DNR Director Responds

[Will Schultz]

http://www.record-eagle.com/opinioncolu ... 94515.html

Forum: DNR needs stable funding source

BY REBECCA A. HUMPHRIES

I would like to clarify some of the budget issues facing the Department of Natural Resources after reading your editorial, "DNR's short-term funding fix." Last year, we projected that the Game and Fish Protection Fund would have a balance of about $3.8 million on Sept. 30, 2007. We closed the books on Nov. 21, with a fund balance of $10.1 million.

There are three reasons we finished the fiscal year with a larger fund balance than expected.

First, the DNR realized significant savings by strictly adhering to the governor's executive directives to freeze hiring, trim travel and reduce other spending. This fiscal discipline resulted in 81 positions, 43 in our law enforcement division alone, funded by Game and Fish dollars remaining vacant throughout 2007 and into 2008.

Second, there was an increase in the number of hunting licenses sold. We had projected a 1.7 percent decrease, based on sales trends. A portion of the increase was caused by recruitment efforts, such as the introduction of apprentice licenses and the lowering of the hunting age, which occurred in 2006.

Third, Game and Fish Protection Fund investments experienced better returns than were forecast.

Your editorial states we should "bite the bullet" -- well, we have. Over the past three fiscal years we implemented planned spending reductions in the game and fish protection fund totaling $8 million. During the 2007 fiscal year, we further reduced spending by another $4.1 million via the executive directives. This is in addition to the reduction of general fund (taxpayer) support to the department of $31 million since 2001.

I am proud of the way my staff has practiced fiscal responsibility and has stretched our current license fees designed to last only six years into more than 10 years and counting.

Unfortunately, this comes at a cost in terms of our ability to best manage our natural resources for our citizens' use and enjoyment. A continual decline in revenue will not maintain our precious lands and habitat and will have untold adverse affects not only for our conservation constituencies, but also for the communities that depend on their quality to attract tourists for their economic well-being.

I agree, we have averted the short-term budgetary need for revenue generated by a hunting and fishing license increase but we still have to address long-term funding for natural resource management.

I look forward to working with the legislative work group, which is charged with developing recommendations for long-term funding of the department by Sept. 30.

Michigan is blessed with abundant natural resources that set us apart from other states. In fact, a recent study shows we are No. 2 in the nation for the amount of natural resources we manage, but we rank at the bottom on the amount of money spent on managing them.

If we are going to protect and manage those resources for future generations to enjoy, the DNR needs a stable source of long-term funding that spreads support among many, not just the hunters and anglers of this state.

About the author: Rebecca A. Humphries is director of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.

[Will Schultz]

Michigan is blessed with abundant natural resources that set us apart from other states. In fact, a recent study shows we are No. 2 in the nation for the amount of natural resources we manage, but we rank at the bottom on the amount of money spent on managing them.

[Cyberlunge]

Several years ago as part of a school project I wrote an initiative that was designed to increase the amount of money available to the state to manage and improve the water quality and fish/game practices in this state. Although it was meaningless in terms of implementation the research done for it was telling IMO about the lack of understanding people on all sides of the issue have and I came up with a few conclusions of my own.

1.) Michigan is a destination state and a gateway state, meaning that we are a dual entry point for Canada as well as a place to vacation. YET we fail to capitalize on this. Anyone who has driven anywhere in the country will tell you that toll roads are alive and well, we allow millions of vehicles a year to abuse I-75 and they contribute nothing to the cost of its maintenance. A person can fill up in Ohio or Illinois and drive to the Sault without spending a dime, of course the Windsor tunnel and Bluewater bridge are the same, we allow the lower Midwest states to use us as a doormat to Canada without prfiting a NICKEL FROM IT!!!! Is someone going to go around for a ten dollar toll from border to border???? Hell no their not. It is time for us to collect the fees from the users of the service. Same goes for bridge tolls, F*** those companies complaining while they make millions crossing the bridge every day, ten dollars a vehicle minimum, you dont like it? find another way, Im not going to go around or cancel a trip for twenty bucks. Take a look at the cost to ride the badger to Wisconsin and tell me the bridge is expensive.

2.) Boating fees and park licenses. We allow boats form every other state to come here and use our water like their toilet, from jet-skis to freighters, you want to use our lakes? would $5 a week for a temporary registration of your boat really keep them at home?

3.) Seasonal taxation of resident campers. You want to live here for 4 months you pay the taxes the rest of us do, even a flat fee of $25.00 would raise huge amounts of revenue. There are increased costs in terms of law enforcement, health care, etc... associated with these people.

4.) Camping fees. We surveyed a bunch of out of state campers about whether a $5 per day fee would discourage them from coming to Michigan, the pretty much all laughed. They just towed a 25 foot camper 600 miles with a truck getting 8 miles to the gallon, is fifty dollars during the stay an issue ummm NO, this was echoed by in-state residents as well.

5.) You want to fish here? Where we spend our asses off to plant your stupid trout and Salmon and you live in another state then you buy a yearly license and end the debate. Is a five day license really covering the cost of the guy who limits twice a day during Salmon season I think not, plus the federal dollar match boost would be tremendous. Limit tourism, I would argue that since they have a yearly license they would be more likely to stay an extra day or come back as opposed to not coming at all. AND to be truthful while we get the fishery back on its feet would it really hurt to reduce the angling pressure a bit?

