Here are Montana's elected "non-partisan" Public Service Commissioners. Look at who the President and Vice-President are. Two of the most partisan people in Montana. But, they were elected, so supposedly no politics were involved.
Link here -
https://psc.mt.gov/About-Us/Commissioners/
I get the frustration, but to think supposed "non-partisan" elections are truly non-partisan is akin to thinking that there is no money influencing politicians; nice in theory but far from reality. I will take our current appointed FWP Commission over that "non-partisan" elected PSC Commission, all day, every day, and three times on Sunday.
Anyone who thinks UPOM and their well-funded donors couldn't leverage small scale FWP elections to get more power on an elected FWP Commission is living in a dream world. Even if it is not their candidate, that "behind the scenes" money helps get people elected. That money comes with strings and influence. The smaller the election, the easier it is for groups to hijack the outcome.
The current appointment process is far from perfect. But, it also requires a confirmation process in the Montana Senate. There are staggered terms that overlap election cycles, the value of which is somewhat negated when a Governor wins two terms. These are better protections than an election of FWP Commissioners that will mostly be former legislators and lobbyists who view any elected office as a target for their partisan machines.
Elections do matter. Relationships matter. Involvement in the remainder of the process matters. Not saying hunters would/will get what we want, but to paraphrase Poz, "Even when the odds are stacked against you, don't give up. Make your opponent take it from you by fighting for your interest." We can make them own the decisions we disagree with.
A lot of what I hear from hunters is what I heard from landowners in the prior 16 years of Democratic Governors. They felt the FWP Commission appointment process was purely a political spoil handed to the Governor's friends. They felt the Commissioners didn't listen to their concerns. We can argue whether that was/wasn't true and they would argue that with the current administration it is/isn't true.
We have some Commission terms that will roll off the Commission in 2025. That is a time to show up. Between now and then, we also need to spend time building relationships with Commissioners, whether we/they agree on all issues. Others who might have a different interest than hunters are doing that. We need to spend more time doing that.
I wish it was easy and could always result in what is best for wildlife. It is a process of representative government, which history shows best "represents" the interest of those who show up.
