


July 01, 2009
Discussion Topic: On Politics and Hunting Regs
By Dave Hurteau
A bill sponsored by Louisiana State Rep. James Armes that would have allowed lawmakers to review and potentially nix hunting season dates, bag limits, and restrictions set by the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission has failed.
The idea was that the Legislature would provide a check and balance to the Commission and the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, which may sound sort of reasonable to some. But on the other hand, is getting politicians involved ever a good idea? Would you want them calling your shots?
Check out the full story and tell us what you think.
Comments (14)
They can even run their "own show". Why would "we" want them "screwing up" "ours".
This sounds about as smart as the employee free choice act of 2009. I'm always for politicians getting the heck out of the way. Less is more with government.
How would politicians without a biology degree or some other relaveant degree be able to supply the proper check and balance. Leave politics out of science.
C'mon guys, politics and science can mix well. Just look at what they've accomplished with 'Global Warming'.
If it works like it should, the politicians should be consulting the experts, who they are supposed to be checking and balancing......just cut the politicians out of the mix.
Let me get this straight--lawmakers want to micro-manage game & fish regulations. If that's the answer, the question must have been: What can we do to really screw things up?
im glad it didnt get passed it seems theres a lot of government polititions getting involeed in almlost everthing at least they are not controlling the fish and game comission
I am of the staunch opinion that the role of the legislature should end with nominating really qualified people to run the Game and Fish commission. Period.
After watching the Hurricane Chris vid on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wOTn2xw3VM&feature=related) I'm not really surprised that said politicians would propose such a law and am emphatically glad that it was defeated.
Years ago getting politicians involved in Kaibab was bad enough!
keep the gov out of our business and let the states and people decide.
Politics needs to stay out of wildlife management, just look at what the politicians did to our Elk herd here in Idaho with their pet wolf project....they can't even manage what they are already suppossed to....
When people get involved in something they know nothing about, it usually does not turn out good at all. Same thing goes here... why would politicians, with no experience or expertise in fish, wildlife, or the environment get involved in such a thing?
There is a simple choice: game management for political motives and game management with biological evidence. I do not believe that politicians grasp the concept of sustained yield beyond their success in the next election.
I'm pleased to read that the measure failed.
Post a Comment
How would politicians without a biology degree or some other relaveant degree be able to supply the proper check and balance. Leave politics out of science.
They can even run their "own show". Why would "we" want them "screwing up" "ours".
Let me get this straight--lawmakers want to micro-manage game & fish regulations. If that's the answer, the question must have been: What can we do to really screw things up?
C'mon guys, politics and science can mix well. Just look at what they've accomplished with 'Global Warming'.
I am of the staunch opinion that the role of the legislature should end with nominating really qualified people to run the Game and Fish commission. Period.
This sounds about as smart as the employee free choice act of 2009. I'm always for politicians getting the heck out of the way. Less is more with government.
If it works like it should, the politicians should be consulting the experts, who they are supposed to be checking and balancing......just cut the politicians out of the mix.
im glad it didnt get passed it seems theres a lot of government polititions getting involeed in almlost everthing at least they are not controlling the fish and game comission
After watching the Hurricane Chris vid on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wOTn2xw3VM&feature=related) I'm not really surprised that said politicians would propose such a law and am emphatically glad that it was defeated.
Years ago getting politicians involved in Kaibab was bad enough!
keep the gov out of our business and let the states and people decide.
Politics needs to stay out of wildlife management, just look at what the politicians did to our Elk herd here in Idaho with their pet wolf project....they can't even manage what they are already suppossed to....
When people get involved in something they know nothing about, it usually does not turn out good at all. Same thing goes here... why would politicians, with no experience or expertise in fish, wildlife, or the environment get involved in such a thing?
There is a simple choice: game management for political motives and game management with biological evidence. I do not believe that politicians grasp the concept of sustained yield beyond their success in the next election.
I'm pleased to read that the measure failed.
Post a Comment