I don't have a problem with hunting, per se, Lanny, as you know.  And
certainly not with shooting more deer.  And if there is one place in Iowa
where large caliber, high velocity rifles may be fired with some degree of
public safety, it would have to be southern Iowa.

But beyond that, things start to look stranger and stranger.  For example,
allowing the use of assault rifles, with a "limit" of 6 rounds in the
clip.  An AK47 is designed for the single purpose of killing and maiming
people; hunters who take them to the woods to shoot deer are more than
likely heading off to their own little NRA-conjured fantasy islands.  I
wouldn't want to be a game warden trying to stop some guy crouched in deer
stand with an assault rifle.

And then we have the farmers who want to shoot at first sight anything
that might vaguely resemble a mountain lion, with no stinkin' laws
standin' in their way. Their attitude toward natural predators reminds me
of a an enlightening moment I had years ago, with Good Ol' Bill Farris,
our former state forester.  Bill was going on at a Natural Resource
Commission meeting about the terrible damage the deer were doing to White
Pine Hollow and other forests where they sheltered during the winters.  He
suggested we could organize massive "pioneer-type" game drives, as they
did a hundred years ago, and mow down deer by the score.

I said I had a simpler, easier, safer answer.

What was that?

I dropped my voice into a low, conspiratorial tone.  "Wolves."

"Wolves," he repeated.

Then it hit him.  His eyes widened, his face turned beet red, and he
sucked in his breath.  "Jeez, no, not wolves!" he squealed.  "That's
terrible!  Those farmers would have my head!"

One comment about the sensitivity and integrity of our natural resource
managers, and how they are different from politicians.  The great dove
hunting controversy of a few years back was precipitated by DNR employees
in cahoots with NRA types.  They used state offices, computers, and phones
to put out targeted mailings, with lists developed from DNR records.  They
put out a 'hit list' of legislators to be pressured.  Their choice of
language was not always diplomatic.  Their goal was not "management" of
mourning doves, but rather increased ammunition sales that would bring in
more Pittman-Robinson tax revenues for fish and game programs.

Bureaucrats can be plenty political. They know that politics is what
creates their programs, feeds their budgets, and fills in their paychecks.
But unlike elected politicians, some of them also know very, very well
that they can play all kinds of insider games, and that, unless they
really screw up, it will damned hard to catch them and bring them to
account.  For a lot of big-time, insider bureaucrats, legislators are an
annual, temporary annoyance, underfoot in January, gone in April.

In ten years, I dealt with a lot of folks from all agencies of state
government.  Some were open, candid, honest, worthy of trust. 
Others...well...

Blaming elected politicians is easy.  They're visible.  They're also, at
least somewhat, publicly accountable.  Try throwing out a non-elected,
incompetent bureaucrat whose only skills are scheming, conniving, and
double-dealing.

--BW




> Certainly hunting is something good people in the club have different
> feelings about.  Hunting deer with center fire rifles may be in the same
> category.  This is a good study in the workings of a government agency.
> We hire well qualified government employees with expertise to plan
> highways, manage commerce, etc., and manage wildlife.   Left alone, the
> DNR faces enormous pressures from farmers, insurers, nature lovers, and
> hunters concerning deer numbers.  Some want more, some want less.  Good
> government is always about seeking compromises.  Then people call
> goverment stupid for not doing everything that they think is right.
> Now, the politicians have jumped in with both feet.  In my expereince
> that is where most "stupid government" comes from.  The professional
> government employess likely go home at night feeling like ripping their
> guts out at the superficial "fixes' imposed by shallow and superficial
> politicians.  In my follwing of wildlife and hunting issues, I can't
> think of few issues that were made better by political meddling.
>
> I was talking to a guy from Indiana and he was spouting all this stuff
> about stupid government.  He paused and then thought to ask, do you work
> for government.  Yes, I do.  It seems his issue was a highway in Indiana
> where the safety and traffic flow was all screwed up by the stupid
> government.  I asked if there was any political meddling in the
> problem.  Yes, it seems.  A politican got impatient with the time it was
> taking him to drive from his home to legislative meetings. He inserted a
> measure into a highway bill that said for every stoplight that highway
> planners put on the road, they had to take out two stoplights.  I tried
> to explain to him the difference between professional government
> employees and politicians.  He said he could see no difference.
>
> I think deer management in Iowa is somewhat in the same boat, with
> political meddling to please special interests.
>
> Lanny Schwartz
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Join us at Sierra Summit 2005.  For information go to:
> http://www.sierrasummit2005.org/
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship
> e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's
> latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent
> editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/
>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Join us at Sierra Summit 2005.  For information go to:
http://www.sierrasummit2005.org/
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship
e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's
latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent
editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/