Quote:
Originally Posted by Duck Butter
What? Really? Come on man, LDWF wouldn't even exist without fishermen and hunters, they are on our side. They are there solely to manage our wildlife, not restrict our liberties.  |
I'm questioning their methods, not their motives.
Should the executive branch restrict liberties based on public opinion (by whatever sampling method) or by sound science?
When LDWF or CCA or whoever supports a regulation change based on what they are hearing from anglers or their membership or whomever, then they are making decisions based on public opinion rather than science.
In our democratic republic, public opinion should be allowed to influence the elected legislature. However, the elected legislature has delegated certain wildlife management regulatory powers to the executive branch with the understanding and expectation that these regulatory powers only infringe on the liberty of citizens when these restrictions are shown to be necessary by sound scientific methods.
Sometimes being on the side of anglers and hunters means listening to the science and making data driven decisions and ignoring the momentary public opinion of those same anglers and hunters.