Martha Williams is officially the worst

BuzzH

WKR
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
2,228
Location
Wyoming
The Game & Fish (Fish & Game) directors should be voted in, not appointed. Ditto on the Commissioners.

I worked for FWP for 24 years and I think we had one decent director in that time.
With the wacko's in Montana right now?

I think that would be even worse.
 

BuzzH

WKR
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
2,228
Location
Wyoming
the guys (and gals) who hunt should choose who run their agency, not some pos politician

were not as whacky as some might think :D
Good luck with that, everyone would get a vote, the wildlife belongs to all citizens.

I also don't put much faith in a lot of people just because they hunt when it comes to voting or much of anything else.

Montana has changed, not the place I was born and raised.

Plus, you're trusting the same people that voted in those pos politicians you have now.
 

mtwarden

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
9,635
Location
Montana
so governor appointees is the way to go when selecting someone serving as a fish & game commissioner or director?

that's worked really well thus far

I have a lot more faith in hunters having a say
 

BuzzH

WKR
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
2,228
Location
Wyoming
so governor appointees is the way to go when selecting someone serving as a fish & game commissioner or director?

that's worked really well thus far

I have a lot more faith in hunters having a say
What percentage of people that vote hunt?

Are you forgetting that anti and non hunters will also be voting for director and commissioners?

Doubtful any dark money operators will ever get involved either...

I would think this over pretty carefully before heading down the path of elected commission and director.
 

mtwarden

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
9,635
Location
Montana
What percentage of people that vote hunt?

Are you forgetting that anti and non hunters will also be voting for director and commissioners?

Doubtful any dark money operators will ever get involved either...

I would think this over pretty carefully before heading down the path of elected commission and director.

Not a ton of anti-hunters here, guessing the same as Wyoming
 

bow_dozer

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Aug 16, 2016
Messages
231
Location
MONTANA
After the second time reading op thread. I was scratching my head wondering when/why Martha Stewart is marking a statement like that…
 

Legend

WKR
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
788
so governor appointees is the way to go when selecting someone serving as a fish & game commissioner or director?

that's worked really well thus far

I have a lot more faith in hunters having a say
In my opinion the step that we have missed is the legislative confirmation of these appointees. The process should be rigorous and our legislators should do their job and work for the people who elected them.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2021
Messages
1,583
Good luck with that, everyone would get a vote, the wildlife belongs to all citizens.

I also don't put much faith in a lot of people just because they hunt when it comes to voting or much of anything else.

Montana has changed, not the place I was born and raised.

Plus, you're trusting the same people that voted in those pos politicians you have now.

so governor appointees is the way to go when selecting someone serving as a fish & game commissioner or director?

that's worked really well thus far

I have a lot more faith in hunters having a say
What is commissioners worked their way up through the ranks instead of being appointed or elected? Not sure exactly how that would work but it seems that a person with experience in wildlife management would be apt to do a better job.
 

BuzzH

WKR
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
2,228
Location
Wyoming
What is commissioners worked their way up through the ranks instead of being appointed or elected? Not sure exactly how that would work but it seems that a person with experience in wildlife management would be apt to do a better job.
Where would these wildlife managers come from?

They would have to be retired or work for someone other than the FG/GF Departments. They would be excluded for good reason if they were still working for the GF.

What needs to happen is accountability in who the Governors put on the commission. Instead of appointing yes people to push their agenda, old college buddies, and ranching buddies, they should put qualified people on the commission.

Elected would be worse IMO.
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2017
Messages
668
Where would these wildlife managers come from?

They would have to be retired or work for someone other than the FG/GF Departments. They would be excluded for good reason if they were still working for the GF.

What needs to happen is accountability in who the Governors put on the commission. Instead of appointing yes people to push their agenda, old college buddies, and ranching buddies, they should put qualified people on the commission.

Elected would be worse IMO.
Have to agree, elected officials could be much worse. That would completely politicize the position and you are much less likely to get someone with actual wildlife management experience (or actually cares about wildlife). Understanding it is truly the lesser of two evils, I’d take appointees and voters have to hold their elected officials accountable for their appointees.
 

finner

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
170
Not a ton of anti-hunters here, guessing the same as Wyoming
Yeah but there's also a ton of hunters who scream "opportunity" at every regional CAC meeting, screw the ethics, screw the resource. That's the mentality that lead to Worsech's appointment. Landowners, outfitters, nonresident hunters crying about how hard it is to draw a breaks tag, how difficult it is to understand Montana's super duper complicated regulations, and how it's unfair that they can't make more money off of elk.

There's no problem with the governor appointing the director and the commissioners, the problem is that Montanans are going down a dark road of picking godawful politicians. I'm not a fan of Bullock and I'd sacrifice a few digits to pee in Gianforte's cheerios, but there are better candidates out there who don't seem to receive adequate consideration. Tim Fox, for example, would not have appointed Worsech and masterminded the changes occurring with MT game management right now. Somewhere out there, I hope, is a politician who won't see the Department as a way to reward campaign donors.
 

mtwarden

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
9,635
Location
Montana
^ Tim Fox would have been a solid choice, sadly he didn't have the $ or the machine; so they elected a mega-millionaire from out of state instead- always a good choice it seems
 
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Messages
1,205
Location
Ohio
The problem is the extreme left wants to end hunting and the extreme right wants to monetize wildlife for profit. Both are wrong.

I’m typically the last one to encourage federal oversight/control, but I have said it here before and I’ll say it here again…

I think federal PR funding needs to have more strings attached. If states want the money they have to protect hunters rights, manage within the principles of the North American model, etc.

States that monetize wildlife or enable outfitter welfare? Their PR dollars from the 49 other states go away…

States that ban hunting/trapping species that can otherwise biologically support it? Their PR money goes away too.

Basically the extremes from both sides get reigned in through incentivizing with federal money. Call it the “North American Model of Wildlife Conservation Support Act.”

You aren’t going to be able to ban stupid crooked politicians, but sometimes you can reign them in a bit.
 
Top