I don't actively look up when and where meetings are. Perhaps better notification would get the meeting into my brain.
Notification of when the meetings are being held.
As Jwill posted, you can sign up for email alerts about meetings.
Like Fin said, it is hard knowing when the meetings are or the processes in place or even admitting you don't know how the process works. Huge barrier for years for me. Voicing an opinion that someone will write down is scary, even if it just an letter to the editor or a comment at a meeting. I still google up comments from 15 years ago. It is scary to take a stand on something in front of people you know and face potential ridicule. Public speaking - even offering a comment - is terrifying and only some get over it. Topics seem to be either too uncontroversial to need more input or so controversial/complex that you are afraid of being on the wrong side.
I absolutely understand the fear of public speaking. I still get a dry mouth and nervous stomach every time. Very silly, because I know I'm right.
+1
I fill a lot of rooms with stakeholders who would otherwise not show up for meetings by feeding them. Unfortunately they then verbally abuse me but that it part of the draw I suppose ...in additional sandwiches. Professionally I take a great 'punch' so-to-speak. Which none of my friends can fathom cause I don't take crap from anybody on a pro bono basis. I digress.
There is actually a lot of truth to those statements. Food brings people together. Even better to hold the meetings over shared food. That's why you should all be attending the summer Commission meetings and the accompanying community BBQ's held by CPW.
I'm not saying they do not have meetings here in the Colorado Springs because honestly I have never been involved with this kind of stuff. I have seen a few up in Denver. But why wouldn't they hold them closer to where the majority of people live? That is one of my biggest hurdles. I know that I'm not going to drive over an hour for a meeting so I can drive the same distance home so I can be up at 2 am to go to work. (and I do realize not many people work the schedule I do) Second reason is I have no idea how any of this stuff works. I do realize that taking part would help this but you say 5 people show up for these meetings. 1) I don't like people, 2) I hate arguing with people especially if I don't like them. I just envision these meeting being like this forum during non hunting season. Again this is just my pre conceived notion. I will go to one some day it is definitely something that I feel needs attention.
Cliff
My guess is that all of these groups accept written comments.
I write letters to politicians on a variety of topics, so I guess I need to start weighing in on these issues also.
I do understand the difficulty of attending meetings. It seems like it is never-ending, and if I had a "real" job it would be much more difficult. But write comments! Send an email! At the most recent Commission meeting I attended, one of the Commissioners said that the email comments he received on a very divisive issue were overwhelmingly in favor of the proposal, indicating that sportsmen did not take the time to comment, and landowners and outfitters who had a financial stake in the game did take the time.
Some of my excuses are, lack of awareness of how certain regulatory changes will affect me, a sense that what I have to say won't matter anyway, and a very real distaste for the personal attacks that inevitably accompany the political process.
Some issues are definitely game changers, some are minutiae, some I really don't think anyone knows the effects.
I'm usually pretty good a giving my comments to proposed legislation and letting legislators know when I do have a strong opinion. However, I find that in dealing with raising a family, running a business and dealing with all the other issues of real life I tend towards apathy when it comes to the drama of wildlife or other politics. Quite honestly, hunting is my escape from the pressures of daily life and I lack the drive to invest more energy making it more like real life.
It's not the right attitude to have I'm sure, but it is what it is.
There is a small bit of truth to the "what I say won't matter anyway." But if 30 guys that feel the same way do indeed show up and speak, it makes a huge difference. I will admit that it can be difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff, and often the important issues are buried in a meeting agenda and easily overlooked. And I do understand the "busy life" issue.
If the government want participation in the process then live cast the events and allow questions to be sent in ahead of time as well as real time. If the government want to restrict participation to those of us that can actually take the time to drive perhaps hundreds of miles using up a vacation day to possibly have a moment or two to interact with them in a meaningful way then they will continue to get a partial conference room of attendees.
Most government meetings and events I have attended were not actually fact-gathering but the fix was in and pretending to hear from the public was a dance orchestrated so speakers had only a minute or two to address the panel and only if were one of the first few on the sign up list since often not only was your time limited but the number of speakers was throttled since the meeting had a hard stop.
I suspect the game is rigged in CO with the hunter clawing to get a seat at the table that has padded chairs in place and reserved for the ranchers, etc. that provide campaign money for the legislature that in turn holds the purse strings over the bureaucrats at F&G.
I've attended a few meetings in Iowa. Across the state they live feed the meetings from some of the community colleges and high schools. They had different topics up for discussion. As a group we went over the topics and got a general consensus on things. Then were given a chance to try and voice your concerns over the live feed or have a spokes person for the group report on how the group felt or somewhat voted on the topics. Most people had a location within an hours drive if they wanted to participate. Attendance was fair depending on the issues covered. The state employees from the area close to the live feed location were in attendance and could be talked to also. Still seemed like it was more of a formality than actual discussion but some good things have come from the meetings.
Best post of the thread.
MT has streaming commission meetings where people can go to the seven regional HQ's and be a part of the meeting rather than attend in person. It seems to help with hot button issues.
Agencies often speak in only agency and it is incredibly frustrating to get a straight answer out of some folks. Clean, simple language is important not because people are slow, but because these are complex issues with a lot of moving parts. The better the explanation and the less acronyms, etc, the better informed people are, and the more likely they are to participate.
The only way to combat the feeling that the fix is in is to participate and see how your voice makes a difference. It takes time and patience, something a lot of us don't have in dealing with government employees or agencies.
I think that live streaming of meetings, including the opportunity to participate from the remote locations, would be huge. No reason why this couldn't be done now.
Thanks for everyone that answered. Pretty much what I expected. One thing that strikes me is that perhaps a sportsman's email listserv for each state, which highlights and explains issues of importance and includes contact information for providing comments, might be helpful. I tend to forget that the whole world isn't getting the pertinent information needed from their daily reading of Sportsmen's' Issues on Hunttalk.
. This board helped me a lot in understanding wildlife issues and process - I was mostly interest in water before.
