Recent Jaguar Pics and other critters down south

[IA Born]

 

The Jaguar that is roaming southern AZ right now is very similar in size to a large tom mtn lion.

 

I hate to break it to you but there are several jaguars roaming southern AZ, not just 1. I know that at one point AZG&F had 5 collared. I know the guys that chase lions down there with dogs have treed many but purposely don't post picture of it nor talk much of it. AZ does not want any land in Southern AZ deemed habitat for jaguars. If the feds recognize it as natural habitat for a roaming jaguar then it becomes a non-huntable protected area and we're screwed.

 

 

 

This is actually not correct. I made a similar post a while back when the critical habitat rule was first published. As I said then, I rarely talk about my job because I know there is so much ant-Fed sentiment on here, but I work for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Arizona (northern AZ). I also spend most of my free time hunting and fishing and teaching my kids about hunting, fishing, and conservation. I try hard to use my status as both an endangered species biologist and hunter to educate folks about what Federal protections really mean.

 

AGFD has not had 5 jaguars collared. We'd have been briefed on that and it would have been a big deal. There was one collared. Its entirely possible that there are multiple jaguars running around southern Arizona and they haven't been brought to the attention of AGFD or FWS. But if lion hunters are treeing them incidentally to their normal lion-hunting activities, they will not get in trouble for harassing an endangered species. If that were the case, you'd have heard about Warner Glenn and Jack Childs getting in trouble for treeing the three (2 in AZ, 1 in NM) jaguars they have treed over the years. They didn't get in any trouble and have been great conservation partners over the years. Unless a FWS Special Agent can prove that a jaguar was intentionally treed, the FWS can't and won't prosecute. We're really not bad to work with, I promise.

 

As for habitat becoming non-huntable if it becomes federally protected, that's not true either. I guarantee you that 1000s of hunters in AZ hunt in land designated as critical habitat for some species protected by the FWS and they've been doing it for decades. A critical habitat designation simply means that that particular habitat is deemed essential for the recovery and conservation of the species, but does not, in any way, stop private land owners or, in this case, hunters from doing ANYTHING. All it means is that Federal land management agencies have to come talk to the FWS about their projects and how those projects can still be carried out, but in a way that ensures habitat remains intact. I hunt in critical habitat all the time when I'm off duty. Again, it has NO BEARING on hunters. I'm not posting this to start an anti-Fed debate or discussion. I'm simply trying to do part of what the American People pay me to do every day and educate folks as to what the ESA does and doesn't do. Anytime anyone wants to sit down and look at the ESA and talk about what it can and, more importantly CAN'T do, I'm happy to help out. Like I said before, once you take the time to listen and learn, you'll find out that (for the most part), biologists from the FWS, especially those who hunt/fish or understand hunitng/fishing, are great to work with.

 

And to the original post, that's definitely a bobcat. Patrick Jr. nailed it on the head as to why.

[trphyhntr]

 

 

 

 

 

right on, this is one i havent seen before. great picture they got.

[Hyperwrx]

 

 

The Jaguar that is roaming southern AZ right now is very similar in size to a large tom mtn lion.

 

I hate to break it to you but there are several jaguars roaming southern AZ, not just 1. I know that at one point AZG&F had 5 collared. I know the guys that chase lions down there with dogs have treed many but purposely don't post picture of it nor talk much of it. AZ does not want any land in Southern AZ deemed habitat for jaguars. If the feds recognize it as natural habitat for a roaming jaguar then it becomes a non-huntable protected area and we're screwed.

 

 

 

This is actually not correct. I made a similar post a while back when the critical habitat rule was first published. As I said then, I rarely talk about my job because I know there is so much ant-Fed sentiment on here, but I work for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Arizona (northern AZ). I also spend most of my free time hunting and fishing and teaching my kids about hunting, fishing, and conservation. I try hard to use my status as both an endangered species biologist and hunter to educate folks about what Federal protections really mean.

