I lit this match, and it was a little tongue-in-cheek. I have a degree from the UW - Stevens Point College of Natural Resources, one of the bigger programs around.
I think Brent is right about the dedication and commitment of most DNR Biologists and employees in general. Most of them have to scrape by on short-term jobs/assignments with little pay and few/no benefits until they get a permanent position. There's easier money to be made, so the ones that stick really are committed. The hard science they perform is necessary to provide proof and reliable data for mangement decisions, etc. Some of it might seem like minutiae but it's where real discoveries are made.
Tom is also right in that there has seemed to be such a dismissive attitude from many state DNR offices about citizen input. I'm sure there are BS calls all the time, but when the anecdotal evidence adds up, or if the DNR employee has gotten to know the people in their area and they know who to trust, then they have to believe that something is going on. I think there are people (farmers, loggers, hunters/fishers/gatherers) that spend most of their time on the land that regularly see things that would amaze most of us, biologists and technicians included.
Fish and wildlife management is a tough game. Multi-faceted, fluid, with numerous unpredictables, and funded by a group that sometimes doesn't know what it really wants, I don't envy the job. But those who do sign up for it need to understand what they've taken on and who they need to work with. I think Wisconsin's "Deer Czar" idea was a good one, and it may point to ways to rebuild the trust that's been lost between the DNR and the people. Rebuilding that trust, and more willingness to give and take, might keep them from the slippery slope of legislated management goals and practices.
Now, can we talk about game wardens that wait for a crime to be committed or create opportunities to violate (read "Robo-Deer") rather than work to prevent a crime in the first place?
and "Cheers!" to Uncle Dusty
Last edited by Pointbock; 08/08/12. Reason: spelling
