Written by Mike Elfenbein
In recent commentaries, critics have expressed concerns about the leadership of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), suggesting that the commissioner lacks the scientific background needed to guide conservation in Florida. While healthy debate is essential, it is equally important to ground that debate in practice (and with a clear understanding of how protections actually work in Florida).
As someone who has worked in conservation for many years, I can say this with confidence. Florida’s model is not broken. In many ways, it is the leader of the nation.
FWC operates under the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, one of the most successful conservation frameworks in the world. This model is used in all 50 states and is built on simple but powerful principles. Fish and wildlife resources are held in trust for the benefit of all people, not owned by individuals or special interests.
That principle is important. It means that conservation decisions are determined not by private interests, but by public responsibility, democratic governance, and, importantly, science.
FWC commissioners play an important role in the structure, not as sole decision-makers but as public trustees. Commissioners are appointed by the Governor and serve as volunteers to guide policy, ensure accountability, and represent the interests of all of Florida. They are not a substitute for scientific expertise. rather, they rely on it.
FWC employs thousands of trained professionals (biologists, researchers, and wildlife managers) who collect data, monitor species, and make evidence-based recommendations every day. Their work will form the basis of the decisions ultimately made by the commissioners.
And those decisions are producing results.
In recent years, Florida has achieved important conservation milestones. That means rebuilding fisheries such as Apalachicola Bay’s oyster population after necessary closures, expanding responsible recreational opportunities such as sea bream seasons, and implementing science-based wildlife management strategies that have been successfully replicated across the United States. These are not signs of system decline, but rather evidence of a system that is actively functioning.
Critics often frame conservation leadership as a binary choice between science and public responsibility. However, this system is actually designed to integrate both. Commissioners bring diverse perspectives from business, law, agriculture, and community leadership that are important in solving complex issues such as land use, population growth, and public access. Science influences decision making. Public directors ensure that their decisions reflect wider interests.
Could the system be improved? Of course. Conservation efforts are non-existent, especially in rapidly growing states facing real challenges. But to ignore the current structure as inappropriate or politically driven is to ignore decades of success and the collaborative model that has restored and sustained wildlife populations across the country.
They also overlook something equally important: service.
FWC committee members do not act for the purpose of profit or personal advancement. They serve because they care deeply about Florida’s natural resources and our legacy. They volunteer their time to make difficult and often controversial decisions that must balance science, stakeholder opinion, and long-term sustainability.
Their public service deserves recognition, not dismissal.
The future of conservation in Florida requires strong science, an engaged citizenry, and thoughtful leadership. The good news is that all three are already in operation. We must work together to strengthen, not undermine, faith in our proven model and ensure that Florida remains a national example of how conservation can succeed.
Mike Elfenbein lives in Inglewood, Florida, where he leads the Cypress chapter of the Isaac Walton League of America (Cypress IWLA), a national conservation nonprofit with 50,000 members.
