AGFC Prerequisite for Commissioner

Discussion in 'AG&F News and Comments' started by Lt Gibson, Jul 15, 2017 at 6:38 AM.

  1. silentassassin

    silentassassin Well-Known Member

    Half of the time biologists don't even agree and when they do it still doesn't mean they're right. Commissioner's shouldn't have any input in the first place. They should simply be a board that decides whether or not the agfc personnel are following their intended mandate and if not, then remove them and replace then with those that can and will. Decision by committee is quite possibly the most paralyzingly ineffective way in the world for a business to operate. But the agfc isn't a business, so biologists should present proposals and then a board of agfc personnel should weigh that info and then look at it from a common sense and a public use perspective and then make decisions. The commission should only be there to regulate and ensure they are doing so and help keep them in check. The latest appointment is a bad joke which is par for the AGFC. That's nothing new, if you're not sure what a joke the agfc is by now then you have bigger problems than wildlife to worry about.... BUT the real point is HELL NO a biologist should not take their single minded focus into making decisions that are way above their training and pay grade. However, the decisions being made should be made based off of the information they provide and not what Fraud Bureau thinks.
     
    tomhunter likes this.
  2. orangefeetdown

    orangefeetdown Well-Known Member

    14,073
    1,998
    NEA
    No.
     

  3. SwampCat

    SwampCat Well-Known Member

    Say you have a bunch of duck hunters who are complaining about the quality of hunting on deteriorating public Green Tree duck areas because of the use of spinners, contacting their congressmen, the commissioners, and anyone else that will listen. The Commissioners here them out and then request comments from the G&F. The biologists say, so what - people are still killing as many ducks, there are as many or more ducks than there have been in the last 100 years - spinners are not adversely affecting the waterfowl population - so the biologists don't advocate a spinner ban. Enforcement division say yes, there is a problem, but we don't have the financing or manpower to actually get on the water and enforce additional regulations. Manpower says all enforcement positions are filled. Budget dept says the only unallocated funds are from oil and gas leases and Media/Marketing had already put a request in for that money to build a six million dollar welcome center on the highway coming in from Idabel, OK to Dequeen, AR.

    The commissioners confer. The biologist recommended against banning spinners because duck populations were unaffected, Enforcement was non-committal because they didn't have manpower. Manpower was against it because they had no unfilled positions or money for anymore positions. Marketing/Media was against it because they don't want to lose funding for a new nature center. Budget Dept says they have funds, buy they were tentatively spoken for by Marketing/Media's nature center. Commissioners scratch their heads - biologists don't count because spinner ban might not help the duck population, but it aint gonna hurt. Everyone else has a halfway excuse not to do it. None of the commissioners are from SW AR, so they aren't supportive of a $6,000,000 nature center at Dequeen. Half of the commissioners duck hunt, this is a duck hunting quality and safety concern - so they decide to dedicate the excess oil and gas lease money to enforcement to hire a few more game wardens to enforce the new spinner ban - and so long new nature center.
     
  4. tmeredith

    tmeredith Platinum Member Redneck Slum Lord

    So I guess we won't be needing the church ladies.
     
  5. SwampCat

    SwampCat Well-Known Member

    You never know - you might not do what they want - but listen to everyone.;)
     
  6. Buck-Ridge

    Buck-Ridge Well-Known Member

    The manager of an organization needs the ability to assume the responsibility and the knowledge and skills to manage all aspects of the people they manage. They need to figure out who they can depend on and how to either grow or get rid of the people they can't.
    They need to figure out what is of the most importance for their organization and how to get the most for the least amount of money. They have to learn how to make sure everyone is following the rules and everyone knows the rules to preserve the integrity and credibility of the organization. The manager has to be the hardest worker and make the people under them believe that they are integral for everyone's success. It isn't easy being in charge of something. I have been trying to learn for a few years now and it isn't fun most of the time.
    This guy that has been appointed is probably skillful at all these things and more or he wouldn't be where he is. He is successful at several big things.
     
  7. tmeredith

    tmeredith Platinum Member Redneck Slum Lord

    What the flip does the director do? Seems to me he should be the guy you describe. Seems to me the agfc or any other agency should be broken down into different dept.s with each dept. having a head homcho who makes the final decisions. If he screws up he then answers to the director or ceo or top dog. Wildlife management decisions should be made by qualified people. Payroll and decorating and maintenance etc. issues should be left to those professionals.
     
  8. SwampCat

    SwampCat Well-Known Member

    I think must have got the idea for the commissioners from the school boards.:)
     
  9. Ange

    Ange Well-Known Member

    What's wrong with stipulating that at least one of the commissioners is a certified working biologist?
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2017 at 1:16 PM
  10. SwampCat

    SwampCat Well-Known Member

    Dr Steve Beaupre, ex-officio member of the commission is a trained biologist with U of A. Not sure if he has a vote or if he is strictly advisory.
     
