Re: Idaho wildlife management

["Sam and Debbie Duncan" <sduncan@turbonet.com>]

While reading all this about bear hunting, two things come to mind. 1)
Taxation WITH representation ain't all that hot either, and a remark by
Will Rogers " It's a good thing that we don't get all the government that
we pay for". 
Sam Duncan
----------
> From: bill london <bill_london@hotmail.com>
> To: vision2020@moscow.com
> Cc: letters@moscow.com
> Subject: Idaho wildlife management
> Date: Sunday, December 06, 1998 8:36 AM
> 
> Here's an early warning about Idaho legislation that will surface this 
> year.  While I assume the choice will be difficult, this proposal is 
> already earning my award for dumbest idea of the year.
> 
> Don Clower (who directed the campaign against the bear protection 
> inititative in 1996) has borrowed an idea from Utah.  In Utah, at the 
> November election, the voters passed Proposition 5, which was sponsored 
> by various hunting groups to stop public input on wildlife regulation.  
> Because of the passage of that proposition, any public initiative 
> related to hunting or wildlife would have to pass by a 2/3 majority.  
> That proposition effectively eliminates direct public involvement in the 
> protection of the public's wildlife.
> 
> Clower wants to duplicate that proposition in Idaho.  He wants to change 
> the Idaho Constitution to read that any initiative dealing with wildlife 
> must pass by a 2/3 majority.  
> 
> This blatantly-undemocratic idea that the majority doesn't rule is 
> especially disgusting when coupled with the Idaho Fish & Game 
> Commission's proposal that every taxpayer (not just hunters and anglers) 
> should help pay for wildlife management now.  So we will have to pay for 
> the management of our wildlife, but we will be denied effective say in 
> that management.
> BL
> 
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com