Upheaval reveals shift in Calif. wildlife policy


By Peter Fimrite, San Francisco Chronicle

The sudden resignation of the most adamant defender of hunting and fishing on the California Fish and Game Commission could put the finishing touches on a sweeping philosophical shift in the way the state views wildlife, sets rules for fishing and controls predators like mountain lions and wolves.

Commissioner Jim Kellogg retired in late December in frustration over what he termed a lack of consideration for the sportsmen and women he represents. The resignation — combined with the unrelated recent departures of commission President Jack Baylis and Sonke Mastrup, the commission’s executive director — sets the stage for Gov. Jerry Brown to appoint conservationists to the increasingly pivotal state board.

Such a move may, observers say, complete the transformation of the commission from an organization that advocates for fishing and hunting to one that safeguards endangered species, preserves habitat and protects California’s top predators from slaughter.

Read the whole story


About author

This article was written by admin


Comments (22)
  1. Toogee Sielsch says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    Could we be coming into an age where actual wildlife biological science dictates our approach to wildlife management, and especially as it pertains to predatory species and their contributions as a cornerstone ecosystem species? One could only hope!

  2. Dogula says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    Possibly. Since humans are no longer permitted to be the predators they were designed to be.

  3. Kits Carson says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    Cali-Lib is the poster child for anti guns and anti harvesting of game. Pathetic. Too bad they are soft on most law breakers. Again, pathetic.

  4. Justice says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    More liberal lunacy fallout. The millions paid by people who enjoy the outdoors for fishing and hunting who buy licenses in this state has been the major funding source for conservation of land and for funding the agency, once this money leaves the state, like the disappearing taxpayers, what will they do? Start taxing who? This is another Moonbeam failure, like the just reported crime increases for last year.

  5. Toogee Sielsch says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    Mr or Ms Justice, just so you understand, 95% of the money spent in wildlife management and conservation efforts throughout every agency in the United States tasked with that job is paid by non hunting taxpaying citizens. The myth that hunters bear the brunt of that cost through tag fees is just that, a myth. It’s time for the hunters with leadership roles in CDFW and NDOW pretending to have wildlife’s best interests at heart, yet managing their hunts from a hunting standpoint as opposed to a scientific standpoint, to be replaced.

  6. Justice says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    It is undisputable that people who buy licenses and pay the ammo and gun taxes and millions in gear costs and lodging for outdoor recreation are the real conservation revenue generators and they are funding the primary means of wildlife conservation through revenue and land conservation, it is in the billions. The liberals are failures at everything they try to manage and regulate and they destroy every agency, city, and state they run. Once the taxpayers leave this state, it will fail and they are leaving by the tens of thousands a month.

  7. Robin Smith says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    Too…CDFW, NDOW at least there are only two of these in your short response.

    Maybe somebody besides yourself knows what they mean?

  8. billy the mountain says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    What is your point?

  9. Robin Smith says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    billy!…maybe you can tell me what CDFW and NDOW mean?

    ASS U ME you’re addressing me.

  10. Toogee Sielsch says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    Robin Smith, CDFW is California Department of Fish and Wildlife. NDOW is Nevada Department of Wildlife.

  11. Robin Smith says - Posted: January 25, 2016


  12. billy the mountain says - Posted: January 25, 2016

    What is your point?
    Try the google machine. Do your own homework, jock.

  13. Robin Smith says - Posted: January 26, 2016

    billy..”What is your point?”

    People from 147 countries check on this LTN blog.

  14. Robin Smith says - Posted: January 26, 2016


    People from 147 or so countries check on this little local blog and none of them are inclined to GOOGLE every other acronym on the planet and then guess which one suits the context…ID your ‘nyms’ then proceed.

    It is also helpful to ID the person you are addressing so NO one has to scan All the comments before responding

  15. CT says - Posted: January 26, 2016

    You can do the research to find out that there are people from over 147 countries reading every word of brilliant inspiration that flows from your gifted mind, but can’t look up a couple of easy acronyms,(especially as related to the ACTUAL STORY).
    When you reply, please use that fun little “sticking my tongue out” thing.
    I have the perfect place for it.

  16. Robin Smith says - Posted: January 26, 2016

    CT…LOL!!!..U R so funnee;)~

  17. Cranky Gerald says - Posted: January 26, 2016

    ” Since humans are no longer permitted to be the predators they were designed to be.”

    Can you please give me a reference for your quote above? I have never seen the Human design specifications.

    Actually, history shows that just about everything Humans take an interest in eating or wearing is driven to near or actual extinction if they possibly can do it.
    (Passenger pigeons, Buffalo, Whales, numerous fur bearing animals, adinfitum other smaller species, and even other humans)

    Regulations ON HUMANS do some good to keep keep the world on an even keel. Given free rein (or is it reign?) humans would very likely cause their own extinction even quicker than we probably already are.

    Looking at it dispassionately, Humans use their predatory prowess largely against their fellow humans. Who would design this? And you are in favor if it?????

    Unfortunately this is entirely believable.

  18. billy the mountain says - Posted: January 26, 2016

    Robin, your point… it is still missing.

  19. Robin Smith says - Posted: January 26, 2016

    billy…the point is…

    I asked Too a question and Too answered my question. I thanked Too.

    I have absolutely no idea exactly what your point is or CT’s.
    Neither of you have anything to do with the subject of the article or the question I asked of Too which Too answered directly.

    What I think is that you are very clearly harassing me.

  20. billy the mountain says - Posted: January 26, 2016

    You were getting at more than what the acronyms mean. What was it?

  21. Robin Smith says - Posted: January 26, 2016

    billy….it means that if you continue to harass me I will report you the the administration.

  22. Rick H says - Posted: January 27, 2016


    You might want to do a little research before you continue to make a fool of yourself. Hunting and fishing license contribute about 16% of the budget to CDFW. Less then 10 % of California residents hunt or fish, and the vast majority (85%) of CDFW’s responsibility are non-hunting related.

    Kellogg is a relict and was unable to keep up with changing demographics and values in the state. For instance, an overwhelming number of California citizens are not interested in coyote killing contest, or allowing bobcat trapping as it has been shown to be practice by a very small number of people (less than 200 trappers with bobcat license in the state) and practices that if it were a domestic animal would land you in prison for animal abuse.