The Republicans who control the Idaho Senate did a rare thing Monday, snubbing their governor, letting the meat loaf grow stale in the lunchroom and delaying an annual ceremony honoring Abraham Lincoln.
The male-dominated Senate rejected Gov. Butch Otter’s nomination of the second woman to serve in the Idaho Fish & Game Commission’s 75 years, in a 19-16 vote after almost two hours of debate.
Joan Hurlock, the daughter of a California game warden who moved to Buhl 10 years ago, was principally faulted for one thing: She isn’t an avid hunter or fisher.
Hurlock is a former cop with a degree in forensic science and a lifetime member of the NRA. She taught her kids to fish and seeks to reverse the decline in hunting and fishing by attracting young people.
Opponents said she was smart and well-informed, but her absence of time in elk camp cost her the volunteer post.
“I wonder if she’s ever sat on the top of a high mountain ridge at daylight after having walked miles in the dark to get to that special hunting spot, only to have an ATV drive by and scare the game away,” said Sen. Steve Bair, R-Blackfoot.
Until Hurlock became interested in the job last year, she held hunting licenses in 1999 and 2000 and a fishing license in 2003. She bought multiple licenses in 2012. That casual history signaled she couldn’t be trusted to put hunted animals ahead of the department’s other legal duty — to protect non-game species.
“Where does that leave the hunter?” asked Sen. Jeff Siddoway, R-Terreton, a former Fish & Game commissioner.
“This lady is not qualified,” Siddoway recalled telling Lt. Gov. Brad Little shortly after Hurlock’s nomination in June. “She admitted to us that she wasn’t a fisherman and that she had hunted once in her life and shot two whistlepigs. The passion that she has for hunting and fishing in Idaho is not there.”
In the eight months since Otter’s nomination, Senate Resources and Environment Committee Chairman Monty Pearce has been fighting to remove Hurlock, who began serving in July and had the support of all six male colleagues on the commission.
“There’s a fear of some environmentalism involved here,” said Pearce, R-New Plymouth, whose committee voted 5-4 last week against Hurlock. “Just trust us, trust us in the way we see it.”
The Senate tradition of affirming committee work also played a role. All four GOP leaders and seven of 10 committee chairmen opposed Hurlock. The 19 opponents included 18 of the Senate’s 30 men, one of five women. Among the 28 Republicans, 19 voted against Hurlock; all seven Democrats backed her.
It was historic — the first time in memory that a GOP-controlled Senate overturned a Republican governor’s pick. The last governor to suffer such embarrassment: Democrat Cecil Andrus in 1988, who also had a Fish & Game nominee rejected in 1974.
Sen. Patti Anne Lodge, R-Huston, defended Hurlock, who tied for the top spot among a committee of eight that interviewed seven candidates for Otter. Lodge’s brother, Dyke Nally, chaired the panel.
Lodge recounted growing up in a hunting family in Canyon County with game so plentiful she shot birds from the porch. “If my father hadn’t hunted, we probably wouldn’t have had any meat,” Lodge said.
Lodge said it’s high time to “bring 50 percent of Idaho citizens — women — into the mix” and offer “a new perspective.” Hurlock would be good for hunting, Lodge argued, boosting animal populations, focusing on science and reversing a decline in license sales and an aging hunting population.
“This is about bringing no agenda except to get young people outdoors and away from violent video games,” Lodge said.
Otter voiced the same sentiment on Friday. “It gets them away from the TV, away from the Game Boy,” he said. “They’re actually out looking at nature and learning about life.”
Otter said he warned Hurlock the floor fight was “not going to be pretty…but if you want to stay in this, I’m with you.”
Sen. Roy Lacey, D-Pocatello, voted for Hurlock in committee and said she was plenty tough. “She knew she was headed for a wreck and yet she came anyway.”
Sen. Bert Brackett, R-Rogerson, warned Hurlock’s foes they risk losing broad public support as hunting culture wanes in an urbanizing Idaho.
