What do you think of the RAC

[groundshrink]

I don't want to sound like a whiney baby, but I hope after reading this you agree I have a point. I went to the RAC's- I actually got up and voiced my opinion. An opinion about a hunt that pissed the DWR Biologist off so bad that he was so red I wondered for his health safety! I quickely saw how they work. But a couple of nights later at a Different RAC. I was looking for the chance to voice the same opinion, but the DWR had convieniently changed the terminology of the hunt ( from depredation to numbers reduction) my gripe was rendered mute! I went to a RAC member locally to see what their take was on this. Had to wait, this person was on the phone. To my suyrprise the conversation revolved around my gripe at the previous RAC meeting! I found out the I was a 'dumb son of a #####' for saying anything, and 'us people who stand up to say anything at the RAC's don't know what's going on'. By the way This RAC member was talking to Don Peay! (sounded like Don was agreeing with this RAC member, but I don't know for sure - couldn't hear him) Piss on that stuff! What's the point if this is the attitude they are going to take?

So: from all my hunting buddies and aquintances, I showed these proposals to, not one agreed with any of it. Not one would go to the Central RAC meeting because in their opinion the RAC exists as a mere formality so we can't complain that we don't have a way to voice our opinion. All my contacts were unanimous in thinking that the decisions are made and the RAC does not listen.

What do you think of the RAC!?

 

[c3]

I had been to the last 4 central RAC's on bucks and bulls each fall until this year.

I went to the Southeast and Central RAC's last year and voice an opinion. In both cases Don got up right after me and shot down everything that was said to that point. Boom, end of discussion and the vote was formalized for the record.

It was a bit disheartening, but in the end of the day all the comments of dissatisfaction with how things are going led to the formation of the elk committee. I'm sure that wasn't something that was planned before John Bair asked for it at last years central RAC.

I think those guys on the RAC's really do care what we have to say, but the real issues appear to be already decided before the meetings ever start.

The RAC is a good forum for expressing opinions, but it might be nice if the outcome wasn't set in stone before they ever take place. Maybe the votes could come at a different meeting than the one where the publics voice is expressed. This might just give some time for the common man to do some lobbying like the Don

Cheers,
Pete

 

[Silentstalker]

I agree that it is mostly a formality but must say that they would have passed the LE or OIL portion had it not been for the majority at the central RAC voicing displeasure at the idea. I am interested in how the other RAC's have gone. Does anyone know? Have a great day and keep the faith. Regardless of your oppinions you deserve the right to express it even if it falls on deaf ears.

Chad

 

[groundshrink]

Thanks for replying guys - I really have to say this site is addicting! The responses usually really make me think about how I look at hunting issues. I appreciate the different views and they make a person stop and think. It's nice to find this many people just trying to have the same experiences that I enjoy and want to continue to have!

I have to say that sometimes I laugh right out load (and get funny looks)because of some of the things posted. Even the 'pissing matches' get to be quite comical/interesting (to me, I know some of those responses are just to see which buttons pushed produce what results).

Anyway, like I said before: If the powers that be are going to go for these Elk Porposals, I hope that they are willing to monitor ( why haven't they been doing the tooth submit thing already?)and adjust if we start ot lose what has FINALLY become something great!