Zim Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Game and Fish needs a new champion to help with legislative issues - gowan is out - so who do we get to help us achieve much needed upcoming legislation ? Given RMEF's recent adamant letters to their AZ members and the governor, would it not be a bad idea to seek their involvement with this G&F appointment board fiasco taking place? Maybe if nothing else they would issue a follow up letter to their AZ members & governor with regards to it. Maybe the AZRMEF members could even organize a meeting in Phoenix to discuss this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elkaholic Report post Posted April 5, 2012 I was thinking about who in our state legislative positions to sponsor any new bills that may be needed Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
audsley Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Elkaholic, I'm mystified by your statement that "Gowan is out." Did you mean to say Weiers? Gowan is running for re-election as far as I know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elkaholic Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Elkaholic, I'm mystified by your statement that "Gowan is out." Did you mean to say Weiers? Gowan is running for re-election as far as I know. looks to me like gowan was/is like weiers he tried to amend the bill with weiers to gag order the G&F . hes part of azsfw as far as I'm concerned- why would he be favored ? this was part of the 2072 and directly from him to shut up the G&F! as an amendment on omnibus g&f bill! http://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/50leg/2r/proposed/h.2639-p2-gowan.doc.htm&Session_ID=107 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Just want to point out that the Commission Appointment Board may not be all bad. Might want to look at it from all angles before we throw the baby out with the bathwater. If and when this state takes a political left turn, we might want some of the benefits that we currently enjoy with the Board in place. Keep in mind that the Governor gets to decide who sits on this Board, not AZSFW. I have the utmost confidence in at least two of the members of that board to watch out for our interests. They are Phil Townsend and Sue Chilton. I think many of us already know more about Phil than we realize by knowing MatthewP45, his stepson. Lets not cast a dark shadow over all those who are doing their best to serve us. Nick Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elkaholic Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Keep in mind that the Governor gets to decide who sits on this Board, not AZSFW she only gets to pick from the names the board gives here - no less than 2 when members of the board is controlled by azsfw members - guess what ? the same with a few organizations we know of! sue s term is done - since when is 2 the majority of 5 ? stinson is a azsfw member - so is gilstrap - most likely johnson best interests are great but if you are out voted - ??!!! Members of the board are Phillip D. Townsend (chair), Susan E. Chilton, W. Hays Gilstrap, Donald R. Johnson, and Leonard G. Stinson. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krp Report post Posted April 5, 2012 The Commission Appointment Board is a political tool of special interests intended to reduce and/or replace the democratic process of public choice. It's not a conservation tool. Again the attempt to intermix conservation ethics with politics either organizationally or individually is non applicable. This is the political arena not a conservation project and those involved better have asbestos for skin. I will never support a reduction of our democratic foundation no matter the intentions or who is in control. Right now the sitting members need to A. hunker down and take heavy incoming flack B. step down gracefully now with a thank you C. make a public statement that they will watchdog our interests while working with the Governor and legislature in removing this board permanently... The, they're great people away from the political arena means nothing in this instance if they adopt A. Acting like a socialist within a selfserving selfproclaimed good intention is... exactly like every other socialist. Kent Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Someone correct me of I'm wrong, but has there ever been 5 people actually sitting on the Commission Appointment Board? I believe that they have operated with only 4 members so far. In that case 2/4= .5. .5 rounded up is a majority. Mostly kidding on the math part but up these most recent appointments and confirmations, that is the way it actually operated. Aren't these all individuals capable of their own thoughts and decisions, or do we really believe that AZSFW has the power to sway these individual's opinions or the voted on opinions of their respective organizations, if they are even taking a vote on a prospective Commissioner? Losing on a vote is a part of a democracy. We can never guarantee a win. Not sure I am following your logic there. I'm not saying that the bill is perfect. I am saying that there is benefit to having a board pick folks who could represent us well, rather than leave it up to the political winds that blow around the Governor's Office come appointment time. I don't think we should paint any of these issues with broad brush strokes of Black and White. There are varying degrees of good and bad in just about every issue. Nick Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krp Report post Posted April 5, 2012 I went through the minutes a few months ago, I believe it was Stinson that wasn't on at the beginning but there in the minutes as present in the fall of 2010 and on. So it's been 5. Kent Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 The Commission Appointment Board is a political tool of special interests intended to reduce and/or replace the democratic process of public choice. It's not a conservation tool. Again the attempt to