 

AGFD has not had 5 jaguars collared. We'd have been briefed on that and it would have been a big deal. There was one collared. Its entirely possible that there are multiple jaguars running around southern Arizona and they haven't been brought to the attention of AGFD or FWS. But if lion hunters are treeing them incidentally to their normal lion-hunting activities, they will not get in trouble for harassing an endangered species. If that were the case, you'd have heard about Warner Glenn and Jack Childs getting in trouble for treeing the three (2 in AZ, 1 in NM) jaguars they have treed over the years. They didn't get in any trouble and have been great conservation partners over the years. Unless a FWS Special Agent can prove that a jaguar was intentionally treed, the FWS can't and won't prosecute. We're really not bad to work with, I promise.

 

As for habitat becoming non-huntable if it becomes federally protected, that's not true either. I guarantee you that 1000s of hunters in AZ hunt in land designated as critical habitat for some species protected by the FWS and they've been doing it for decades. A critical habitat designation simply means that that particular habitat is deemed essential for the recovery and conservation of the species, but does not, in any way, stop private land owners or, in this case, hunters from doing ANYTHING. All it means is that Federal land management agencies have to come talk to the FWS about their projects and how those projects can still be carried out, but in a way that ensures habitat remains intact. I hunt in critical habitat all the time when I'm off duty. Again, it has NO BEARING on hunters. I'm not posting this to start an anti-Fed debate or discussion. I'm simply trying to do part of what the American People pay me to do every day and educate folks as to what the ESA does and doesn't do. Anytime anyone wants to sit down and look at the ESA and talk about what it can and, more importantly CAN'T do, I'm happy to help out. Like I said before, once you take the time to listen and learn, you'll find out that (for the most part), biologists from the FWS, especially those who hunt/fish or understand hunitng/fishing, are great to work with.

 

And to the original post, that's definitely a bobcat. Patrick Jr. nailed it on the head as to why.

 

 

I appreciate you posting and clearing up what I had been told. I might have cut some corners of the specifics but the way it was explain to me by the AZG&F biologist who just retired this year was at one point in time we as a state were in possible jeopardy of losing huntable land due to the feds determining that a portion of Southern AZ was part of the jaguar's natural habitat. This is how it was explained to 100 hunters at a local predator hunters meeting back when the macho B incident occurred. He also told us that macho B was not the only jaguar they were keeping track of.

 

I personally know of a very successful and well-known houndsman whose dogs have treed many jaguars. I sold him some confinement cages and we sat and spoke at length. They pull the dogs off and the jaguar is free to go. Those dogs can't tell the difference between a bobcat, lion, or jaguar. They give chase to any and all. Once the animal is IDs I'm sure they back off. I am positive they want no bad PR.

[IA Born]

 

 

 

The Jaguar that is roaming southern AZ right now is very similar in size to a large tom mtn lion.

 

I hate to break it to you but there are several jaguars roaming southern AZ, not just 1. I know that at one point AZG&F had 5 collared. I know the guys that chase lions down there with dogs have treed many but purposely don't post picture of it nor talk much of it. AZ does not want any land in Southern AZ deemed habitat for jaguars. If the feds recognize it as natural habitat for a roaming jaguar then it becomes a non-huntable protected area and we're screwed.

 

 

 

This is actually not correct. I made a similar post a while back when the critical habitat rule was first published. As I said then, I rarely talk about my job because I know there is so much ant-Fed sentiment on here, but I work for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Arizona (northern AZ). I also spend most of my free time hunting and fishing and teaching my kids about hunting, fishing, and conservation. I try hard to use my status as both an endangered species biologist and hunter to educate folks about what Federal protections really mean.

