December 17, 2017

New Road Improves Access to 12,000 Acres in New Mexico

Press Release from Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—A new road is now in place and being used by elk hunters and others in northeast New Mexico thanks to funding provided by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and the Lineberry Foundation.

RMEF worked with the New Mexico State Land Office to improve vehicular access to approximately 6,000 acres and walk-in access to another 6,000 acres of State Trust Lands in the White Peak Area.

“This project eases the tension of a long-running dispute in Mora County over access into prime wildlife habitat,” said Blake Henning, RMEF chief conservation officer. “Not only is this mix of private and State Trust Lands key for elk but it’s also home to deer, turkey, bears, mountain lions and other species.”

RMEF provided nearly $20,000 in funding to blade the 2.5 mile road that ties into existing ranch roads and old logging roads within Game Management Unit 48 that improves access to Halls Peak, Cooks Peak and Gallinas Mesa. It is accessible off Mora County Road 10, commonly known as White Peak Road.

Additionally, RMEF paid for a 35-year right-of-way easement that blocks future land commissioners from closing the road through 2052.

The project also secures access to a primitive seven-acre campground open during hunting season solely to sportsmen and women with a valid license. RMEF volunteers also recently put in 40 hours of work to clear the campground with chainsaws, build an access gate and install a gap gate.

Share

Public Access Dispute Solved in Central Oregon

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—The public will continue to have access to 43,000 acres of central Oregon’s prime elk country thanks to a group effort including the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Bureau of Land Management, Crook County, Oregon Hunters Association (OHA) and the Waibel Ranches, LLC.

“We are pleased that all parties could come together to provide continued access to a part of Oregon revered by elk hunters and others,” said Blake Henning, RMEF chief conservation officer. “Opening or improving access to our public lands lies at the core of our conservation mission. We hear time and time again from our members how important it is that we carry out this public access work.”

At issue was what was thought to be a public road through private land south of Prineville in the Crooked River drainage that provided access to the southern end of Ochoco National Forest. RMEF provided title work and research that showed continuous public use of the road since the late 1800s.

Waibel Ranches, LLC facilitated the construction of the new road at their own expense and at their own initiative. They did so in order to provide access to the same public lands as a means to reduce the liability, trespass, poaching and littering associated with public travel along the old Teaters Road.

“It’s great to have a partner like RMEF to help find solutions to public land access issues,” said Dennis Teitzel, Prineville BLM district manager.

“This project provides access for hunters and all others that could have been lost without the cooperation and efforts of several organizations. The landowners should be thanked for their willingness to work to solve a problem for the benefit for all,” said Richard Nelson, OHA Bend Chapter past president. “It shows what can be accomplished when all work on a solution instead of locking in to an adversary position.”

Since 1986, RMEF and its partners completed 875 conservation and hunting heritage outreach projects in Oregon with a combined value of more than $57.4 million. These projects protected or enhanced 793,317 acres of habitat and opened or secured public access to 90,073 acres.

Share

Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Issuance of Depredation Permits for Double-Crested Cormorants

SUMMARY: This notice advises the public of the completion of an environmental assessment (EA) and finding of no significant impact (FONSI). The EA analyzed the potential impacts of a proposal to make decisions on depredation permit applications for the annual take (i.e., lethal removal) of up to 51,571 double-crested cormorants, Phalcrocorax
auritus, across 37 central and eastern States and the District of Columbia. The EA considered two alternatives: The proposed action; and the reduced take alternative (which is the preferred alternative). The scope of the EA is to issue permits to manage cormorant damage at aquaculture facilities, protect human health and safety, protect threatened and endangered wildlife, and alleviate damage to property. Based on the analysis contained in the EA, the Service finds that the preferred alternative would not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, as outlined in the accompanying FONSI.<<<More>>>

Press Release
Service’s Environmental Assessment Balances Protection of Aquaculture with Conservation of Cormorant Populations

November 14, 2017

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has taken action towards providing relief to fish production facilities that are suffering significant economic losses due to predation of their fish stocks by double-crested cormorants. The Environmental Assessment released today was completed by the Service under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in consultation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Wildlife Services. It evaluated options for issuing individual permits to lethally control cormorants (known as depredation permits) while ensuring the long-term health of the cormorant population.

