Preston Cole is stepping down. Hopefully we will get a person with more conservation and biology experience along with the politics that goes with these positions these days.

Bryce

who says who gets that job?

Appointed by the governor?

I looked it up....yes, appointed by the Gov. ..

Hope your gov. is better than ours.

He is not.

Cole can't leave soon enough.

Nearly everyone has a better governor than we have.

I've been disappointed in Cole's performance during his entire tenure. It's possible he's just a puppet for the governor though.

I haven't heard who the new one will be.

I think it should be appointed by the Natural Resources Board

Natural Resources Board are appointed by Governor, too!

No DNR position should serve at the pleasure of any politician. They should serve at the pleasure of the Citizens who vote them in. Wouldn't it be great to have our DNR's be like the County Sherriff and they just had to win our votes and not be forced to kiss butt to politicians to keep their jobs?

Careful what you wish for.

If they had to be elected they would be bending to which ever way the majority of the population blows.
Nowdays I don't think the majority of citizens think like those on this forum when it comes to trapping and host of other outdoor subjects.

Sad to say but the odds of getting someone who is going to make choices based on scientific knowledge will be slim to none. It will be a left leaning political lackey.

I'd rather take my chances with the people, at least that would be a true result. Not a Rhino, a R that's really a D, or a flat out D, appointing DNR Directors and Wildlife Council's. If the people speak then you know if it's time to get out there and enjoy, move, or hang the Victors up above the fireplace and remanence of times past.

That's a great idea if you want a California styled wildlife department.

And things are going great the way they are in Cali? Of course it won't change there, what positive change could come from there? That's a very narrow view. What about here in Ohio, heck, what about in NY even? They have the numbers in their favor but don't turn out and then gripe about the outcome.

You honestly think that across the board in all States, it's better to serve at the pleasure of the Governor, then the people? I personally think voting for the DNR's will bring a better turnout in our favor than voting for Governor's.

Most of calis terrible wildlife laws were because of voter referendums. Atleast a few other states have lost trapping g or bear baiting etc because of voter referendums.

Way to easy to appeal to the masses emotions on wildlife issues.

Ok, so lol. A lot of trapping and outdoors issues actually are on the ballot and the people choose? I've never seen any here. Letting a Governor choose the people who set wildlife laws is better then the people? You didn't answer.

Would a actual vote for wildlife laws bring out more voters then a Governor vote? If outdoor laws were on the ballot, I think States like NY would have had a different turnout, I've just never seen them on the ballot it's the people appointed who make the rules.

I greatly dislike voter referendums and would prefer to not have them, at all. Letting 51%+ of the voting population control the other 49% is bad policy. I don't like democracy, the country was founded as a representative republic because of the inherent flaws of democracy and I believe we should stick with that model.

Poor Washington was elected on a farce lol. Carry on and again, lol.

I don't think you understand my point. If these position were by election they will become One issue elections. Someone will run on ending trapping or hunting with hounds or ending Wolf hunting and they will receive a TON of out of state money to run adds that play to emotion. Get an anti elected with out of state funds with the promise to end consumptive use and it's over.

A lot of States have these restrictions and does your last sentence not sum it up? Point blank, Is control better suited for one Man or Women, or we the people?