“We need more recruits,” said Brackett. “Joan Hurlock is committed to that. For the survival of hunting as we know it we’re going to have to get more youth involved sooner.”
And these are the people who run the state of Idaho, forbid the state’s larger towns, cities, and counties to have constitutional home-rule powers (only western state), have America’s only required supermajority to pass an ordinary school bond, won’t give M&O monies to schools (only US state again), and in a supposedly ag-state, keep a 5 acre threshold for ag property tax exemptions, so’s speculators can skate p-taxes.
Is it any wonder the state’s become a high-tax, low wage backwater, who’s percapita income fell from 37th in 1980, to 49th in Q2, 2011? Jeez, gimmeabreak.
Though Tom Luna is an elected official these legislators have no trouble swallowing his proposals hook, line and sinker (pun) and Mr. Luna has never been an educator. So is the real objection to Ms. Hurlock the presumed fact that she is not a real hunter?
Thought the same thing. Wondering if things might have been different if Tom Luna had been a woman and Pam Lowe a man.
On a positive note I do find it encouraging that many folks are so concerned about who serves on the IDFG Commission…it shows how much Idahoans care about fishing, hunting, and wildlife in this state. With respect to the nomination of Hurlock, I think
legitimate concerns have been raised and this is not short-sighted. I am sure she is a wonderful person, but the fact that sportsmen groups have concerns about her is legitimate. I don’t think people need a lifetime of hunting experience to serve, but it appears Hurlock only incidentally/peripherally engages in hunting/fishing. There are so many sportsmen in Idaho with vast hunting and fishing experience and a desire to serve that I do not think the Senate or the Governor should confirm/appoint anyone who is not totally engaged in hunting/fishing. No attendance record is necessary but I want a commissioner who is passionate about hunting and fishing. I support the Senate on this one and hope the governor appoints someone who is passionate about hunting and fishing…there are many good men and women who fit this bill. As for Hurlock, nothing is preventing her from volunteering for the IDFG and being engaged in helping increase youth participation. I hope she continues to help in those areas she is passionate about but she is the wrong choice for serving on the commission.
Listening to the debate I was disappointed at the continuing spreading of misinformaton by those opposing Hurlock’s appointment. She has served knowledgeably and admirably on the board since her appointment early last summer and now she has no knowledge of the issues and concerns? How ridiculous. 19 senators should hang their heads in shame. They heard only what they wanted to hear and that was no woman should serve on the commission. Sexist mindsets. Including the one woman senator who cannot think for herself and when she does it is what the heck does she have any brains.
Let me just ask myself… If a male had the same education, background and experience would I want HIM on the commission? My answer would be NO. Hmmm, would I want someone who at one time changed a flat tire to diagonis, repair and guarantee my truck repair. No, I would want someone with extensive experience. I do not believe this is a male female issue but an experience issue.
I think it’s because she ain’t Annie Oakley.
Turning this into a sexist issue is typical of Americans now days. What happened to standing up for what u believe in and accepting the criticism? I am a woman and a very big hunter, fisher, competition archer, etc. I was actually at the senate house when we were allowed to testify. I was one that spoke up and specified my disappointment. Im not afraid to stand up for what i believe in, but stop turning this into something its not. We couldnt care less about her as a person, we dont want this person for our commissioner. Hunting and fishing are the only things that pay for F&G to exist so giving sportsmen a voice in who represents them is not too much to ask. I don’t want someone who is more worried about what her father did or what shes read or what people have told her. I want someone as passionate as me on keeping wildlife alive for our children and grandchildren. Quit whining about discrimination and learn the facts.
So you consider the spreading of misinformation because she is a woman irrelevant to the facts. She has served well and knowledgeable since her appointment and is concerned about the total mission of the department. This is not a hunting nor a fishing issue, this is an issue about the management of wildlife for all of Idaho. I financially support the dept’s endeavors without a hunting or fishing license.
As the decline of hunters why not an individual who encourages young people to endeavor to become hunters. No, this vocal minority has done a disservice to the management of wildlife for all Idahoans.