 

AGFD has not had 5 jaguars collared. We'd have been briefed on that and it would have been a big deal. There was one collared. Its entirely possible that there are multiple jaguars running around southern Arizona and they haven't been brought to the attention of AGFD or FWS. But if lion hunters are treeing them incidentally to their normal lion-hunting activities, they will not get in trouble for harassing an endangered species. If that were the case, you'd have heard about Warner Glenn and Jack Childs getting in trouble for treeing the three (2 in AZ, 1 in NM) jaguars they have treed over the years. They didn't get in any trouble and have been great conservation partners over the years. Unless a FWS Special Agent can prove that a jaguar was intentionally treed, the FWS can't and won't prosecute. We're really not bad to work with, I promise.

 

As for habitat becoming non-huntable if it becomes federally protected, that's not true either. I guarantee you that 1000s of hunters in AZ hunt in land designated as critical habitat for some species protected by the FWS and they've been doing it for decades. A critical habitat designation simply means that that particular habitat is deemed essential for the recovery and conservation of the species, but does not, in any way, stop private land owners or, in this case, hunters from doing ANYTHING. All it means is that Federal land management agencies have to come talk to the FWS about their projects and how those projects can still be carried out, but in a way that ensures habitat remains intact. I hunt in critical habitat all the time when I'm off duty. Again, it has NO BEARING on hunters. I'm not posting this to start an anti-Fed debate or discussion. I'm simply trying to do part of what the American People pay me to do every day and educate folks as to what the ESA does and doesn't do. Anytime anyone wants to sit down and look at the ESA and talk about what it can and, more importantly CAN'T do, I'm happy to help out. Like I said before, once you take the time to listen and learn, you'll find out that (for the most part), biologists from the FWS, especially those who hunt/fish or understand hunitng/fishing, are great to work with.

 

And to the original post, that's definitely a bobcat. Patrick Jr. nailed it on the head as to why.

 

 

I appreciate you posting and clearing up what I had been told. I might have cut some corners of the specifics but the way it was explain to me by the AZG&F biologist who just retired this year was at one point in time we as a state were in possible jeopardy of losing huntable land due to the feds determining that a portion of Southern AZ was part of the jaguar's natural habitat. This is how it was explained to 100 hunters at a local predator hunters meeting back when the macho B incident occurred. He also told us that macho B was not the only jaguar they were keeping track of.

 

I personally know of a very successful and well-known houndsman whose dogs have treed many jaguars. I sold him some confinement cages and we sat and spoke at length. They pull the dogs off and the jaguar is free to go. Those dogs can't tell the difference between a bobcat, lion, or jaguar. They give chase to any and all. Once the animal is IDs I'm sure they back off. I am positive they want no bad PR.

 

 

 

These are they type of civil discussions I absolutely love. Hunters have never been in jeopardy of losing huntable land. The reality is that southern Arizona is, in fact, part of the jaguar's natural habitat. It has been (as has most of the state) since before white settlers came here. One thing that doesn't get made public is that there are some issues which cause great consternation between FWS and AGFD. I'm not surprised that it was explained as you describe it. I have a bunch of good friends and colleagues at AGFD and I have a good working relationship with many others there. But on some issues, there is bad blood between our offices. To be fair, its not all on AGFD's shoulders. We have our share of biologists who are difficult to work with and just as close-minded. In reality, AGFD does not understand how the ESA works as well as they think they do, overall. There are some there who absolutely get it, though. But, again, we have individuals (emphasis on individuals, not the agency) who abuse the ESA, too, and assert authority they don't have.

 

Macho B was not the only jaguar being kept track of in Arizona at that time, that's for sure, but he was the only one collared. The Macho B incident brought much unwanted attention to both agencies. That's about all I can discuss about Macho B at this time. As for critical habitat and jaguars, I have my personal opinions that do not necessarily represent the FWS' official position on the matter. I can also tell you that I'm not the only one. Its tough when you (collectively as an agency) are told to do something by a Federal judge who has no understanding of biology. We originally produced a "not prudent" determination for jaguar critical habitat, but a District Court judge threw it out and forced us to write what you see. Critical habitat is there, we didn't back off the determination, but, again, it has no bearing on anyone's hunting, hiking, fishing, or camping activities on Federal land.

