Chase your tail much?  The point of my article was that Sen. Kelly (and others) claim that because nonhunters don't pay for hunting licenses and tags, they don't deserve a seat on the Board of Game. But I've shown that nonhunters pay much more than hunters for habitat conservation and wildlife management that sustains, among other things, hunting and trapping. Another major point was that wildlife belongs to everyone and everyone deserves a seat at the table.

My example about Alaska using its general fund to support predator control was not (as you imply) that most of Fish and Game's budget comes from the general fund. It's ironic to me that you and others are arguing against nonhunter voices on the Board of Game because, as you argue, they only manage hunting and trapping, when the board also supports the shooting of wolves and bears using state money that's not from the sale of licenses and tags.

It's not funding, but 1 hunter in 7 residents that equates to 1 in 7 on the board.