
Jim McMahon with a Rapid Creek rainbow taken last fall.
By KW
Shows you what I know.
I figured Jim McMahon was a shoe-in for reappointment to the state Game, Fish & Parks Commission. He’s Mr. Qualification, for just about anything.
So I figured McMahon had grown tired of fish and fowl business when I saw the news release last week from Gov. Dennis Daugaard that he was appointing Sioux Falls businessman Duane Sather to take McMahon’s spot. Turns out, McMahon asked for a reappointment but didn’t get it.
Surprised? I was. The guy is one of the best lawyers in South Dakota. He served as a deputy state attorney general and a U.S. attorney. He hunts and fishes. AND he fly fishes.
What’s not to like there? Well, nothing according to Tony Venhuizen, a senior advier to Daugaard, who said McMahon was a good commissioner and a good candidate for reappointment. But the governor decided to go with Sather, who had been recommended by a former GF&P commissioner.
Venhuizen didn’t name that former commissioner, but I have to ask: Tim Kessler, are you out there?
Sather has been very successful in the business community, and has in the past – like Kessler himself – owned a hunting preserve. Some might question whether that experience is appropriate for an urban sportsman representative on the commission, which is divided into rural landowner-urban sportsmen slots.
Maybe. We’ll see.
Being a cynic, I checked campaign contributions. Sather shared a bit of his wealth with Daugaard’s campaign effort, donating – between himself and his wife – more than $11,000 to the governor’s candidate committee in the four years leading up to the 2010general election.
McMahon made the list, too, with $1,000. So they’re both DD donors, but at a different level.
Venhuizen said it’s not about the campaign cash by any means. And, indeed, $11,000 was a pebble on the long, wide gravel road of Daugaard donations. Venhuizen also pointed to a number of other appointments involving people who gave little or nothing to the campaign.
Sather brings a unique set of experiences, skills and perspectives to the commission, Venhuizen said.
I’m sure he does. And I have no reason to doubt that he’ll be a good commissioner.
But we’re letting a pretty good one go, too.