The facts are: Senator Monty Pearce told her to withdraw her nomination and perhaps she could be nominated to the nurses board! If that is not sexism, I don’t know what is. FYI, she is quite passionate about preserving hunting and fishing for future generations! If you knew what she did, you would know that.
This position is also about law enforcement. For those who said she wasn’t Annie Oakley, she out shot all of the commissioners and the director. This is about the opposition not getting their guy in, not wanting a woman and spreading as much misinformation as possible!
She has been doing the job for 6 months and the other commissioners backed her up. Shame on all of them!
Roses4u take your environmental tree hugging attitude and go elsewhere. It is called Idaho fish and game for a reason. It is an agency created by who? Yes Sportsmen!!!!!!!!!! This was another ploy to get an environmentalist into making fish and game decisions. Her main qualification was forensic science. Are we going to hold CSI for deer? Or see who killed the ground squirrel and with what? She had a father who was a game warden. Big deal! If my dad was a surgeon does that make me one? Nooooooooo! She seems like a nice person but way not in tune with Idaho fish and game. It takes a sportsman to understand it. No one is attacking her as a person. The facts are there and she was extremely less qualified than the other candidates. Plain and simple that the highest qualified individual was not selected.
Jevon, you need to be properly informed as to the department of fish and game.
Idaho Fish and Game’s mission is to protect, preserve, perpetuate and manage Idaho’s wildlife resources.
A 1938 voter initiative created the Idaho Fish and Game Commission structure that governs the agency today. Meet the commissioners who set fish and wildlife management policy and the Directors Office responsible for management to carry out the policy.
Here’s the specific mission statement
Fish and Game Mission StatementTuesday, February 12, 2013
The mission statement for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game is found within the State of Idaho Wildlife Policy, which reads:
“All wildlife, including all wild animals, wild birds, and fish, within the state of Idaho, is hereby declared to be the property of the state of Idaho. It shall be preserved, protected, perpetuated, and managed. It shall be only captured or taken at such times or places, under such conditions, or by such means, or in such manner, as will preserve, protect, and perpetuate such wildlife, and provide for the citizens of this state and, as by law permitted to others, continued supplies of such wildlife for hunting, fishing and trapping.”
Katz, being a person with a gun doesn’t make you a sportsman. What has she done for SPORTSMEN? 0!!!!!!!! Misinformation? I have seen the facts! The fact is she was no where near as qualified as the other candidates. If she wanted to be a warden like her father she has great qualities, but when it comes to commissioners it takes sportsmen. The other commissioners after the first session were amazed she was ever selected. At their sessions she said nothing. Why? Because she has no idea what is going on. I was there when at the Senate Committee hearing and watched her as she was questioned. She had no direct answers and could only answer ‘i have read or I am learning’ . What does this say? Well I see it as she doesn’t have a clue. When one senator asked her about Salmon and dam breaching her response”I don’t know anything about it”. When asked about wolves and her feelings towards managing them she beat around the bush with no definate answer. Then the next day on public radio she accused those who testified against her as being “criminals and felons”. No one in their speeches said anything demeaning or derogatory towards her. In fact all messages were factual information directed towards what sportsmen want. They taljk about lawsuits.? How about a huge one against her for slandering the people who testified against her on public radio! The Senate got this right and EVERYONE needs to just shut up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jevon, if she said nothing then the minutes of the meetings are inaccurate.
Not sure if Hurlock’s a Mormon or not, but in the Resources and Environment Committee vote, all five of the “No” votes came from Mormons. I would surmise that they would prefer one of their own (white, male, LDS?) on the commission. If the Senate confirmed all of the other commissioners, and they supported her, why are they having heartburn over Hurlock? (see above) As for Siddoway, he’s a real piece of work. We all remember the Egin-Hamer Road fiasco don’t we.
She was a single member of a 7 member commission. I guess that means she would have outnumbered the rest of the commission 1 to 6 and forced her views on the rest. Just like she’s been doing since she was appointed. /s