Cormorants can feed on fish raised for human consumption and on fish raised for other commercial purposes. In addition, cormorants may cause economic damage to property as well as other damage and conflicts associated with increasing populations.

The EA analyzed options for the issuance of depredation permits for cormorants where there is either significant economic damage to aquaculture facilities, significant damage to native vegetation, significant impact on a threatened or endangered species or significant human safety risks.

It provides a strong biological foundation to ensure cormorant populations are managed responsibly and in compliance with federal laws and regulations, while balancing economic development, human health and safety, endangered species management and other priorities.

Upon publication in the Federal Register on November 15, 2017, aquaculture facility managers and property owners across 37 central and eastern states and the District of Columbia will be able to apply for individual permits for lethal take of double-crested cormorants. The Service expects to begin issuing actual permits prior to cormorant migration this fall.

This review did not include potential damage to recreational and commercial fishing by cormorants. Over the next year, the Service will engage stakeholders in order to assess the biological, social and economic significance of wild fish-cormorant interactions, and to identify a suite of management alternatives. This will include identifying the monitoring needs necessary to address the issue and gathering better scientific information that could be used in the NEPA review and decision making process.

The scale and complexity of the issues involving cormorant control to protect wild free-swimming fish populations is substantial, and not as easily assessed as the impacts on aquaculture. The Service will work with states and tribes to compile scientific information regarding the biological and economic effects of cormorants or their removal on wild fisheries.

The Service is also currently working with state fish and wildlife agencies to assess comprehensive management options for cormorants across the United States.

For more information, please visit: https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/double-crested-cormorants.php.

Share

2018 Elk Camp Heads to Arizona, Registration Now Open

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation is heading to the sunny Southwest to hold its 2018 Elk Camp March 15-18 in Chandler, Arizona.

“There is nothing like the energy and enthusiasm generated by our members and volunteers at Elk Camp,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “We are excited to get together in Arizona to celebrate our conservation mission and milestones.”

As of July 1, 2017, RMEF has conserved or enhanced more than 7.14 million acres of elk habitat and opened or improved access to 1.15 million acres for hunters, anglers, hikers and others to enjoy. RMEF recently eliminated alllong-term debt for the first time in its 33-year history and is also riding eight consecutive years of record membership growth.

The Sheraton Grand at Wild Horse Pass will host 2018 Elk Camp. As in past gatherings, RMEF will celebrate its accomplishments during Volunteer Fun Night as well as two other nightly events including auctions. Elk Camp will also offer various “Taste of Arizona” events including a desert jeep tour, an excursion to historic downtown Scottsdale and Major League Baseball spring training games (schedules/locations yet to be announced by MLB teams). In addition, attendees may play nearby championship golf courses and take part in other on-site activities such as boating, horseback riding or sitting down at Arizona’s only five-star restaurant.

RMEF will announce its world class entertainment performers and other information in the near future.

Full registration is now open and available here.

RMEF held its 2017 national convention in Nashville, Tennessee.

Current Elk Camp 2018 sponsors include ALPS OutdoorZ, Browning, Sitka, US Bank and BMO Wealth Management.

Share

RMEF Enabling Perpetuation of GI Wolves

*Editor’s Note* – Below is a press release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. It is the announcement of a $50,000 grant to the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks for wolf management. The presser states that half the $50,000 will be used for “wolf collaring and management actions for problem wolves.” The other half for  “developing what’s called the Patch Occupancy Model (POM) for estimating wolf populations.”

The Federal Government and their totalitarian NGOs, took on a criminal enterprise to force wolves onto the landscape which included the Montana region. Once they strong-armed their “GI Wolves” onto the public, they then forced the Montana taxpayers to now pick up the bill to continue their criminal enterprise. Can you spell extortion? So why is the RMEF enabling the continuation of this criminal enterprise?

Instead of spending $25,000 on collaring problem wolves, why not just kill the damned things and get rid of them? In addition, only a moron thinks that a computer-driven, outcome-based, fake “model” can more accurately tell fake managers how many wolves there really are. The only thing fake computer models will do is manipulate an already rigged system that can be used to con organizations, like the RMEF, out of $50,000 to further perpetuate their criminal activities.

