CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Animal-rights activists might not make a lot of sense, but watching their antics is educational if nothing else.
Their public statements sometimes reveal which backdoor tactic they'll use next in their never-ending crusade to rid the world of hunting, livestock rearing, circuses, the wearing of furs, or any other activity they hope to eliminate.
A recent op-ed in the Las Vegas Review-Journal is a case in point. The man who wrote the piece, Fred Voltz of Carson City, Nev., revealed at least three tactics animal-rightists are using, or plan to use, to try to turn the tide of public opinion against hunting.
The first, and the central point of Voltz's screed, was to argue for the abolition of the Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners.
Voltz called the nine-member commission an example of "unelected public bodies with scant visibility," as if to insinuate that its commissioners conducted business in secret, and without input from the public.
What Voltz failed to mention is that Nevada's governor - who is elected - appoints commission members to four-year terms; and that all of the commission's meetings are open to the public, not "secret." Like West Virginia's Natural Resources Commission, the Nevada panel is responsible for setting season dates, bag limits and special regulations for the state's hunting and fishing seasons.
Voltz argued that the Nevada commission and its affiliated county advisory boards "are overwhelmingly composed of killers pursuing 'conservation' by propagating target wildlife to a level where a hunt can be declared."
"Killers?" Really, Fred?
Anyway, if Voltz had his druthers, the commission would be eliminated and management would be turned over to the Nevada Department of Wildlife, which, in his words, "employs professional staff potentially capable of rebalancing wildlife's best interests against the current, shameless slaughter."