 

You are also correct in that lion dogs can't tell the difference between cat species, which is why we will never prosecute a houndsman for treeing a jaguar or ocelot. They are out conducting lawful activities and not intentionally breaking any Federal laws. The houndsman I've spoken with absolutely don't want bad PR and most of them are excited to see a jaguar. And from my experiences, yes, they back off once they know what they have. Great pics, by the way! Again, great discussion and I hope you find it sincere that I take my job working for the American People very seriously!

[trphyhntr]

 

 

 

 

The Jaguar that is roaming southern AZ right now is very similar in size to a large tom mtn lion.

 

I hate to break it to you but there are several jaguars roaming southern AZ, not just 1. I know that at one point AZG&F had 5 collared. I know the guys that chase lions down there with dogs have treed many but purposely don't post picture of it nor talk much of it. AZ does not want any land in Southern AZ deemed habitat for jaguars. If the feds recognize it as natural habitat for a roaming jaguar then it becomes a non-huntable protected area and we're screwed.

 

 

 

This is actually not correct. I made a similar post a while back when the critical habitat rule was first published. As I said then, I rarely talk about my job because I know there is so much ant-Fed sentiment on here, but I work for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Arizona (northern AZ). I also spend most of my free time hunting and fishing and teaching my kids about hunting, fishing, and conservation. I try hard to use my status as both an endangered species biologist and hunter to educate folks about what Federal protections really mean.

 

AGFD has not had 5 jaguars collared. We'd have been briefed on that and it would have been a big deal. There was one collared. Its entirely possible that there are multiple jaguars running around southern Arizona and they haven't been brought to the attention of AGFD or FWS. But if lion hunters are treeing them incidentally to their normal lion-hunting activities, they will not get in trouble for harassing an endangered species. If that were the case, you'd have heard about Warner Glenn and Jack Childs getting in trouble for treeing the three (2 in AZ, 1 in NM) jaguars they have treed over the years. They didn't get in any trouble and have been great conservation partners over the years. Unless a FWS Special Agent can prove that a jaguar was intentionally treed, the FWS can't and won't prosecute. We're really not bad to work with, I promise.

 

As for habitat becoming non-huntable if it becomes federally protected, that's not true either. I guarantee you that 1000s of hunters in AZ hunt in land designated as critical habitat for some species protected by the FWS and they've been doing it for decades. A critical habitat designation simply means that that particular habitat is deemed essential for the recovery and conservation of the species, but does not, in any way, stop private land owners or, in this case, hunters from doing ANYTHING. All it means is that Federal land management agencies have to come talk to the FWS about their projects and how those projects can still be carried out, but in a way that ensures habitat remains intact. I hunt in critical habitat all the time when I'm off duty. Again, it has NO BEARING on hunters. I'm not posting this to start an anti-Fed debate or discussion. I'm simply trying to do part of what the American People pay me to do every day and educate folks as to what the ESA does and doesn't do. Anytime anyone wants to sit down and look at the ESA and talk about what it can and, more importantly CAN'T do, I'm happy to help out. Like I said before, once you take the time to listen and learn, you'll find out that (for the most part), biologists from the FWS, especially those who hunt/fish or understand hunitng/fishing, are great to work with.

 

And to the original post, that's definitely a bobcat. Patrick Jr. nailed it on the head as to why.

 

 

I appreciate you posting and clearing up what I had been told. I might have cut some corners of the specifics but the way it was explain to me by the AZG&F biologist who just retired this year was at one point in time we as a state were in possible jeopardy of losing huntable land due to the feds determining that a portion of Southern AZ was part of the jaguar's natural habitat. This is how it was explained to 100 hunters at a local predator hunters meeting back when the macho B incident occurred. He also told us that macho B was not the only jaguar they were keeping track of.

