[ Return to Contents
| Post a Reply
| Post a new message
Board should listen to "reliable sources"
Posted by bushrat on May 04 2006
This scares me: "To some extent, the BoG answers to the people. I like it that way."
If and when the Board of Game really begins answering to the "people," I think you'd find that hunters would not be represented as much as non-hunters. Someone out there is going to catch on that "beneficial users" also includes wildlife viewers, hikers, river runners, etc. The problem with your line of thinking, and AOC's line of thinking, is that it takes authority and say away from the Department and tries to give it to "the people." This is going to end up biting us in the butt in the future.
Seekins recently tried to amend and add to Fish and Game statutes to redefine exactly who has more say, who is a "reliable source" before the Board. He further wants to empower ACs and Board. In the past, the Board was supposed to derive an opinion based on ADFG's input and advice, along with what the "people" were clamoring for. Now he (and you, apparently) wants to make it so the "people" are just as reliable a source as ADFG as far as wildlife management. There is nothing perfect in this world, or in our system. But changing it to make the "people" have the greatest say in how many moose or wolves or bears or caribou we should have, what type of allocations we have, only makes it less perfect than it is now. ADFG must retain authority and control and they must remain the most "reliable source" for wildlife densities, habitat concerns etc etc. Otherwise, your "people" will change the face of hunting forever in ways we can only imagine.
Previous: I was wrong martentrapper May 04 2006
Next: Still the same martentrapper May 04 2006