HA Newsletter 11

Articles...

Rate this item
(0 votes)

HUNTER'S ALERT has been saying it for years and never has it been more evident. The people appointed as sportsmen to the Wildlife Commission are not representing them. The exception is Don Cavin who is outnumbered and its too early to evaluate Bill Bradley. However, the majority, Chairman Brown, Commissioners Tiberti and Matorian have been a disappointment to the sportsmen they are supposed to represent. They have shown their true colors (green) over the mountain lion issue.

Rate this item
(0 votes)

Dear Governor Miller:

In the realm of your duties you have the responsibility to insure that qualified and responsible individuals fill the positions of state government that the law allows the executive branch to fill. The hiring and, if necessary, dismissal of leaders of various state agencies is your prerogative, their administrative abilities and their performance

based on their track record, executive branch guidelines, state law, political background, and public satisfaction, I assume are the primary guidelines you use as criteria in your decisions on such matters.

Which brings me to my first question:

Are any of the following, grounds for dismissal from a leadership position in state government?

1. Loss of a lawsuit for sexual discrimination? 2. Malfeasance in office? 3. Joking about sexual harassment in an official state department bulletin? 4. Failure of a state audit? 5. Use of state vehicles for semi-private use? 6. Over expenditure of the legislative authorized budget? 7. Taking a state agency with more that a million dollars surplus, doubling its yearly expenditures in a five-year period and

creating a need to borrow from the state's general fund to stay afloat? 8. A public request from an entire county's commission asking for dismissal of an administrator? 9. Federal lawsuits (pending) alleging discrimination and retaliation for inter-agency problems?

Governor, after discussing these situations with state employees and with different state administrators, the conclusion was almost unanimous—any one of these would normally constitute ground for getting dismissed from state service. That's why leadership positions in state government are normally not tenured—to allow you the flexibility you need to remove individuals whose job performance is substandard or worse.

Yet, today, you have an administrator of one of the state's largest agencies who has been involved with not one, not two, but all nine of the situations listed. I'm talking about William Molini, administrator for the Nevada Division of Wildlife. Let's start with the most serious violations.

Molini's agency has exceeded its legislative expenditure authority by more than $190,000. As you know, this is no minor matter. In fact, it's a violation of the state's criminal code (NRS353.260), and officially constitutes malfeasance in office. That Molini wasn't doing his job is best evidenced by the fact that this huge overdraft wasn't even known about until the middle of July 1995 —more than two weeks after the close of his fiscal year. He has more than six fiscal budget employees, so there is simply no excuse for failure to properly track revenue and expenditures. Additionally, he is over his limit in not one, but several categories. As one of your own fiscal analysts told me: "It's clear they were not watching or paying attention, and sheer luck they didn't overspend in all their budget accounts."

In one of the two lawsuits (a federal lawsuit recently filed) against Molini and his agency, a trip in a state helicopter involving Molini, Senator Raggio and lobbyist John Sande was brought to light. It involved flying Raggio and Sande

from Reno to a private hunting club at Kings River Ranch, where Raggio has his own private hunting lodge. The flight was supposedly to "conduct a chukar survey." Since chukar surveys are normally conducted by the biologist in each region (for that area the biologist is Jim Jeffers, stationed in Winnemucca, and he was not on board) and do not involve staying overnight at a private hunting club (it's only a 15 minute helicopter flight from Winnemucca to Kings River Ranch) it's difficult to escape the conclusion that this was a private scouting trip to show Senator Raggio the best areas around his hunting lodge to hunt chukar. At a cost of $365 per hour to fly the helicopter, it was no inexpensive excursion.

This was made public through a lawsuit — how many additional such "perks" are there that we don't know about? Such misuses of state vehicles are not right and should not be tolerated. Raggio was the senator who requested, in 1990, the performance audit which brought to light numerous problems within NDOW. Since the helicopter trip in 1991, Raggio has been a strong supporter of Molini; in fact, he was the only Republican in the Assembly and Senate to vote against Assembly Bid 307 that would have changed the way NDOW does business. A coincidence? Perhaps, but I doubt it. Molini has faced not one, but two cases of sexual discrimination. They involved Ginger Miller and Virginia Oliver. After a careful review of the cases, the Nevada Attorney General's Office recommended an out-of-court settlement. The taxpayers had to pay a total of $291,000. After paying more than a quarter of a million dollars you would think they had learned their lesson, but no; since that time, NDOW has in its inter-agency newsletter made jokes about sexual harassment.

Due to Molini's inept handling of several issues important to the people they serve, the Elko County Commission, in a highly unusual move, publicly requested you to remove him from his position. For reasons you have not made public,

you denied their request. Why?

When Molini was appointed, the Nevada Department of Wildlife was a well-respected state agency; it had an annual budget of $8 million and a surplus in the bank of $1.3 million. In five years, between 1983 and 1988, Molini increased spending dramatically, the budget doubled from $8 million to $16 million, the surplus was all spent and employees went from 147 to more than 200.

