Maine Candidates For Governor Answer Questions About Outdoor Issues.....Or Do They?

Home > Maine Candidates For Governor Answer Questions About Outdoor Issues…..Or Do They?

In politics 101, if it’s not taught it is soon realized that to be a successful politician you have to learn the fine art of not answering a question or at least answering it only enough to satisfy the majority, to sound knowledgeable, authoritative and a real leader while refusing to indicate exactly the political bias hiding behind the big smiles and fancy words.

George Smith, Executive Director for the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, shares with his many readers some of the responses he and his Board of Directors got when interviewing and seeking responses to questions dealing with the Outdoor Industry in Maine, i.e. hunting, fishing, boating, hiking, etc., etc. Smith promises more responses in the future and I will do my best to at least give you a link to those responses.

Published in DownEast, one of the questions posed to the five candidates – Republican Paul LePage, Democrat Elizabeth (Libby) Mitchell, and Independents Eliot Cutler, Shawn Moody, and Kevin Scott – was a safe and generic kind, asking about, “the experiences that shaped their thinking about Maine’s outdoor heritage.”

All the responses were quite unremarkable and typical of what you would expect from any person hoping to gain inroads with the outdoor world.

I guess history has shown these candidates that even though their refusal to be more specific in answering questions only leaves people to speculate, it must be far better than people finding out the truth. I don’t understand that because from the perspective of a voter, I would demand the truth. However, fluffy, good sounding answers seems to be the accepted norm.

You do however begin to recognize that through the answers to these questions, there is a definite difference in class backgrounds. From Mitchell’s response that she is happy her grown children chose Maine to live in because of “quality of place”, vs. Moody’s “Hunted and trapped throughout high school with older brother Thad”.

Only two of the five candidates listed hunting as an outdoor activity they enjoyed.

Perhaps just a tad more revealing, Smith writes about some key responses by the candidates during interviews with SAM’s Board. Obviously Mitchell is the veteran, the more polished candidate, while injecting all the key elements of the Outdoor Industry – “world class fishing”, “bold commissioner” of MIDFW who will “work with sportsmen”, and “rebuild deer herd”.

Paul LaPage’s focus seems to be mostly on the forest products industry. He did however state that he wanted to “brand Maine as a place to hunt and fish”.

Eliot Cutler wants to fix the roads leading to Moosehead Lake and Shawn Moody tossed out an interesting concept. He is thinking of requiring public access to lands listed under Maine’s Tree Growth tax program.

In addition to what is printed in DownEast, George Smith posted remarks and information on the Maine Sportsman Forums in discussions about who or what would make a good leader for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.

I assume we will hear more about this later on as Smith stated later issues of his blog would reveal more. However, at the MSF site, Smith shared another question that was asked of the gubernatorial candidates.

“What skills, experience, and knowledge will you be looking for in the people you select for the positions at DIF&W that are appointed by the Governor.”

Once again the answers were what you might expect but leave us not really knowing anything about the candidates. Perhaps when Shawn Moody answered the question this way, ““In considering persons for positions in DIF&W, I will consider people whose backgrounds, training and experience will make a sound professional contribution to the goals of outdoor recreation, wildlife enhancement, and that will interface with the interest groups common to the Department, the public and the legislature.””, he pretty well summed it up for all of them. It says nothing! As a matter of fact, just what does that mean?

Libby Mitchell will look for these qualifications: ““Managerial experience, educational background, science-based knowledge, personal experience in outdoor pursuits, and character.””

And Paul LePage: ““Someone with knowledge, experience in managing natural resources, such as forest, water, hunting and fishing. Demonstrated skills in leadership and ability to see the big picture.””

Questions remain unanswered and we are left knowing little about these people as it pertains to the Outdoor Industry or the Department of Inland Fisheries and wildlife. Mitchell wants some with educational background. In what? Political Science? And someone with science-based knowledge. Being that she is a democrat does she espouse to Barack Obama’s idea of science, disguised as agenda driven politics? Or is she and any or all of the other candidates actually interested in proven, up-to-date wildlife science and research?

