BigGameHoundsmen.com

Once again the California Fish and Game Commission has decided to make no changes to the CEQA document that was not complete enough to be certified. I read the whole 171 pages and it looked like good solid science to me. The Commission said they weren't afraid of being sued by groups like the HSUS. One commissioner even ominously stated that if these decisions weren't handled properly by fall of 2011 there would be no bear hunting in California. The agenda also stated that for item #4 there would be "Action only, no further public comment", yet they took public comment. I would have been there in person and made the commission very uncomfortable. I can't wait for the May meeting in Stockton. I am going to unload on these cowards. If hunting with hounds is outlawed will you be an outlaw? More to come later today. "We must indeed all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately." -Benjamin Franklin replying to John Hancock's remark that the revolutionaries should be unanimous in their action, July 4, 1776 at the signing of the Declaration of Independence. -Pete

Pete,

Once again the California Fish and Game Commission has decided to make no changes to the CEQA document that was not complete enough to be certified.

Note that last year, the Department submitted proposals within the Negative Declaration standard rather than the full-blown CEQA standard. The ND meets a lower legal threshold and cannot withstand the same level of scrutiny that the fully-compliant CEQA document can. Once the Department realized the opposition they were facing (namely, the threat of a lawsuit by Los Padres ForestWatch), they realized that they would have to come, "loaded for bear" in 2010 with a CEQA-compliant set of proposals.

I read the whole 171 pages and it looked like good solid science to me.

It's not the science that is being scrutinized. There are some minor procedural matters to address. The Department is compelled by law to allow the public to provide comment to both the proposals and any subsequent changes that are made, and is further compelled by law to respond to all public comment. The Department requires more time to do so due to the volume of correspondence they received.

The Commission said they weren't afraid of being sued by groups like the HSUS. One commissioner even ominously stated that if these decisions weren't handled properly by fall of 2011 there would be no bear hunting in California.

Actually, some of the Commissioners indicated a fear that any changes they make would incite an initiative on the 2012 ballot. I fear their resolve may not withstand such a threat.

I can't wait for the May meeting in Stockton. I am going to unload on these cowards.

It's not a matter of cowardice. The Commission accepted the recommendation of the Department to choose the No Change option and give the Department more time. They could have decided to gavel down on the No Change option and told the Department to come back in 2011 or 2013, but they didn't. I applaud the Commission for that!

With the information above in mind, and given the information I indicated in the other related post, I hope you would rethink your intended actions.

RIFLEMAN ~ Thanks for addressing these concerns.

Pete ~ I too hope that you'll consider all of these answers or the enlightening if you will, to your concerns before you jump down the throats of the commissioners.

Remember WE HAVE 2 on our side. We only need 1 more. You don't want to run that potential vote for us away now do you?

Take it easy!
Irv