David Trahan’s Jan. 20 column, “Civil servants play vital role in Maine political campaigns,” with the online subhead, “First Amendment right of free speech should not be denied to state’s knowledgeable professionals,” is one more attempt to mislead the public.

In the recent bear referendum, we all witnessed the deliberate partisan role that Maine’s Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife played in the decision-making process, siding as usual with the hunting lobby, and saturating the air waves with uniformed personnel using scare tactics, all on company time and with the use of public resources.

As the Jan. 1 editorial (“State shouldn’t overreact to ads in bear campaign”) stated, “It appeared to be the enormous power of state government wielded against a group of citizens who were calling for a change in state law. We have seen state officials involved in campaigns before, but we have never seen them go quite as far as the state biologists and game wardens went in this election.”

Trahan cites a court decision — one that is under appeal — and claims that the suit was brought to ban staff of the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife from participating in the bear campaign. Participation by expressing one’s opinion as a private citizen or citing an official opinion on a given issue has never been in question. However, there’s an important distinction between those basic freedoms and throwing the full force of government and its employees to campaign during working hours for one side or another. If DIFW had marshaled their resources to support the bear referendum, Trahan likely would have been the first to object.

The issue is not about curtailing freedom of speech or silencing anyone. It’s about the abuse of power that occurs when one of Maine’s basic tenets is undermined — the right of the people not to be unduly influenced by the biased efforts of a state agency.

Don Loprieno

Bristol