DNR Director Responds

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:03 am

I submit that the true DNR haters probably can't read. Might need an elementary teacher to dumb down those words, then read it to them

Kingfisher · Post by **Kingfisher** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:47 pm

I also wondered that. This term has been tossed around for several months now. I personally know of no one who even dislikes the D.N.R. My opinion is that the D.N.R. was screwed by the likes of three governors and several state house and senates. Michigans D.N.R. needs our support and cooperation if it is to return to the organization it was before Blanchard,Engler and Granholm.

My dislike of this current governor is no secret. She should resign and go back to Canada. Michigan has been on the short end of the stick for many years as far as quality governors go. So yes I ask the same question, who are the D.N.R. haters anyway?

Ill keep saying this until people stop worrying. The state can not take money away from the D.N.R. anymore. We the people voted and said no in a 75 % statewide voice. Be patient, The same people who made those great investments that are paying off are running things now. In short order the programs will be back and we will have what we all want. A D.N.R. that is free of state plifering and standing on its own. Maybe next election we force the governor to realocate general funds to the D.N.R. by fielding a proposal and voting it in

.

As for the N.R.A. they were just standing up for hunters rights. Its not fair that they should shoulder the entire load by excepting huge license fee increases when pleasure boaters use D.N.R. launch ramps for free. This is a problem that belongs to everyone in this state not just hunters and fishermen. I applaude the N.R.A. for making a stand before another stupid piece of legislation was passed. The state of Michigan took 31 million dollars away from the D.N.R. by cutting them out of the general fund Rebeccas own words. There are your D.N.R. haters right in front of you . Jenifer Granholm and the Michigan house and senate. These people feel that social programs are more important than keeping our parks open. If you all just look at her agenda and what she is asking the state congress for week after week you will see why there are no more general funds for the D.N.R. Period. Man , I am beginning absolutly hate politicians. Kingfisher

Post by **Will Schultz** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:14 pm

Hate might be a strong word, but you don't have to look far to find people that dislike the DNR (strongly). These people whine about everything. They don't like something and feel the DNR is neglecting the needs of the sportsmen then in the next breath they complain that the DNR is trying to overregulate or take away opportunities. The recent proposed license increase brought a ton them out. Everytime there's a change proposed the DNR gets bashed and there are a number of outdoor writers that seem to promote the dislike among sportsmen for the DNR.

Pete · Post by **Pete** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:39 pm

It seems the further north you head, the deeper the angst runs towards the DNR. That's equally true for hunters and fisherman...and that culture is propagated by gun shops, bait shops and guides. As just one example, when I asked 2 of the die hard spearers up here a few years ago why they choose to keep sticking muskies on a particularly active day when they already had their daily quota, both independantly responded something to the effect of "...because the @#$%ing DNR says you can only get one, and they don't know $&@%..."

And anyone who headed north on M-30 near Sanford from 1995-2005 probably remembers the many murals placed on private properties of Hitler dressed in a DNR uniform with the phrase 'Damn Near Russia' underneath...that slogan also appeared at local DNR launches.

Post by **Cyberlunge** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 8:09 pm

Two years ago I called the DNR about an illegal trap line and the CO came out the next day. I was more than willing to show him where they were because my Setter steeped on one of the traps set beside the road (on the spring, did not trip it). So he says "Jump in and show me where they are" long story short we find them and actually bust the guys in the act but, while we are driving past a house there were three or four guys in the yard and two of them flip us off for no reason other than driving by. This is the mentality of the trailer dwelling deer killers we are battling.

Kevin

Hamilton Reef · Post by **Hamilton Reef** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:31 pm

R.Humphries letter was one topic at our fishery workshop today at Ludington. Remember that money is only one year. Still need good long term funding.
Also talked muskie with Tonello and Rozich of course. Lake Margarethe muskie doing well. Oops, off topic.

Kingfisher · Post by **Kingfisher** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:39 pm

I must live in shelter. I need to get out more. I look more at who is harming the D.N.R. not imbicles who dont even vote. Those twits dont affect much of anything in the big scheme of things. They whine ,puss and moan about things and do nothing but go have another beer. My complaint is with the government not the people. The D.N.R. is an agency that keeps ending up on the bottom of this administrations list of important things to get fixed. And in my opinion they messed it up in the first place 20 years ago so they owe us.

. Forget the beertards you guys, they know not what they do or say. They make no difference in Lansing. Our fight is with our representatives and this lame governor . For now it looks like the pressure has forced her to cough up 5 million from the general fund but 31 million was taken where is the rest? This is the real issue right there. Why did they take the general funds away in the first place and where is that money now? 5 million just came back now I want to know where other 26 million is. What is that money funding??????????????

Kingfisher

Heavyhound · Post by **Heavyhound** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:08 am

It's a little disappointing to hear the name calling from this club when someone disagrees with the DNR. The BIG error the DNR made this year should lend some support to the idea that the DNR should be questioned, just as all government should be.

The overall tone I get from some of you is that sportsmen are ignorant scum who should just shut up and pay their fees. That attitude will not help Michigan resolve its problems.

Hamilton Reef · Post by **Hamilton Reef** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:53 am

Budget slipup hurts DNR's credibility

LANSING -- Talk about crying wolf. The Department of Natural Resources' ham-handed retraction of a projected budget deficit and employee layoffs could make it impossible to get any needed license and other fee increases passed by the Legislature for years to come.

After the DNR announced that a projected $10-million deficit in the Game and Fish Fund had become a $10-million surplus, and that the agency had enough money on hand to get through 2008, the e-mails and telephone calls came in fast and furious.