  11. Ange

    Ange Well-Known Member

    Thanks. He should have a vote if he doesn't.
     
  12. betweenthecadrons

    betweenthecadrons Well-Known Member

    There's nothing wrong with one of them being a working biologist. It doesn't need to be someone who works for the AGFC obviously.

    I would support the appointment of Lt Gibson as a commissioner. I highly doubt there's many folks as educated as he is on the subject of feral hogs. I believe the control of feral hogs is one of the most important wildlife conservation subjects the AGFC should be concerned with. Along with CWD.

    I just don't agree they all should be biologists.
     
  13. SwampCat

    SwampCat Well-Known Member

    I can say this, because I do have a degree in Wildlife - but oftentimes, biologists become obsessed with the latest management fads and cant think past it. Game and fish agencies over the country bought in big time to the doe slaughter and balance the herd mentallity. Our own g&f is guilty of this mindset right now. G&f agencies now figure out there is something changing with the deer herd because the harvest either declines or increases. Good biologists would determine there was something changing with the deer herd prior to a big change in harvest. That is not all the fault of the biologists - most agencies just dont have enough manpower to stay ahead of the curve. Our own g&f allowed the deer harvest to decline by about 40% in the early 2000's before they made sweeping regulation changes to stop the bleeding. A lot of biologists have this mindset that THEY are the biologist, so they are the one that best knows what is happening and know best how to control what is happening. There was a time a few years ago when hogs were the biggest spot on their radar screen. I am pretty sure at that time, g&f would have blamed hogs for global warming. I had one biologist blame them for displacing deer on my land - even though hogs have been present on my land for 100 years and deer were non-existent and actually made a comeback in spite of the hogs. G&f has even done a hog/fawn predation study - but has yet to do a coyote/fawn predation study .

    Being a biologist, I would not want only biologists making all the decisions. Oftentimes, they (we) cant see the forest for the trees. That is not a malady infecting only biologists - but is common in all professional fields.
     
  14. thompson

    thompson Well-Known Member

    No. It's the Commission job to listen to the staff Biologest and the general public request. Their job is to prevent overhunting and protect the states wildlife while giving the public ample opportunity to enjoy hunting at its full potential. A Biologest generally has one job, to do what's necessary to make the species flourish in good required habitat. Most would push cutting season structure to a min. to fulfill that mission and would not reason with public opinions as many have stated above. They are the right wing and the public are the left wing of this democracy called management, These commissioners look at a marble monument daily when walking into the AGFC building reminding them of their duties. It's a tough job and your decisions are never liked by either party due to trying to split the difference. Do I always agree with their decisions, no, but many of the Biologest do not as well for the opposite reason. They are setting judges daily who listen to both sides of the argument and make the tough decisions. It's not perfect all the time nor will it ever be. Control by all setting Biologest would be a very bad move for the hunting world in my opinion. We as hunters would have no say at all. Although it sometimes seems that way, there are many speaking in our behalf in most meetings well before the final decisions are made and announced at the public monthly meeting. It is government, political and at times influenced by outside sources but overall, a good set up for all involved.
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2017 at 9:20 PM
    SwampCat likes this.
  15. Ange

    Ange Well-Known Member

    I think we should shorten the duck season and go to a point system for a while to thin the hoards out.
     
  16. R6mm

    R6mm Well-Known Member

    It sometimes doesn't matter what kind of a degree you have, or even experience in a particular field. If you're not good at your job as an individual, you're probably going to do a poor job, make poor decisions & recommendations. This happens in every field of business.
     
  17. SwampCat

    SwampCat Well-Known Member

    And, in defense of the biologists - I dont know what goes on after a biologist makes a recommendation. Does he recommend a reduction of two antlerless deer - and the commissioners says "why would we do that - we got more does than we can handle on our multi-million dollar property." Or maybe they stack the deck from the beginning when hiring a deer biologist "we dont want SwampCat, he wants to balance the herd by increasing the number of bucks up to the number of does - lets go ahead and hire that other guy who wants to kill the does down to the number of bucks." Or, the deer biologist goes to the commission and requests increased funding for extra cwd testing and they tell him they dont have the money because they are building a new nature center.

    Hunters can be their own worst enemy. Whoever tells g&f what to do in Iowa told them, basically to cut the deer herd in half - due to demands from farmers, insurance companies, municipalities, etc. their g&f increased antlerless tags and the hunters of Iowa did the rest - complaining about a lack of deer the whole time they were killing them.
     
  18. R6mm

    R6mm Well-Known Member

    Lol. That sounds exactly like a group of politicians, that seldom get things right. :)