Every line of work - - even clubs and hobbies and games - - have their insider shorthand, jargon and specialized vocabulary.
But language that is dense or obfuscatory when used by government officials - - word chaff, if you will, like "enhanced interrogation techniques" - - can block or overwhelm the public's mandatory need to know and fully understand what's happening in its name, and with its money
No offense to the particular speaker below because he's reflecting his agency's culture, but take a look at how a DNR official earlier today disclosed and explained the major reduction in the state's estimated wolf population following the 2013/14 hunting and trapping season:
The state’s wolf population was estimated at between 658 and 687 animals in late winter, down from 809 to 834 in late winter 2012-’13...
“The goal for the season was to apply downward pressure (on the wolf population),” said Dave MacFarland, DNR large carnivore specialist. “The increased mortality associated with harvest was the difference.”"...downward pressure...increased mortality associated with harvest..."
Courtesy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Let me make a suggestion: If you are interested in the less-sanitized reality behind those terms, Google "trapped wolves images."
The Internet and social media are filled with pictures, videos and first-person accounts and comments about trapped/and or shot wolves hoisted aloft like found treasure, or otherwise posed.
A mature and transparent state government would honor its stewardship role on behalf of wildlife it holds in trust for all the people of the state.
And would be more honest with its citizens in explaining and justifying how state wolf hunting policies are implemented, rather than cluttering their meaning and outcomes with terminology and extra syllables.