I still think that some license fee increases will be necessary over the next few years to get the DNR out from behind a fiscal eight ball. And we also need to find some way to fund the natural resources of this state that doesn't put such a heavy burden on the hunters, anglers and people who visit and camp in state parks. Those resources are owned by all of the people of Michigan, and they should all pay to help preserve them.

But if the MUCC analysis shows that DNR officials tried to stampede us into unnecessary license fee increases, then the people who were responsible shouldn't be allowed to stay around.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti ... 60640/1058

Heavyhound · Post by **Heavyhound** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:06 am

Question: Is there a way that Michigan sportsmen/lobby groups could get a ballot initiative that would guarantee a certain amount of funding to the DNR out of the General Fund or out of the state sales tax etc????

I'm not familiar with how Michigan handles ballot issues.

Hamilton Reef · Post by **Hamilton Reef** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:21 am

Yes the ballot initiative option is there, but first we need to see which final solution is selected by the legislators before deciding if needed. All the ideas haven't been fully debated yet. The legislators also have option of putting up a ballot initiative without all the hassle of public petitions which is very expensive. Good or bad they sometimes play that political game to bypass other ballot initiatives put up by the public. The politicians do not always like the public having direct political power of ballot initiative unless it is their own underground cohorts pushing their agendas. That goes back to DNR-DEQ funding political football not the welfare of the state resources.

Kingfisher · Post by **Kingfisher** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 2:03 pm

My opinion is this, The state should set a certain amount aside from the general fund to fund the main functions of the D.N.R. such as law enforcment and state parks. The other programs like hatcheries and stocking programs should be funded by direct fees like the licenses, stickers, ramp fees, fines, tags etc etc etc . You guys if they put back the money they took this problem would go away. Yes like I have been saying for months,this is everyones problem not just hunters and fishermen and certainly not tourists who come here to spend money. I have and even better approach to tourism. How about we lower out of state license fees by 10 percent in an effort to bring more visitors to fish and hunt here???? We need the influx of tourist dollars to make up for the loss of industrial dollars. Rebecca no doubt was having panic fits as Granholm kept cutting her funds. 31 million since 2001. This has been the main problem and its over. Finished, book closed. Now we are here at this new place. There is money to work with but programs are being held back for a short time as things sort out. Its not the end ,its the beginning. Man I cant wait to see how well this is going work out with the State out of the cookie jar. All we need is the general funds back and the battle is over. I really dont think any large increases will be needed . I have written my rep with my recommendation as to making state owned boat ramps fall under the state park regs meaning state park sticker required to use them. I think the D.N.R. should issue a kill tag for Musky with a one fish per year limit that cost between 25 and 50 dollars with proceeds going directly to Musky stocking. Hound, You come up and fish with us sometime.
You all know my position on this topic. I feel its the governments fault that we have this problem. I do not fault the D.N.R. or its workers and Biologists. I feel pressure from our group and other groups like MUCC is what will force this governor to think twice before pulling any more funding from the D.N.R and return the money they took away from it. We sent the state a message in the last election. That message was hands off!!! They countered by pulling general funds(what a low blow) We said no thats not going to work either we want them back. If we give in and raise license fees then the governor wins and we get stuck footing the bill while she takes the money and funds her new spending . Jenifer, PUT THE MONEY BACK ,its not yours. Kingfisher

Post by **Will Schultz** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 2:37 pm

Heavyhound wrote:It's a little disappointing to hear the name calling from this club when someone disagrees with the DNR. The BIG error the DNR made this year should lend some support to the idea that the DNR should be questioned, just as all government should be.

The overall tone I get from some of you is that sportsmen are ignorant scum who should just shut up and pay their fees. That attitude will not help Michigan resolve its problems.

Whoa there, I don't think that's it at all. No one is calling anyone here names and not calling sportsmen "ignorant scum". It was simply pointed out that there are DNR haters that are very vocal, these same people want change made based on feelings and not science or economics. Not agreeing is one thing but blaming the DNR for everything and badmouting them to anyone that will listen is a problem. This was obvious when support was needed for the recent license increase. Do you really think these people DON'T have any influence? Why do you think the NRA got involved with the recent proposed license increase? Because of a bunch of people that couldn't see the forest for the trees didn't take the time to look at the license increase for what it was. They found someone that had the resources to stop what needed to happen - the NRA.

IMO the DNR needs to find ways to make it's own money and stay out of the general fund. The money the DNR makes can't get raided when Governor-X needs to balance the budget. This means fees at ramps, license increases, etc.

hemichemi · Post by **hemichemi** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 2:49 pm

Will Schultz wrote:
...
IMO the DNR needs to find ways to make it's own money and stay out of the general fund. The money the DNR makes can't get raided when Governor-X needs to balance the budget. This means fees at ramps, license increases, etc.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. Personally, I wouldn't mind paying more for a license (say, $50/yr) and think non-residents should pay more, too. I also wouldn't mind paying for launching/parking at DNR ramps, provided that I was assured the money was going to preserve/enhance the fishery. After all, I'm using this resource, and so I don't mind paying for the privelege.

Hamilton Reef · Post by **Hamilton Reef** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:46 pm

Why do you think the NRA got involved with the recent proposed license increase?
The NRA got involved for one reason only to screw Michigan into a Republican state, period! The NRA is a one issue gun nut organization only meddling with Michigan funding for their gain not DNR/DEQ funding. It was the NRA Engler cohorts that destroyed the state DNR/DEQ funding to start with. Michigan can solve its problems without the NRA meddling.