Director James Lane of the NMGFD resigned unexpectedly in October 2013. Nobody knew why or where he would be going. He came to NM from KY. Be interesting to see if he returns to KY Dept. of Fish and Wildlife since they now have a job opening there for a new director. NMGFD is still silent about what happened. In recent weeks, two other high-ranked employees have left the NMGFD as well: the Human Resources Chief and the Assistant Director.

http://www.sfreporter.com/santafe/article-7982-something-fishy-at-state-game-department.html

Was he doing a good job in NM?

A state wildlife agency cannot have a better director than that.

Well, as much as I am a hunter/sportsman and I do believe that most if not all species, game or non-game, will need population management/control at one time or another. I disagree quite strongly about not having a better director. Wildlife management has a lot more involved that just appealing to the hunter/sportsman. There are many different angles to consider. When dealing with wildlife management you are dealing with people or stakeholders as much if not more than animals. It is not wise to be so one sided in your views when it comes to management. It is not just about how many things we can kill or should be killed. A large part of the job is conservation, preservation, and restoration to maintain a balance and to ensure that these resources are available to the stakeholders for years to come and sometimes that will require protection of a species to some extent.

ND hasn't had an antelope season for a number of years due to low population numbers. Would we be better off to still allow hunting and shoot them all so that there are none left, or should we shut down hunting for however long to recoup the population and ensure the species will remain part of the landscape? What about if we were talking about coyotes, I would personally argue for reduced hunting or no hunting of coyotes if the population was in bad enough shape and when the numbers come back resume hunting them as usual. Highly doubtful that we will see such a reduction in coyote numbers but it is entirely possible if we would have several years of adverse weather conditions that did not allow for normal reproduction rates.

From the sounds of that article this guy has absolutely ZERO concern for any type of conservation/restoration efforts and honestly that is not the person you want as a wildlife manager. Having a person with that type of attitude is doing nothing but throwing gas on the anti's fire.

Just from reading the article, it sounds like he was more inclined to 'get things done' his way than to be exercising some political acumen...Not something that bodes well for a State Director position...

I'm a really in agreement with Midwestpredator as to the need to balance species control for healthy sustainability...Failure to acknowledge the concerns of environmentalists seems to have also been one of his shortcomings...Not that I think their attitude should dictate all decisions, but they have to be reasonably considered and evaluated as to the good of the state as a whole..

Wildlife management should be science based and decisions for such should not be based on politics.

Nature of the beast my friend. Ive been studying it for the last 4 years and have had several arguments...I mean discussions with professors on that very point. I reality, you just pain have to put up with it. There are other stake holders that have just as much right to voice their opinion as we have to voice ours.

Im with you brother, and I try to set feeling and personal beliefs aside and try to let the scientific facts point to the answer. Sad part is, it really does not matter what the science says when it comes to wildlife/habitat management. It general comes down to which side or who can make the most noise with the public and the media. That is why it is so important to have lots of public outreach opportunities and to do everything we can to get th science facts out to the masses, this is how we will defeat the antis, by using their own weapons against them. In this case, education and media.

You have to add this to the mix, Lane was put in the job by a rancher on the board who does things his way and it is all reported by a very rabid liberal anti-hunting media. Santa Fe is the hotbed of all things liberal in NM. They stand a strong chance of getting an anti-tournament bill and a gun show bill before the legislature in a year that is constitutionally set aside for financial bills only.

If you want what is right and lawful you'd be better off working for a state other then Newer Mexico. This state's politicians are more concerned with being elected then doing anything else. We are last in almost all categories concerning education, jobs, quality of life, crime and drug use. But by gosh don't even think about changing things. This state has been democrat run forever, and we don't change a bleeping thing and we're still in last place. Go figure!