I would have liked to have heard whether any of these candidates intend to restructure the fish and game department, along with the Department of Conservation. Instead of asking Mainers to pay out some more money in taxes so Maine can fund it’s fish and game from general taxation, why not put that responsibility on those who take advantage of outdoor resources who don’t pay anything now?

Perhaps Smith and the Maine League of Conservation Voters will give us some more cabbage to grind in the days and weeks ahead that will give voters something a bit more meaty to sink their teeth into.

During the last round of elections for Governor, I was able to conduct a 5-question interview via email with the candidates. Perhaps it is time I honed my skills at question asking and see if I can get the five candidates to answer a question(s) with something other than fluff.

Tom Remington

Richard

Ask them how they see the Coyote predator fitting into Maine wildlife management and if they would do something about Coyote predators what would that be and how would they do it.

What groups do they think would support their efforts and which groups would likely oppose them. What would they say to the opposing groups. What would they say to the people if Maine in general.
Tom Remington

Good questions! I welcome more suggestions!
Kurt Lane

Here’s the good side,these canidates, more so than any others in the past, are being pushed and questioned by sportsmen. I have been told by Lepage and Scott that the department positions will not be filled with political cronies by them, but that they will be reaching out to the various sportsman organizations for help in order to ensure appointees are inline with the outdoor community.
I plan on getting copies of the 10,000 or so names on our predation petition into each of their hands in the coming weeks, asking for a public statement on specific questions.
We need to keep at them from many directions in order to ensure our issues don’t fade after Nov.
Richard

The Department of Conservation (LURC and Forest Service) and Inland Fisheries and Wildlife have ‘shared’ responsibility to manage/provide oversight of Maine Forests. The state hires experts for this purpose paid out of tax dollars and license fees. From this article http://evergreenmagazine.com/magazine/article/Condition_and_Outlook_for_Maine_s_Spruce_fir_Forests_Aftermath_of_the_Spruce_Budworm_Epidemic.html by a respected non-state expert we can deduce that Maine’s Forests are doing pretty much OK. But, after two severe winters the White-tailed Deer are gone upcountry – maybe forever. At least a long, long time. The decimation of deer yards has been identified as the cause but at least one state wildlife biologist believes that there is ample deer wintering area even before the two hard winters that erased all evidence of white-tailed Deer in many areas of the state.

As you can see by the this IF&W site http://www.maine.gov/ifw/hunting_trapping/hunting/harvest.htm deer has declined drastically even before the two bad winters.

So, if Maine’s forests are doing OK but the deer are gone do you believe the problem with the White-tailed-Deer is anything that can-should be managed? Since the White-tailed deer historically has drawn large numbers of hunters nationally, and some from far distant places, and they are no longer coming to Maine this results in great economic and recreational loss to the people north and east of Bangor. In this article http://www.downeast.com/georges-outdoor-news/2010/august/ecotourism-delivering-maine by SAM’s President George Smith he says that environmental tourism is an economic failure. Sportsmen are no longer making Maine a destination.

How are you are going to answer questions about the loss of the deer-herd and what are you going to tell the outfitters, guides, sporting camp owners, landowners and sportsmen that a whole way of life and livelihood are now gone. What will you say to the readers of the Northwoods Sporting Journal, Maine Sportsman and members of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine? How will you respond to MASTC – the Maine big game records folks – that the deer they are keeping records on will be so few that the effort is useless?

How will you respond the Restore, the Sierra Club, the Wolf Coalition. Many of the changes upcountry benefit the creation of a National Park where no logging, snowmobiles, road-building, ATV’s will be allowed and furtherance of the introduction of Wolves as another predator species will be a hot item.

In a nutshell, what are you going to do? Of the groups of people above which ones will benefit the most from your administration? Will it be tradition or post-modern environmentalism? Traditional Sporting Camps or another state office to manage another government program? Hunting or hiring sharpshooters? Trapping or hiring animal damage control agents? What efforts would you make to return the deer to prominence in Maine?
Kurt Lane

excellent Richard

Maine Candidates For Governor Answer Questions About Outdoor Issues…..Or Do They?

Related Posts

Tom Remington

Related Sites

Archives
Categories