When Dan Tourtelotte helped write legislation to boost the state’s whitewater rafting industry, when he testified in its behalf before the Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Committee, he did so as a major in the Maine Warden Service, as its acting chief.

What Tourtelotte knew and the lawmakers did not was that he, at the same time, had been actively pursuing a job with one of Maine’s largest rafting companies. On March 4, the day the committee voted 8-3 to back the bill, Tourtellote signed on as New England Outdoor Center’s new general manager.

This is a dissappointing lapse in judgment by a man who served the state long and well. Even more disappointing is the reaction by some legislators and state officials who aren’t quite sure they see anything wrong.

Some, to their credit, do. The bill has been tabled indefinitely in the House while inquiries into Tourtelotte’s conduct are investigated. Several members of the committee say they feel somewhat betrayed by what, if not a full-blown conflict of interest, certainly looks and smells a lot like one.

Others have taken positions that are downright puzzling. Committee Chairwoman Sen. Marge Kilkelly says Tourtelotte’s advocacy of the bill had no undue influence, as if the head warden’s opinion carries no more clout that that of the average Joe. Speaking of which, Rep. Joe Clark sees no problem because, after all, Tourtelotte hadn’t started his new job yet.

Most perplexing is the response from IFW Commissioner Lee Perry. There’s no conflict, he says, but he would have removed Tourtelotte from the process had he known about his chief’s upcoming career change.

That’s called having it both ways and that is unacceptible. Public officials regularly testify before legislative committees and the public has every right to expect that such testimony reflects its interests and is not part of the job application process. Tourtelotte may indeed be made of such stern stuff that he can represent the public sector while having one foot in the private, but Maine citizens should not be left to wonder.

The bill, which allows the number of rafts and rafters to expand and eliminates state review of each company’s allocation, is not one of the high-profile items before lawmakers this session, but it is of keen interest both to those in the whitewater rafting industry and to other users of Maine rivers who believe the raft expeditions already are too intrusive, too noisy and too numerous to be compatible with their activities. If those folks are concerned that their concerns were not fully considered by IFW, those concerns are justified.

The plan now is to hold the bill until the Attorney General and the governor’s legal counsel review the relevant statutes and assess how Tourtelotte fits in. Then, some hope, the bill will be revived and evaluated on its merits.

That is not good enough. The bill is hopelessly tainted and must be withdrawn for this session. There is nothing urgent about it, it does not address any emergency, the rafting industry will not be harmed by the status quo. Let it get a fresh start next year. And let all state officials, including legislators, chiefs and commissioners, use that time to reflect upon the importance public perception has in the public process.