Colorado Governor appoints leading anti-hunting activist and researcher to CPW Commission

Joined
Jul 17, 2017
Messages
979
https://governorsoffice.colorado.go...rado-parks-and-wildlife-commission-reappoints

This is bad….. incredibly bad. At least Otero and Niemiec. Don’t know anything about maguire or Le Coq.

Governor Polis getting one more stomp in on the Colorado sportsmen and women.

Otero is a complete embarrassment as a sportsmen’s rep. Didn’t bother to show up to the May commission meetings, where there were consequential votes on the next commission chair. He has a history of just not showing up to commission meetings. Completely devoid of any willingness or courage to publicly stand up for hunters and anglers during commission meetings.

Dr. Rebecca Niemiec is a leading anti-hunting activist and academic. She leads the anti-hunting policy center at CSU that creates public opinion polling data and campaign material for anti-hunting initiatives like Prop 127, while framing it as academic research. She headlines every major Wildlife For All and CatsArentTrophies event. She headlined an event with Marlon Reis, Samantha Miller, Delia Malone, and Wayne Pacelle where she helped strategize on how to pass a mountain lion hunting ban and a post mortem analysis on why Prop 127 failed. They also discussed how to end black bear hunting. Her works centers on dividing people into dominant and mutualist views/values on wildlife management. Hunters are dominant and only see animals for consumptive use while mutualist want to preserve all animals. She claims mutualist are the majority and wildlife management should reflect mutualism views which don’t allow for hunting and consumptive use. If you read Niemiec’s work it is quite apparent that it is conducted to convince the general public that mountain lion and black bear hunting is overwhelmingly opposed by the majority of Coloradans. And hunting for sport or recreation is also opposed by the majority of Coloradans. Election results would tell us her polling is quite flawed. But that was never the point, her work was meant to assist in eliminating mountain lion and black bear hunting.
 
For sure, and yet another example of the dangers of having academics influencing/making policy.
Yeah, it’s really a stretch to count her work as academic research. It’s really just public opinion polling with the expressed intent of influencing public opinion against hunting. Basically a political propaganda department operating under the auspices of a public research university.
 
Reading endorsed prop 127. Since the public voted against it they are now going to try to back door it through the commission.

“Proposition 127 bans chasing mountain lions with dogs, in which the ‘hunter’ follows the GPS signal from the dogs’ collars to a treed lion, walks up and shoots the animal. That is not hunting, and something we would never allow with ungulates (animals with hooves),” writes Parks and Wildlife Commission Vice Chair Richard Reading, PhD, a wildlife biologist, in his letter published Sunday in the Ark Valley Voice. “Similarly, bobcats are trapped not for personal use, but for the sale of their fur for sale to buyers from outside the U.S. — the very definition of commodification.”

Appears he’s also in favor of ending trapping.
 
https://governorsoffice.colorado.go...rado-parks-and-wildlife-commission-reappoints

This is bad….. incredibly bad. At least Otero and Niemiec. Don’t know anything about maguire or Le Coq.

Governor Polis getting one more stomp in on the Colorado sportsmen and women.

Otero is a complete embarrassment as a sportsmen’s rep. Didn’t bother to show up to the May commission meetings, where there were consequential votes on the next commission chair. He has a history of just not showing up to commission meetings. Completely devoid of any willingness or courage to publicly stand up for hunters and anglers during commission meetings.

Dr. Rebecca Niemiec is a leading anti-hunting activist and academic. She leads the anti-hunting policy center at CSU that creates public opinion polling data and campaign material for anti-hunting initiatives like Prop 127, while framing it as academic research. She headlines every major Wildlife For All and CatsArentTrophies event. She headlined an event with Marlon Reis, Samantha Miller, Delia Malone, and Wayne Pacelle where she helped strategize on how to pass a mountain lion hunting ban and a post mortem analysis on why Prop 127 failed. They also discussed how to end black bear hunting. Her works centers on dividing people into dominant and mutualist views/values on wildlife management. Hunters are dominant and only see animals for consumptive use while mutualist want to preserve all animals. She claims mutualist are the majority and wildlife management should reflect mutualism views which don’t allow for hunting and consumptive use. If you read Niemiec’s work it is quite apparent that it is conducted to convince the general public that mountain lion and black bear hunting is overwhelmingly opposed by the majority of Coloradans. And hunting for sport or recreation is also opposed by the majority of Coloradans. Election results would tell us her polling is quite flawed. But that was never the point, her work was meant to assist in eliminating mountain lion and black bear hunting.
Thanks for keeping us up on everything Grant. The fight is real and we're ready
 
For sure, and yet another example of the dangers of having academics influencing/making policy.
Well I certainly think this is a poor opinion on the matter. There are academics doing research in favor of hunting just as there are academics doing research in opposition of hunting. If anything, I'd rather have academics making decisions rather than Uncle Bilbo down the road since most academics are trying to make decisions based on science and understanding rather than emotion.

The real danger is ballot box biology. Allowing the general population to make decisions about wildlife and ecosystems without an understanding of the consequences their vote will bring is what will send an ecosystem spiraling.
 
Well I certainly think this is a poor opinion on the matter. There are academics doing research in favor of hunting just as there are academics doing research in opposition of hunting. If anything, I'd rather have academics making decisions rather than Uncle Bilbo down the road since most academics are trying to make decisions based on science and understanding rather than emotion.

The real danger is ballot box biology. Allowing the general population to make decisions about wildlife and ecosystems without an understanding of the consequences their vote will bring is what will send an ecosystem spiraling.
That depends on who's paying their salaries and for the reseach.
 
Well I certainly think this is a poor opinion on the matter. There are academics doing research in favor of hunting just as there are academics doing research in opposition of hunting. If anything, I'd rather have academics making decisions rather than Uncle Bilbo down the road since most academics are trying to make decisions based on science and understanding rather than emotion.

The real danger is ballot box biology. Allowing the general population to make decisions about wildlife and ecosystems without an understanding of the consequences their vote will bring is what will send an ecosystem spiraling.
These are not academics, these are activists wearing a “science skin suit” if you will. Ballot box biology is awful, but somehow these faux “dr.’s” might be worse
 
These people are not academics. They are paid political pawns , anti hunting, liberal extremist whackos. As has been proven in the past , you can not reason with these types . Coloradan's outdoorsman only hope is to overthrow this liberal whacko democrat regime they allowed to take over the state.
 
The proof that they are only interested in “following the science” when it suits them was the spring commission meeting where they completely disregarded the recommendations of their own staff biologists to push forward the fur ban.
 
Back
Top