RMEF should use the $50,000 to pay hunters and trappers to kill the wolves and in return this action will please members of the RMEF who are tired of seeing their money spent so that more wolves can be grown which, in turn, further erodes their hunting opportunities. How many elk tags have been taken away from hunters since the proliferation of GI Wolves?

This makes absolutely no sense at all. RMEF needs to rethink their policies.

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

RMEF Grant to Benefit Montana Wolf Management

MISSOULA, Mont.—The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation awarded Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) a $50,000 grant to assist with wolf management in the state of Montana.

“Montana’s wolf population is more than three times larger than federally-required minimum mandates,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “This funding will help FWP get a better grasp on wolf numbers as a benefit to wildlife managers tasked with seeking to balance predator and prey populations while doing so in a more cost effective manner.”

Half of the grant funding will go toward wolf collaring and management actions for problem wolves. The other half will assist a joint effort by FWP and the University of Montana in further developing what’s called the Patch Occupancy Model (POM) for estimating wolf populations.

POM incorporates data on territory and wolf pack sizes along with hunter observations and known wolf locations to get to a more accurate estimation of wolf populations. It is a much cheaper undertaking than previous efforts since it incorporates data analysis rather than direct counting efforts.

Montana’s 2016 wolf report shows a minimum of 477 wolves which is down from 536 wolves counted in 2015, however it does not necessarily reflect a reduction in wolf numbers, but rather a reduction in counting effort.

“Though the minimum count is down, we’ve long held that these minimum counts are useful only in ensuring Montana’s wolf population stays above the federally-mandated minimum threshold. The minimum count is not a population count or an index or estimate of the total number of wolves,” said Bob Inman, FWP carnivore and furbearer program chief.

RMEF also provided grant funding to FWP in 2015 for development of the Patch Occupancy Model.

Share

So, Just What Exactly is Maine IFW Trying to Communicate?

First thing this morning I opened a link to a news story about how a major land owner in Maine, J.D. Irving, has been awarded a conservation award from Sustainable Forest Initiative. In gleaning the report, I read this: “JDI is supporting a large study of white-tailed deer through collaboration with six scientists as well as partners in government across New Brunswick and Maine. The deer research is using GPS tracking and extremely accurate forest inventory mapping to look at how deer are using different forest types during summer and winter months. This long-term study will monitor 140 deer and the habitats they choose over the next four years.”

Did I know this? Did you know this? Without knowing what exactly “supporting a large study” means, one might think that activity deserving of recognition might be worthy information to openly and eagerly share with the Maine people. Evidently it’s not.

In my work with this website, part of that includes a pretty close monitoring of the things that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) does….or doesn’t do. I am signed up to receive press notices, email notifications and Twitter Updates, although I suspect strongly that I don’t receive all that go out…for whatever the reasons.

It wasn’t until long after MDIFW had begun their deer study, that I and the rest of the public learned of it. It wasn’t until today, that I learned that J.D. Irving was “supporting a large study” with Maine and New Brunswick. If I, as someone who spends probably more time and effort than the majority of Maine residents keeping track of such things, don’t know these things, one has to suspect the general population isn’t either.

To date, MDIFW has been very stingy with any information about the study. Other than an occasional “release” to a “safe zone” propaganda outlet, the public would know nothing about the study or that it even existed.

However, this really doesn’t come as a surprise to me, as MDIFW does a very poor job of “communicating” with the public and and even worse job “communicating” with the license-buying sportsmen who pay their salaries. One example of terrible communicating is the department’s relentless tardiness in making available deer, bear, moose and turkey harvest reports and data. Seriously, I wonder why that is?

I also wonder why it is that a better effort can’t be made to share information about the ongoing studies of deer and moose in the state? Is it that the department really hasn’t the time or the money?

Following the revelation that J.D. Irving was awarded for “supporting a large study” of deer, I found out that the MDIFW has decided that the T.V. show, North Woods Law wasn’t embarrassing enough for them and the Governor’s office, so as part of what is being expressed as a campaign to “better communicate their mission with the general public,” they have teamed up with a professional actor to make “funny” videos.

The article I just finished reading says these videos are to share with the public and to “get our message out.” It appears to me that the message MDIFW wants to get out is void of deer and moose studies, or anything to do with hunting, trapping or fishing, even though, as I have repeatedly stated, it is these sportsmen who fund a great part of MDIFW’s budget…a budget that evidently allows them to hire a professional actor and spend their time recording “funny” videos for the “new” website and to publish on YouTube.

