A) Most politicians will only pay attention to concerns of constituents, so Cali hunters, let 'er rip. This is important, as the loudest voice often gets heard....apathy is not the approach to take.
B) This may come as a shock, but hunting is not a right, unless written into law as such (laws can still change) but a privilege, allowed to perpetuate by your fellow citizens. It's called a 'social licence' and every one of us are an ambassador to hunting and should conduct themselves as such.
C) Politics has no place in Wildlife Management and when emotion trumps science, you end up with situations like we did in BC with the Griz hunt, shutdown by a bunch of ignorant city dwelling folks voting to save smoky the bear.
D) Irregardless is not a word, you just say regardless
A) Although a legislator "listens to their constituents", they also interact with other Legislators and members of our culture. Similarly as you have suggested, this cultural impact has an influence on the legislative process. Hearing the value of hunting from other citizens, will help shape their perception of our cultural support for hunting. And, it will become a experiential factor which may come to their consideration latter in the political careers which may possibly govern the legislative expanse of the country. If we want our hunting rights to continue, hunters must collectively let their values be known to every politician.
B) "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" is not a law my friend, but they are arguably naturally-based Rights as declared in our Declaration of Independence. Hunting is an action of life. Therefore, hunting can be articulated as a right. U.S. Laws affirm and protect "inalienable rights". The creation of a law or a "social licence"(license), is based upon human conditions for sustenance and the continuation of designated qualities. Why one would separate the idea of hunting from sustenance and the pursuit of liberty and pursuit of happiness is probably best understood by assessing the historical inputs which led to the construction of dependence economics and the irrational application of human morals upon animals; of which, have recently been influencing our legislative process.
Anti-hunting and "animal rights" philosophy have arguably shaped the idea that hunting is a privilege and I strongly reject such a thought. Although distinct from my wholehearted thankfulness for my way of life, I certainly will not associate my actions of hunting as a "privilege". Also, to think of your fellow man as providing you with the ability to hunt is a fast track to fulfilling the ambitions and objective of anti hunting ideologies. As an ambassador of hunting, I strongly encourage you to reframe your behavior.
C) Emotionally tied ideas certainly drive the statements of anti hunters and their legislative interventions. Disney made a fortune on the innate emotions of humans and directly helped to shape the dangerous attack on our hunting rights today.
D) No thanks on the grammar imperative. Irregardless is in fact is a word; and, although a blend of words doesn't mean that it's necessary to refrain. Language has a variety of possibilities, just as our ability to creatively resist and oppose Anti-hunting ideologies. Regardless(hat tip) of your locale on the planet, your action of contacting a CA legislator to let them know of your hunting values will help counteract the anti-hunting ideas they hear about.
In a collective call to support our hunting rights, "Resist".
Happy Hunting.