intermix conservation ethics with politics either organizationally or individually is non applicable. This is the political arena not a conservation project and those involved better have asbestos for skin. I will never support a reduction of our democratic foundation no matter the intentions or who is in control. Right now the sitting members need to A. hunker down and take heavy incoming flack B. step down gracefully now with a thank you C. make a public statement that they will watchdog our interests while working with the Governor and legislature in removing this board permanently... The, they're great people away from the political arena means nothing in this instance if they adopt A. Acting like a socialist within a selfserving selfproclaimed good intention is... exactly like every other socialist. Kent Kent I like you and your passion and agree with 99% of what you post on here. Please don't consider this a personal attack, but if you or anyone else believes that Janet Napolitano or any potential future governor like her, gave or gives a crap about your "democratic foundation" when it comes to appointments like this, you've got another thing coming. You are factually incorrect that this is a "democratic process of public choice". Nick Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 I went through the minutes a few months ago, I believe it was Stinson that wasn't on at the beginning but there in the minutes as present in the fall of 2010 and on. So it's been 5. Kent I stand corrected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elkaholic Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Aren't these all individuals capable of their own thoughts and decisions, or do we really believe that AZSFW has the power to sway these individual's opinions or the voted on opinions of their respective organizations, if they are even taking a vote on a prospective Commissioner? Losing on a vote is a part of a democracy. We can never guarantee a win. Not sure I am following your logic there. you are kidding right! have you been sipping the kool-aid too! i wouldnt use power as much as to say influence! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 I went through the minutes a few months ago, I believe it was Stinson that wasn't on at the beginning but there in the minutes as present in the fall of 2010 and on. So it's been 5. Kent One more thing I would like to point out in regards to SB1200 that some of you may not have such hearburn over. The law also holds the Governor's Office's feet to the fire when it comes to the timeliness of the appointment. It is a huge disservice to the sportsmen to have a Governor play games with an appointment, and hold it well into the spring as we have seen a few times in the not so recent past. With the timeline that this law has in place we have seen the Commission Appointee Nomination Confirmation be one of the first things the Senate gets done and we have a new Commissioner in February, like we should. Do we all believe that is so bad. If so, I suggest you research what the Director of the Department might think about that. Don't want to put words in his mouth, but I personally believe he might be of a different opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krp Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Well, I looked at the link again... http://www.azgfd.gov/govCommBoard/index2.html and though it says 2010 it goes to the 2011 meetings, I do remember the minutes from 2010 where they started with 4 sitting. Don't really have the energy to redo all my research I did two months ago. something else I found awhile ago. http://www.azgovernor.gov/bc/documents/GovAppointments.pdf Susan Elizabeth Chilton Brewer Term Expires 7/29/2012 Phillip Dale Townsend Brewer 7/29/2013 Donald R. Johnson Brewer 7/29/2014 William Hays Gilstrap Brewer 7/29/2015 Leonard Gary Stinson Brewer 7/29/2016 I don't take anything personal and always appreciate the conversation. I understand what is happening in this country as much or more than most... doing something unethical because the opposition works that way is playing right into their strategy... they like it, it legitimizes their philosophy. Kent Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heat Report post Posted April 5, 2012 Aren't these all individuals capable of their own thoughts and decisions, or do we really believe that AZSFW has the power to sway these individual's opinions or the voted on opinions of their respective organizations, if they are even taking a vote on a prospective Commissioner? Losing on a vote is a part of a democracy. We can never guarantee a win. Not sure I am following your logic there. you are kidding right! have you been sipping the kool-aid too! i wouldnt use power as much as to say influence! No I am not kidding. I don't know Sue Chilton that well personally but I do know that she is a woman of principles and integrity. She and her husband Jim stood up to bullys like the CBD and DOW and won in court on proving malice on the behalf of those POS when it came to how they treated their leased grazing lands. I'll have that woman guard my back any day, any time, anywhere. I do know Phil Townsend personally and trust that man like I might trust someone in my own family. He is salt of the earth. If you are going to question his morals and ethics you are certainly not very well informed at the least. I won't go any further than that. So according to the way you guys are thinking and this is just one giant well orchestrated conspiracy on behalf of the AZSFW, you need to stop sipping the Kool Aid! If you honestly believe that Phil Townsend gave two bits what Suzanne Gilstrap has to say or that he is somehow on the take, then you are now saying that George and I, and the rest of the YVRGC who supported Phil through this process as our representative, are on the "take" so to speak and so easily "influenced", you are really blowing some smoke! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