I also learned that: “The videos, produced by a professional ad agency [how much did this cost license holders?], are quick hits on three outdoorsy topics: hiking preparedness, birding and invasive species. (emboldening added)

If J.D. Irving’s “supporting a large study” is great enough that it actually made the study possible (and I don’t know what “supporting” means – maybe MDIFW should tell us?) maybe it would make a whole lot of sense to get J.D. Irving into one of those videos, if they are all that important to “getting the message out.” But maybe this is more telling than we realize. Perhaps the “message” is more about hiking, birding and invasive species, than deer, moose, trout or roughed grouse because the department has changed their focus to side dishes while disregarding the meat and potatoes.

But here I am again saying, this shouldn’t come as any surprise. Maine’s fish and game department – even fisheries and wildlife is an inaccurate title for the message it appears they want to send – is no different than all the rest of this country’s environmentalism-driven departments based on Scientism and the relationships of people and animals, far exceeding the relationships between person and person, as is obvious in our violent, angry and hate-filled society.

What I want to know is what plans the State of Maine, and the MDIFW, have in place to fund the future department of natural resources, animal rights and protectionism, when hunting, trapping, and fishing, along with the closing down of access to forests, effectively stopping ATV riding and snowmobiling, are eliminated in about 10 years?

The MDIFW evidently doesn’t have the time or resources to get game harvests reported online until the start of the following hunting seasons, or later, but they have time to make “funny” videos and resources to hire an ad agency, with a professional actor, to send out the message that hiking, birding, and invasive species are far more important than hunting, fishing and trapping.

I think the message is very clear and that MDIFW has been advertising that message loud and clear for several years now. MDIFW is NOT about getting the message out that hunting, trapping and fishing are the very backbone of this entire industry that has brought Maine and the rest of this nation to a point were responsible wildlife management has become the norm. Because we live in a post-normal age, all that has proven to work and has been successful and effective, must be destroyed and replaced with Romance Biology and VooDoo Scientism.

Maine, and the rest of the nation should say goodbye to our traditions of hunting, fishing and trapping and prepare for the “message” MDIFW and others are trying to get out.

From my perspective, it’s a real shame. I also feel bad for J.D. Irving that MDIFW cannot even take the time to acknowledge their support for their ongoing deer study. It is terrible public relations like this that next time MDIFW wants to have a study, they will be left on their own to figure it out.

Good work people!

As I see it, the choice now becomes mine. I can either hope that hunting and fishing are around until I drop dead, or I can become part of the “New Science” Scientism that is driving it all. Answer? I will NOT be signing up for “Keeper of the Maine Outdoors.”

Share

Buying Into Deer Management by Political Influence

Recently a Maine outdoor writer expressed his newly found knowledge he had acquired from reading a 10-year-old study about how deer can destroy a forest. What is most unfortunate for readers is that lacking in this report was the actual history of what took place during that time that prompted this politically biased report, placing pressure on the Pennsylvania Game Commission, forest management companies and private land owners to side with the Game Commission in carrying out their newly crafted deer management plan to radically butcher the existing deer herds throughout the state by up to 70%.

If for no other reason, one has to look at the very top of the study to see that the study was composed by, essentially, the forest industry. With knowledge and understanding, which so few people have these days, of the realities of “studies,” founded in Scientism and outcome-based, agenda-driven, “science,” one can easily discern that this study is the work of scientists, paid by the forest industry, to show a need to protect the forest, even at the expense of a deer herd.

There is, of course, more than one side to any story. The Unified Sportsmen of Pennsylvania sued the Pennsylvania Game Commission to try to get them to stop the destruction of the deer herd. However, many believed the number of deer in Pennsylvania to be much too large, in some places sporting numbers in excess of 60-70 deer per square mile. Growing up and hunting in Maine, where at times to find 1 deer in 60-70 square miles was a feat, it’s difficult to muster up support for those complaining that reducing deer populations to 15-20 deer per square mile would be a total destruction of the deer herd. There is a balance in there somewhere and it’s not based strictly on numbers but on a wide variety of items, often mostly driven by habitat and available feed on a continuous level.

