I personally believe the Fish and Wildlife Commission should be dissolved. If it worked as allegedly intended and gave sporties a real voice, I would certainly feel differently. As it is, the Commission delegates all final decisions to the Director of WDFW. That effectively neuters us. We'd be better off without the proxy in place, because we could take our gripes straight to the Director's office instead of wasting our time chasing squirrels.
Public forums were once a legitimate means for citizens to actively influence important government decisions. In today's political era, where the politicians do whatever their contributors tell them to do (we don't contribute to campaigns like the other stakeholders, which pretty much entirely explains why we get $hit on all the time), citizen involvement is little more than an annoying formality.
I find that position more than a little disingenuous given the general perception that politicians in this State are owned by monied special interest groups.
I think we agree completely, as regards lobbying, Larry. I didn't mean to imply there was anything fair or righteous about the fact that special interests own the government; just stating the fact.
Yes, we are close in many of our perceptions.
However, regarding the suggestion to eliminate the Commission my point was that eliminating the Commission under the pretext that the alternative(s) would be more attentive to our concerns/issues ignores why we voted for a Commission in the first place.
Recognizing that many of our fisheries issues are extremely complex it is unrealistic in my opinion to expect Commissioners to know each and every detail (think NOF) but I do expect them to have outcome expectations and to evaluate outcomes against those initial expectations to achieve better results in the future.
In short, to clearly hold the Director and his Staff accountable.
Previous Topic
Index
