that want to. If someone really wants to do it please chime in. Otherwise if no volunteers I will if I have to.
The main reason I am reluctant is because I do not function well with a prepared written speech. I have to step away from it and just speak, which means I could leave some important points out. What I tend to do is write down the key subjects I want to speak on, then freestyle from that list of subjects.
If there is a better speaker out there, please chime in.
|
|
|
Post by longpond on Feb 14, 2009 10:30:52 GMT -6
Let me clear one thing up right here and now fellas. I just got an E-mail from a person on here that thought it was wrong that I voted yes at the BOD meeting but seem to be helping the no crowd out on here. First and foremost I will work to make dam sure Iowa Trappers have a voice. We all will never agree 100% on everything but who or when does that ever happen in the real world. If I can help anybody out I will. The way I see it both sides need to let their District Directors hear from them, let Ron A. hear from them, and it organized to be at the April meeting. Lets get this decided without beatin each other up..............Jeff
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Feb 14, 2009 11:10:19 GMT -6
Yeo you are right Jeff. Fellas if I speak at this deal I willnot blindly defend ALL prestakers, only those who are doing so properly.
In fact know this in advance, I will be taking a stand AGAINST prestaking more than a couple weeks ahead of season, and AGAINST leaving kill poles out year round. So consider that before you guys ask me to speak.
I feel more than two to three weeks ahead of season is too far ahead.
Jeff please make sure someone on the anti prestaking side knows that this meeting is going to happen.
If I am the speaker, I will only have something negative to say about them IF THEY FAIL TO SHOW and represent thier side of the issue. If no one from that side shows up, then the Board needs to consider that strongly.
Its easy to pick up a phone and complain to a Director, but if you really mean it, you will back it up with action.
|
|
|
Post by justwannano on Feb 14, 2009 12:44:41 GMT -6
Let me clear one thing up right here and now fellas. I just got an E-mail from a person on here that thought it was wrong that I voted yes at the BOD meeting but seem to be helping the no crowd out on here. First and foremost I will work to make dam sure Iowa Trappers have a voice. We all will never agree 100% on everything but who or when does that ever happen in the real world. If I can help anybody out I will. The way I see it both sides need to let their District Directors hear from them, let Ron A. hear from them, and it organized to be at the April meeting. Lets get this decided with beatin each other up..............Jeff Lets keep it civil guys. Nobody needs to be beatin anybody up. just
|
|
|
Post by centraliowa (ryan) on Feb 14, 2009 18:30:12 GMT -6
K9, I do very well with presentations and writted speeches. i can also wing it if needed. I also agree with you on the two week before season for pre-staking and not leaving out kill poles all year. I would just need to see the speech a few days ahead of time so I could memorize it. i will help with this any way i can, just let me know. ryan
|
|
|
Post by k9 on Feb 14, 2009 20:44:58 GMT -6
That will be fine Ryan I look forward to seeing you. When I prepare my thoughts in letter form for Directors and Ron Amdrews, I will send a copy of it to you also. You can glean from it whatever you wish.
|
|
|
Post by paulb on Feb 14, 2009 21:09:26 GMT -6
is there another term that could be used in the wording for "kill pole",,,i would hate to see that in black and white in the law and or rules and regulations,,,just my opinion
|
|
|
Post by Scott W. on Feb 14, 2009 21:12:23 GMT -6
I was told duriing the chat session that tangle stake was more appropriate, and I agree. Scott
|
|
|
Post by justwannano on Feb 14, 2009 23:24:12 GMT -6
I'd be careful with that term too. It could be used to mean anything that an animal could be wrapped around. If we lose that
|
|
|
Post by Scott W. on Feb 15, 2009 6:05:23 GMT -6
Well, I'm willing to hear other terms. Maybe we just don't encourage using specific terms in the regs, although I would like to see "pre-placement of unset equipment" used instead of "pre-staking" Keep talking! Scott
|
|
|
Post by daveplueger on Feb 15, 2009 9:26:45 GMT -6
How about "cable restraint dispatch aparatus"
|
|
|
Post by centraliowa (ryan) on Feb 15, 2009 11:19:40 GMT -6
"Tangle Stake" and "pre-placement of unset equipment" and "removal of equipment from field" are good terms. do we need to include anything about anti-bullying. I think most of us understand that we do not own anything in the ROW. do we need to make sure the anti-pre-stakers know they have just as much right to it as anyone even if it is pre-staked?
|
|