 

I personally know of a very successful and well-known houndsman whose dogs have treed many jaguars. I sold him some confinement cages and we sat and spoke at length. They pull the dogs off and the jaguar is free to go. Those dogs can't tell the difference between a bobcat, lion, or jaguar. They give chase to any and all. Once the animal is IDs I'm sure they back off. I am positive they want no bad PR.

 

 

 

These are they type of civil discussions I absolutely love. Hunters have never been in jeopardy of losing huntable land. The reality is that southern Arizona is, in fact, part of the jaguar's natural habitat. It has been (as has most of the state) since before white settlers came here. One thing that doesn't get made public is that there are some issues which cause great consternation between FWS and AGFD. I'm not surprised that it was explained as you describe it. I have a bunch of good friends and colleagues at AGFD and I have a good working relationship with many others there. But on some issues, there is bad blood between our offices. To be fair, its not all on AGFD's shoulders. We have our share of biologists who are difficult to work with and just as close-minded. In reality, AGFD does not understand how the ESA works as well as they think they do, overall. There are some there who absolutely get it, though. But, again, we have individuals (emphasis on individuals, not the agency) who abuse the ESA, too, and assert authority they don't have.

 

Macho B was not the only jaguar being kept track of in Arizona at that time, that's for sure, but he was the only one collared. The Macho B incident brought much unwanted attention to both agencies. That's about all I can discuss about Macho B at this time. As for critical habitat and jaguars, I have my personal opinions that do not necessarily represent the FWS' official position on the matter. I can also tell you that I'm not the only one. Its tough when you (collectively as an agency) are told to do something by a Federal judge who has no understanding of biology. We originally produced a "not prudent" determination for jaguar critical habitat, but a District Court judge threw it out and forced us to write what you see. Critical habitat is there, we didn't back off the determination, but, again, it has no bearing on anyone's hunting, hiking, fishing, or camping activities on Federal land.

 

You are also correct in that lion dogs can't tell the difference between cat species, which is why we will never prosecute a houndsman for treeing a jaguar or ocelot. They are out conducting lawful activities and not intentionally breaking any Federal laws. The houndsman I've spoken with absolutely don't want bad PR and most of them are excited to see a jaguar. And from my experiences, yes, they back off once they know what they have. Great pics, by the way! Again, great discussion and I hope you find it sincere that I take my job working for the American People very seriously!

 

 

how do you know that though? i dont know anything about it of course, but im the type of guy that doesnt want to give an inch in case they decide to take a mile. i mean, wouldnt it just be fodder for anti's to use against hunters?

[IA Born]

That's a good, fair, and legitimate question, trphyhntr. This is partially a case of your trusting a Federal agent (me) that you don't know to be telling you the truth. The Federal law (ESA) is very clear on what critical habitat can and can't do. After 10+ years of implementing that law and working on many critical habitat issues (including lawsuits by environmental groups), I can assure you anti-hunters and environlomental groups can never make that happen. Its been upheld in Federal court MANY times in MANY variations of attempts. I'm not saying anything on here that can't be looked up and proven.

As for your concern about not wanting to give an inch...I don't blame you. Its that kind of attitude from folks like you and the environmental groups (they serve a purpose, too) that are what keeps our agency honest. Its why I take my job working for you all so seriously! And, you should try working for the Feds...talk about not wanting to give an inch for fear of them taking a mile! I've worked more 70-hour weeks in the past 3 years (while only getting my 40-hour pay and no comp time) than I care to remember.

[1uglydude]

 

 

 

 

 

The Jaguar that is roaming southern AZ right now is very similar in size to a large tom mtn lion.

 

I hate to break it to you but there are several jaguars roaming southern AZ, not just 1. I know that at one point AZG&F had 5 collared. I know the guys that chase lions down there with dogs have treed many but purposely don't post picture of it nor talk much of it. AZ does not want any land in Southern AZ deemed habitat for jaguars. If the feds recognize it as natural habitat for a roaming jaguar then it becomes a non-huntable protected area and we're screwed.