The bloom left the rose and Molini was forced to borrow $800,000 dollars from the state's general fund to keep his agency afloat. In yet another federal court lawsuit, one of Molini's own employees, Bart Tanner, alleges that Molini's law enforcement division, in retaliation for his helping some private citizens falsely accused of poaching sage hens, falsified evidence, conducted an illegal search and seizure and perjured themselves in an attempt to get even. The charges against Tanner were dismissed outright; the judge threw out the whole case. The federal case is pending, but it clearly looks bad for NDOW and Molini. Taken all together, it's abundantly clear this agency —to put it mildly — is very poorly managed.

Governor, I personally know Molini on a first-name basis and like him as a person. He is a dynamic individual. In fact, I wrote a letter to you in 1990 supporting Molini. However, as more information and evidence becomes available, it becomes painfully clear that he is an inferior administrator, and has run a once well-respected agency into the ground. I know I speak for tens of thousands of Nevadans when I say it's time to let him go. It's time for some new blood, new ideas, and a clean slate.

If you're going to retain him, please Governor, tell us — why?

Ira Hansen — Reprinted from the Daily Sparks Tribune
Wednesday, September 13, 1995

Ed. Note: Critics say HUNTER'S ALERT is picking on Willie Molini. Gee: looks like the Daily Sparks Tribune is also picking on poor Willie. Elko Daily Press is guilty too!

Rate this item
(0 votes)

Our group has consistently tried to represent hunting and fishing interests in Nevada by attending Wildlife Commission meetings and initiating and supporting legislation in the interests of the thousands of sportsmen in this state. We have even supported legislation to increase the number of sportsmen on the Wildlife Commission and also to have sportsmen on the County Boards decide on who is appointed as a commissioner to represent their interests.

'96 Oct 31

EDITORIAL

Written by Hunters Alert
Rate this item
(0 votes)

HUNTER'S ALERT doesn't always get our newsletter out on time. There is a good reason for this. First, there are no paid employees in our organization with the exception of our lobbyist. We find ourselves pulled in several different directions at one time trying to determine which issues to address next.

Rate this item
(0 votes)

The Foundation would like to inform its members on the status of the Nevada 1996 auction sheep tag. The Nevada tag will not be auctioned at our 19th annual convention. New legislation was passed in July of 1995, that greatly affects how the revenue generated by this permit will be allocated for wild sheep in the state of Nevada.

Rate this item
(0 votes)

It started years ago with the direction of Nevada Division of Wildlife. The people of NDOW didn't know where their revenue was being generated. In the Game Division, deer hunters furnished the largest portion of NDOW revenue. Because of mismanagement, they lost 70% of the deer herd by falling to control predators.

Rate this item
(0 votes)

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has published a booklet with the above title. The booklet has position statements regarding hunting from major conservation and preservation organizations.

Rate this item
(0 votes)

At the January Wildlife Commission meeting, the commissioners heaped praise on NDOW for assembling the "Comprehensive Mountain Lion Management Plan". This draft consists of 114 pages and the majority of this information comes from a study done over a ten year period from approximately 1972 to 1982. At that time it was estimated that there were 792 lions in the state. This study was called 'The Mountain Lion in Nevada" and David Ashman was the chief biologist responsible for this publication. Listed below are some findings of David Ashman's which were not included in NDOW's "Comprehensive Mountain Lion Management Plan" and comments from HUNTER'S ALERT

Rate this item
(0 votes)

Good morning. My name is Cecil Fredi. I am president of HUNTER'S ALERT. What has caused all the furor over the mountain lion? To answer this question, we must start with the very basic question, what is hunting? Hunting exists for one reason: It is the humane way to harvest surplus game birds and animals. If there were no surplus, do we need hunters and hunting? The answer is absolutely not. If you were an anti-hunter, how would you insure that there is no surplus? You would protect predators and let them remove the surplus. That's exactly what the antis are doing to eliminate hunting. Mountain lion protection is a pure and simple anti-hunting measure.

Rate this item
(0 votes)

It all started in February, 1979 when my hunting partner, taxidermist Hagan Thompson and I returned from a very enjoyable African safari. Hagan's taxidermy shop was a one man operation so he had a young man watching his shop while we were on safari. Upon his return, the part-time employee notified Hagan that while he was away, two game wardens, one from the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and one from Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) came to the shop and seized his record book and skins.

Search Articles

Login Form



Donate to the Website

donate_without_paypal_account
Look for this section on the paypal donation page to donate even without a paypal account.  Just click on continue where it says "Don't have a PayPal account?"

Donations help to pay for web hosting and management of Hunters Alert! keeping this content online and up to date.

*All donations are annonymous unless you would like to be announced as a donor.

Copyright © 2017 Hunters Alert! - Keeping the sportsman informed.. All Rights Reserved.
Site developed and kept in honor by a digital media professional.