Wisconsin NRB & DNR, Not Political, TRUST ME!!!!!!

https://www.nbc26.com/news/state/dnr-wont-participate-in-meeting-amidst-appointee-fight

Oh my God, over reacting much. Get a grip. The terms and labels being tossed around here over a very small amount of info is comical.  Anyone suggesting grand conspiracy back room politics this early needs to ditch the tinfoil.  Some need to be reminded that several former NRB members had the corner on that market. Good riddance. 

I did, in fact, watch the meeting. I believe these comments are a typical overreaction to what was discussed which constituted about 1 minute of a 3-1/2 hour meeting. Yes, the Conservation Congress ( not NRB, not DNR) will look at delving into environmental issues which are beyond the normal realm of hunting, fishing and trapping. Well and good, it's CONSERVATION.  If you look more closely at the make up of the CC, you couldn't find a less radical group. Plus they are purely an advisory body to the DNR and according to many on another thread,  the DNR never listens to the CC anyway.
Bottom line...much ado about nothing. 

Terrible appointees. Hopefully the senate will do their job and say “no” to these radicals. But they won’t? Perhaps they’re waiting for comments from their constituents to tell them to do their job. If you haven’t, don’t fret about it….or do fret?

Fin,
They got what they chose extreme radical,  off the deep end, virtue signaling, saving the world aggenda. Congress is just a puppet and and extension of the clueless dnr. Everyone trade in your gas guzzling trucks and boats for electric cause electricity comes out of the wall not from fossil fuels. And electricity is free and everyone can afford these vehicles that if they are lucky can tow a radio flyer wagon. ? Next they will try to eliminate hunting and fishing because they don't like it. These people are beyong clueless and not rational or logical.  Just followers and sheep for their team's game plan

What'd you all think about the last meeting? (Don't fret, I know you didn't watch).

The chair of the NRB asked the DNR secretary to direct the DNR to work with the Conservation Congress to promote environmental issues. He asked for a meeting and cooperation on these issues with the CC environmental committee. He specifically asked for the DNR to meet with that committee's chair. No biggie right? Not so fast.

The Conversation Congress Environmental committee just passed/advanced an item calling for the DNR to adopt a position of "elimination of fossil fuel infrastructure in the State of Wisconsin." This is what the NRB chair is asking for. WOW. 

The DNR's going to be doing this stuff now? I can't think of a more decisive agenda than that. 

And if this appointee is a huge mistake (and any of the others), our elected senators have a job to approve or disapprove them.  If you feel it is a huge mistake, naturally you’d reach out to your senator to remind them to do their job.
My gut feeling is if the senators did their job to review these appointees, all appointees would be approved.

Better service to each other and clearer communicating could result if folks did their research and background information gathering BEFORE typing out opinion laden "what if" messages. This article was published back on May 5, 2023 and I'm sure there's more information to be found out there:
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2023/05/05/tony-evers-appoints-new-members-to-wisconsin-natural-resources-board/70188190007/

I believe I took FB's message the way it was intended......as a slight to tribal members and tribes. At best, it was a poorly chosen tongue-in-cheek statement.  At worst it was racist and passive aggressive.

If we really want things to get better and all work together better, we need to turn the page and refrain from innuendos and name calling.  But I am not so naive to understand that some folks just like to stir the pot and don't want things to get better so they can hold on to their prejudices and grudges.

"Questioning an appointment based upon race alone is by definition racist." 

I doubt he is making the judgement based on racism.  That is the first thing certain people throw out there when they disagree with someone.  Technically a tribe has no boundary based on bloodlines/race and can change their membership criteria at any time. 

I withhold judgement until I find out to which tribe this person belongs.  To me it potentially has the outcome of this person voting as someone from a political party I don't agree with, or for what they are....another nation with objectives different than the majority of those that use the outdoors.  There is one tribe/government in particular that I fear this person will belong to.  They have been in the news for a myriad of reasons lately, and I cannot support someone from this particular tribe if they are introduced to represent the tribe interests.  If this person is introduced as someone to support the tribes interests as a whole and not introduced solely to fulfill the purpose of the NRB...then it is obvious this person has been appointed purely by politics and decisions will be driven not by the majority, but by a single tribe.  Time will tell.

Shallow minds sling shallow accusations.

As you say ,time will tell with regard to the appointment of said " tribal member". However it is certainly worth mentioning that this individual has impeccable professional and academic credentials.  Questioning an appointment based upon race alone is by definition racist. Are you a big boy and willing to admit it?

Has anyone been following what's been going on with the NRB. If not, I'm letting you know that Evers has appointed a tribal citizen to sit on the state of Wisconsin's Natural Resources Board. Perhaps it will bring everyone together in a big peace pipe smoking kumbaya wholesome embrace. Perhaps it's a awful decision and a clear conflict of interest. Time will tell.

Hilgenberg and Kazmierski's terms expire in 72 hours. Has Evers chosen their replacements? Has he even proposed some options? I looked a couple days ago and could find nothing, zilch, on any decision at all. What's up with that???? So much hub-bub about Prehn staying on board...now with 2 openings just days away there's nothing being done. Guess we'll have just 5 people determining Natural Resource policy for the state, Statutes require 7,  not a way to run things IMO.

My guess is that it won't take long to find out.

Whether one liked Kaz's position or not, he did try to hold the DNR responsible.

DNR is already started to disregard policy and Statute to go around the citizens.

First, the DNR canceled the March CDAC meetings and is only holding an April Meeting, this limits Public input and is in violation of the CDAC Guidance.

Second, The DNR iis changing the Spring Hearings in regard to citizen input and voting.  This is also against Statute pertaining to the Conservation Congress.

My prediction, those that support hunting, especially deer hunting, will not be happy.

It will be interesting with Kaz losing all his power and support from Prehn.   Both He and Hilgensberg term expire in  one more month,May of this year.   
It was additionally curious why Bill Bruins, with no explanation resigned shortly after Prehn announced relinquishing his seat on the board.
Now with new members of the board and a new DNR secretary, will things be better or worse?  Sad part, is there will still likely be politics involved. 

The current NRB hasn't updated it's membership list on it's web site for 3 months. New members either aren't named at all, or they have no bio uploaded. What's up with that?