The study in question is more of a political influence prompted by a very nasty set of events set in the mid-2000s. No study should be blindly accepted as the gospel without a deep forensic research into the background of the study and the whos and whys it is being done. Few would argue that too many of any animal within a defined area of the landscape can be destructive, in more ways than simply eating too much vegetation. But at the same time, a biased study, bought and paid for by the forest industry, has to be taken with a grain of salt and definitely within the context of the events at that moment in time. That is why the author should have spent a little more time in conducting his own research about the politics behind this study before extolling its “scientific” virtues as high value.

At the time this study was being compiled, those of us who followed the event, saw typical political nonsense loaded with contradictions. As an example, the forest industry, seemingly having convinced the Game Commission, that the only way the forest industry could survive was to have the deer densities slashed to around 15 deer per square mile. The same forest industry and Game Commission said that their new deer management plan would manage and maintain populations at that level, and yet in May of 2008, we read in the news that a member of the Pennsylvania Game Commission said that in one region, where deer densities had been reduced to 15-20 per square mile, the deer where healthy, the forest had “regenerated,” and that now the deer herd could be rebuilt. Rebuilt? Huh?

The author’s piece also revealed, what he called, “troubling,” a statement made by an author of the study in question. “It doesn’t matter what forest values you want to preserve or enhance – whether deer hunting, animal rights, timber, recreation, or ecological integrity – deer are having dramatic, negative effects on all the values that everyone holds dear.”

This is, of course, the root of all things bad when it comes to wildlife and game management. The real scientific method has gone absent. The study in question is a work of Scientism, in which those with authority present their opinions and perspectives as scientific evidence, understanding full well the power derived by such a position. When scientific decisions are disregarded and replaced with caving in to social and socio-political groups because deer, or any other animal, is having “dramatic, negative effects on all the values” that these, sometimes perverse groups “holds dear,” what hope is there for responsible game management? We can always expect to read more fake “studies” bought and paid for by political groups for political purposes.

Interesting that the reality is that none of these social groups would be in any position to be seeking the preservation of their perceived values as they might pertain to wildlife, if, over the past century, the hunters, trappers and fishermen had not been the financiers and willing participants in the execution of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. And yet, these social and political groups, who are now dominating the fish and wildlife agencies across the country, have never paid a lick of money or given any time toward real conservation of wildlife, are looking to destroy the one proven existence that has brought us to this point. Go figure.

Share

The Left, The Right, Reality and Zinke’s Proposed Forest Management Practices

From the Left all we ever hear is “We’re all gonna die!” From the Right all we ever hear is “It’s about time we’re gonna get it right!” The reality is nothing ever changes. But, don’t go look. The Left/Right paradigm is fake but exists only in echoed rhetoric and that is exactly what we are seeing when Trump’s new Secretary of the Interior announced changes in forest management practices.

The West is burning up, as one report this morning stated. Forest fires are popping up everywhere and as is usually the case, the Left blames is on Global Warming, and the Right blames it on poor forest management practices that result in the creation of tinder boxes.

Another example of the emotional reactions of brainwashed and blinded people is that immediately fear mongering began about the possibility that a tree might now be cut on Maine’s new and mostly unwanted national monument, Katahdin Woods and Waters.

The Right claims that their intent is “a healthy forest through active timber management,” with never a definition of the intent – and that is for a reason. The Left threatens a lawsuit if Zinke tries to cut down one tree in Katahdin Woods and Waters.

St. Clair, the original owner’s son, who is now the front man, without having a clue what Zinke meant by changing forest management practices, said, “We didn’t donate this land to be used as a commercial timbering operation.”

And this is business as usual here in the U.S. of A. While nothing changes in the Federal Government, except that which the ruling establishment wants to change and Congress just does as they are told, a part of what never changes, which is the reason the Federal Government gets away with what they do, is that the Left and Right continue their reactions and responses in the usual manner. In this case, the Left says we’re all gonna die and the Right says it’s about time to get it right. And then it’s on to the next round of fake announcements and none of these mouthy people ever go back to examine exactly what took place.

I think James Beers, former member of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, says it quite well as to why nothing will change – except the emotional rhetoric that always accompanies false political announcement. The Left controls every aspect of government, as well as every non-governmental agency. Because of the infiltration and successful years of brainwashing and mind control throughout our indoctrination factories, even those, like Sec. Zinke, who, to the Left, appears to be a Rightist intent on destroying the forests, cannot help but do anything except what the Left desires – protect the forests and create the tinder boxes. Only politics calls for the political rhetoric to satisfy the voters of each perspective party.

