On Jan. 17, the RGJ reported the Bear Committee (a subcommittee of the Wildlife Commission) will meet to review the bear hunt. The 2013 Legislature, in SB82, asked the commission to make an “unbiased and informed recommendation concerning the viability of hunting black bears in NV,” “Predicated on sound scientific data.”
In that same article, it states that NDOW has already proposed the hunt to continue and a wildlife commissioner states, “we will probably move forward” (with the hunt). It appears the decision to have a hunt had already been made, so what exactly was the point in having a public meeting to have an “unbiased” three-year hunt review? This is an insult to the legislators who asked for this review.
The Wildlife Commission, which makes all the decisions regarding the public’s wildlife, has only one public representative on that board. With seven of the nine commissioners being hunters, how can this be “unbiased”?
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Census Nevada (revised 2013) reported hunters spent $204,000, while wildlife watching produced $682,000. With the non-hunting public’s abundant spending, is this fair representation for 98 percent of the people? The governor appoints the wildlife commissioners. Let your opinion be heard.
Elaine Carrick, Reno
http://www.rgj.com/article/20140124/OPED02/301240023/Bear-commission-isn-t-an-unbiased-group