 

 

 

This is actually not correct. I made a similar post a while back when the critical habitat rule was first published. As I said then, I rarely talk about my job because I know there is so much ant-Fed sentiment on here, but I work for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Arizona (northern AZ). I also spend most of my free time hunting and fishing and teaching my kids about hunting, fishing, and conservation. I try hard to use my status as both an endangered species biologist and hunter to educate folks about what Federal protections really mean.

 

AGFD has not had 5 jaguars collared. We'd have been briefed on that and it would have been a big deal. There was one collared. Its entirely possible that there are multiple jaguars running around southern Arizona and they haven't been brought to the attention of AGFD or FWS. But if lion hunters are treeing them incidentally to their normal lion-hunting activities, they will not get in trouble for harassing an endangered species. If that were the case, you'd have heard about Warner Glenn and Jack Childs getting in trouble for treeing the three (2 in AZ, 1 in NM) jaguars they have treed over the years. They didn't get in any trouble and have been great conservation partners over the years. Unless a FWS Special Agent can prove that a jaguar was intentionally treed, the FWS can't and won't prosecute. We're really not bad to work with, I promise.

 

As for habitat becoming non-huntable if it becomes federally protected, that's not true either. I guarantee you that 1000s of hunters in AZ hunt in land designated as critical habitat for some species protected by the FWS and they've been doing it for decades. A critical habitat designation simply means that that particular habitat is deemed essential for the recovery and conservation of the species, but does not, in any way, stop private land owners or, in this case, hunters from doing ANYTHING. All it means is that Federal land management agencies have to come talk to the FWS about their projects and how those projects can still be carried out, but in a way that ensures habitat remains intact. I hunt in critical habitat all the time when I'm off duty. Again, it has NO BEARING on hunters. I'm not posting this to start an anti-Fed debate or discussion. I'm simply trying to do part of what the American People pay me to do every day and educate folks as to what the ESA does and doesn't do. Anytime anyone wants to sit down and look at the ESA and talk about what it can and, more importantly CAN'T do, I'm happy to help out. Like I said before, once you take the time to listen and learn, you'll find out that (for the most part), biologists from the FWS, especially those who hunt/fish or understand hunitng/fishing, are great to work with.

 

And to the original post, that's definitely a bobcat. Patrick Jr. nailed it on the head as to why.

 

 

I appreciate you posting and clearing up what I had been told. I might have cut some corners of the specifics but the way it was explain to me by the AZG&F biologist who just retired this year was at one point in time we as a state were in possible jeopardy of losing huntable land due to the feds determining that a portion of Southern AZ was part of the jaguar's natural habitat. This is how it was explained to 100 hunters at a local predator hunters meeting back when the macho B incident occurred. He also told us that macho B was not the only jaguar they were keeping track of.

 

I personally know of a very successful and well-known houndsman whose dogs have treed many jaguars. I sold him some confinement cages and we sat and spoke at length. They pull the dogs off and the jaguar is free to go. Those dogs can't tell the difference between a bobcat, lion, or jaguar. They give chase to any and all. Once the animal is IDs I'm sure they back off. I am positive they want no bad PR.

 

 

 

These are they type of civil discussions I absolutely love. Hunters have never been in jeopardy of losing huntable land. The reality is that southern Arizona is, in fact, part of the jaguar's natural habitat. It has been (as has most of the state) since before white settlers came here. One thing that doesn't get made public is that there are some issues which cause great consternation between FWS and AGFD. I'm not surprised that it was explained as you describe it. I have a bunch of good friends and colleagues at AGFD and I have a good working relationship with many others there. But on some issues, there is bad blood between our offices. To be fair, its not all on AGFD's shoulders. We have our share of biologists who are difficult to work with and just as close-minded. In reality, AGFD does not understand how the ESA works as well as they think they do, overall. There are some there who absolutely get it, though. But, again, we have individuals (emphasis on individuals, not the agency) who abuse the ESA, too, and assert authority they don't have.