Beers points out much the same when he says that the only way anything could change is through serious changes and/or repeals of certain draconian federal laws that prohibit change of any kind. And we know that will NEVER happen because it is not intended to happen. And so we keep on keeping on.

Beers writes in a recent email:

All of these above mentioned reasons for fuel accumulation and many, many other dwindling public land benefits that are slated for elimination by fiats, regulations and unjust law authorities granted federal bureaucrats in the past 40 to 50 years have a common taproot..  Past Administrations, their appointees and the bureaucrat “scientists” they have hired, all have this land closure and sustainable natural resource management elimination  as their ultimate goal.  Unless and until that “legal” (?) authorization for federal bureaucrats in federal laws like the ESA and Wilderness Act is either repealed or severely and specifically controlled in the specific federal laws authorizing such tyranny I don’t believe these somewhat generic and feel-good directives amount to anything.  The next Administration (look to all the Obama directives and letters, etc. on a wide variety of subjects) will simply issue their own directives (and probably in less than 9 months) and just drop the government truck into high gear and truck on down the road from where they left off on 19 January, 2017.

Because we cannot see, with each announced or “leaked” (that’s funny) change to anything, we will always keep hearing, we’re all gonna die, and it’s about time to get it right, but the truth is nothing ever changes, because “We the People” call all the shots and “we the people” have nothing to say about it – but we are trained to think we do.

Yep, somethings never change. Just more talk.

Share

More Elk Country Conserved, Opened to Public Access in Pennsylvania

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—An additional 766 acres of Pennsylvania elk habitat is now permanently protected and opened to public access thanks to efforts by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) and a generous donor.

“This would not have happened without landowners who care about Pennsylvania and both understand and appreciate the crucial wildlife values of this area,” said Blake Henning, RMEF chief conservation officer.

Located in Centre County, the project extends the western unit of State Game Lands 100 to the north along the West Branch of the Susquehanna River. By doing so, it expands that unit to 5,272 acres in size and improves access to it while expanding the overall size of the two State Game Lands 100 units to a combined 21,069 acres.

“This critical acquisition to the Pennsylvania Game Commission’s State Game Land system will not only enhance the agency’s ability to better manage the southern dispersal of its elk herd, but it will benefit all Pennsylvanians by adding an additional 766 acres,” said Bryan Burhans, PGC executive director. “We are grateful for the outstanding partnership between RMEF and the Game Commission.”

The property’s habitat includes oak and pine woodlands, meadows, grassland and key riparian habitat along 1.24 miles of the river. It is home to elk, whitetail deer, black bears, turkey, grouse and other bird and animal life.

“We are especially grateful for our long-standing partners at the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Their dedication and determination made this project possible,” added Henning.

Since 1991, RMEF and its partners completed 424 conservation and hunting heritage outreach projects in Pennsylvania with a combined value of more than $24.9 million. These projects conserved or enhanced 26,874 acres of habitat and opened or secured public access to 9,312 acres.

Share

David Allen Will Be Leaving RMEF – Search Begins for Replacement

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation announced today the initiation of a search committee to find a replacement for David Allen, RMEF’s President and CEO, whose contract expires in August 2018.

‘RMEF has flourished under David’s leadership for the past ten years and there is no question that he is leaving RMEF much better than he found it,’ explained Philip Barrett, the Chair of RMEF’s Board of Directors, ‘and the end of David’s tenure next August provides an opportunity for the Board to transition to a new leader to secure the continued growth and success of RMEF.’

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, with over 222,000 members, 146 employees, $93,000,000 in assets, and programs and services that touch virtually every state in the country, is one of the largest and most robust conservation organizations in the United States. Mr. Barrett indicated that the vacancy is expected to draw interest from scores of exceptionally qualified individuals, and he noted that the committee has been formed now with the goal of enabling RMEF to conduct an exhaustive search. He added ‘RMEF will issue more information at an appropriate time concerning the search as it gets underway.’

Further information about RMEF and its mission, programs, and membership can be found online at www.rmef.org.

Share