Science & referendums

An editorial from the Early May 2014 North Woods Call

    All this talk about scientific management of natural resources and voter referendums has us a bit “discombobulated.”
     Some say we should listen to the voice of the people—at least in a representative republic such as ours—while others say the average person doesn’t know enough to make good decisions about wolf hunts and other things better left to the “experts.”
     One can reasonably argue the relative cost and efficiency of referendums—or whether they are proper tools to use—but the voice of the people has generally been sacrosanct in our nation.  As the law currently stands—if the electorate believes that those who have been entrusted to do the will of the public they represent are not doing so—such recourse is allowed.
     Unlike some, we’re not particularly bothered by this.  After all, ignorant and uninformed people vote in every election on issues of consequence and most folks seem to accept this as the price of freedom.  Certainly, few would suggest that such people shouldn’t have the right to vote, even though it’s clear that better decisions could be made if some basic level of civic knowledge and familiarity with the issues were required.
     Should wolf management decisions be any different?