 

Macho B was not the only jaguar being kept track of in Arizona at that time, that's for sure, but he was the only one collared. The Macho B incident brought much unwanted attention to both agencies. That's about all I can discuss about Macho B at this time. As for critical habitat and jaguars, I have my personal opinions that do not necessarily represent the FWS' official position on the matter. I can also tell you that I'm not the only one. Its tough when you (collectively as an agency) are told to do something by a Federal judge who has no understanding of biology. We originally produced a "not prudent" determination for jaguar critical habitat, but a District Court judge threw it out and forced us to write what you see. Critical habitat is there, we didn't back off the determination, but, again, it has no bearing on anyone's hunting, hiking, fishing, or camping activities on Federal land.

 

You are also correct in that lion dogs can't tell the difference between cat species, which is why we will never prosecute a houndsman for treeing a jaguar or ocelot. They are out conducting lawful activities and not intentionally breaking any Federal laws. The houndsman I've spoken with absolutely don't want bad PR and most of them are excited to see a jaguar. And from my experiences, yes, they back off once they know what they have. Great pics, by the way! Again, great discussion and I hope you find it sincere that I take my job working for the American People very seriously!

 

 

how do you know that though? i dont know anything about it of course, but im the type of guy that doesnt want to give an inch in case they decide to take a mile. i mean, wouldnt it just be fodder for anti's to use against hunters?

 

 

...and if you won't take the word from IA Born as a federal agent, take it from a former environmental litigator who represented many clients dealing with ESA issues. I know...I know...a fed or a lawyer...pretty slim pickings.

 

Critical habitat designations can make it harder to push through new development....or maintain existing development....but I don't see it specifically targeting hunting or similar uses.

 

[Big Browns]

Great info, thanks IA Born!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[coatimundi01]

This turned from clearly a pic of a bobcat to one heck of a discussion! Good stuff IA Born! I hope to one day glass up a jaguar, and not at the dealer lot in Tucson!

[ready2hunt]

Thanks for the info guys!

[Chef]

Thank you IA Born for your educating posts on the subjects. This has turned into a very informative and enlightening thread. I greatly appreciate your willingness to post up. Especially with your first hand knowledge and experience on the matter. Thanks for doing what you do and for working alongside us!

[IA Born]

Thank you IA Born for your educating posts on the subjects. This has turned into a very informative and enlightening thread. I greatly appreciate your willingness to post up. Especially with your first hand knowledge and experience on the matter. Thanks for doing what you do and for working alongside us!

 

You are very welcome, Chef! Same goes to all of you showing support above! It was my love of hunting and fishing with my dad growing up in Iowa during the 1985 Farm Bill that helped push me down the road of a career in conservation. At that time, I wanted to be an Iowa DNR Conservation Officer, but I left Iowa for grad school and it led me where I am today. I strive to use my love of hunting and fishing to do just what I did above and help educate and break down myths and misinformation. My supervisors love that I can reach out to the hunting community and help them understand what does/doesn't happen with the ESA and break down some of those two-way barriers. I truly do take my job working for you all (The American People) very seriously. I don't base any of my management recommendations on emotions and I don't believe that every species or habitat should be federally protected because someone else says it should be. I look at what the science tells me and bury any personal feelings. I won't lie, I want to conserve everything, but that doesn't mean using Federal laws to do it. I have coworkers who have big misconceptions about the hunting community and I have several coworkers who are as passionate about hunting and fishing as I am. I've also hunted with folks who have misconceptions about our agency. I've been in areas where I truly felt like I'd be in serious trouble if I admitted who I worked for, even as a hunter, and that has made me nervous about speaking up in certain areas and at certain times on CW so I truly thank you for your support. I promise you, we're not a bad agency to deal with. We have our share of nut-jobs, just like the hunting community does, but we have far more great biologists, just like there are far more great hunting ambassadors out there!