6.) While fixing the resources determine what really woild make this state desirable (see 5) and make it happen. Consider it a long term investment. Fish stocked in Metro lakes is great for the local guys and to get others into fishing, we need that without a doubt, but after the newbieness wears off we all want to go to Georgian Bay. LOTW. Great Slave etc... we have the lakes and we have the Wilderness not only in the UP but in the Northern Lower as well to be a Destination for great fishing trips. Notice I did not say trophy as that is hard to do I would rather go to a place where I can catch twenty mid forty Pike or Muskies or Lake trout for that matter than a lake where I have a shot at a fifty five incher. Big fish are great but we have to remeber that the definition of trophy is not universal.

7.) Much more of a jaunt than the rest but... Un-bottle our rivers and let them run free, bring back the rapids and the indigenous species and stop worrying about the stupid anadromous fishes that dont even belong here. The reason IMO that the big lakes are so sterile is because we starve them of the nutrients required to make weedbeds around river mouths and we artificially seperate fish from them. Let nature fix what we have ruined and stock the appropriate species to balance out the Great Lakes so they can be that again. As it stands we are the mediocre lake state at best.

If you made it this far congrats on your reading skills and thanks for listening to my ranting.

Kevin

[Will Schultz]

KK
From my understanding most of the money spent on roads comes from the fed. Residents of other states passing through are indeed providing money for roads, albeit indirectly. I’m not positive but I believe that as soon as you make it a toll road you loose the fed funding - ouch.

I agree that all the other options are good ones except... I like "Fake Lake State" better than "mediocre Lake State" - LOL

[Steve S]

Will, who is number1 in natural resources and where do they rank on the other scale? Steve

[Will Schultz]

Will, who is number1 in natural resources and where do they rank on the other scale? Steve

I'm going to have to guess Alaska is number one since that state is 2.5 times larger than Texas and more than 6 times larger than Michigan. I don't know what the budget is for any of the other states.

[Lureless]

The number one state is some piece of crap.

[Cyberlunge]

Will-

Actually I think I knew that, it still yanks my wanker though. If they were to privatize half of this stuff and cut the pork from it we would be so much further ahead. But since that isnt going to happen Ill just keep dreaming for now.

KK

[Steve Horton]

Last year, the federal gov't decided to research privatization of many lower level natural resource jobs. Some were led to believe that their jobs were in jeopardy. But, they were told that the Feds would hire them back, through the private entity, to work doing the same duties, but with a substantial pay and benefits cut. The money that was "saved" would go to the private owner of the "career broker". After spending close to a million dollars researching it they decided it wasn't cost effective.

[Cyberlunge]

When the wolf does the calculations about how much it costs to lose a sheep Im not surprised that the wolf decides to stay in charge. I was really meaning more of the highway/construction/maintenance type jobs where the fat is. I think the DNR needs to be a state agency otherwise we would need a new state agency to monitor the privatized one and would be in a bigger hole than we are now. I think the DNR does a pretty good job with the resources it has, if the rest of the agencies were required to work under the same pressure maybe we would see less spending is what I was trying to say.

Kevin

[LeMay]

Gas tax is a user fee! The money from people driveing on the roads pays to fix them! We are not construrting new roads in Michigan. Roads in Michigan where frist made for bicycles not cars. The Nations frist freeway was to get parts from Detroit to Willow run airport to make the B-29's for WWII. Just like paying the DNR to use the boat ramp State land.

Sheep have only two speeds: ‘grazing’ and Stampede.

[Steve Horton]

Yep, kevin. I gotcha. I agree. In fact, I don't think that privatization is necessarily a bad thing in some cases. You are right about the wolf and the sheep! What got me is that they spent a million or so (it may have been much more) of our taxpayers money on the research only to find out what they already knew. What a waste. I think it was a political leverage tool. Kind of like finding a whole bunch of money at the end of a fiscal year, that was deemed to be so bad that it was the end of the world and trickled over into countless other entities AND the private sector, during at an election year. I don't have any proof, but its just too much of a coincidence. I wish someone could set my mind at ease about it. I mean, if they could just simply adjust like they say they did, and come out OK, then why all the rhetoric?

[Kingfisher]

Now the Governor should look at the fine work the D.N.R. HAS DONE. If she would cut more pork from the general state fund there would be plenty to get the D.N.R. positions filled. But she got miffed when the people said no the her hand in the D.N.R. cookie jar. Ever since she has been cutting back General funds that were helping the D.N.R. to maintain its programs. Quote:

Your editorial states we should "bite the bullet" -- well, we have. Over the past three fiscal years we implemented planned spending reductions in the game and fish protection fund totaling $8 million. During the 2007 fiscal year, we further reduced spending by another $4.1 million via the executive directives. This is in addition to the reduction of general fund (taxpayer) support to the department of $31 million since 2001. end quote:

As you can see her administration has cut D.N.R. funding by 31 million dollars since 2001.


I still think the D.N.R. can and should operate as a seperate enity from the state government as far as its money goes. Keep government hands out of it completely. Let them pass laws thats what they are paid to do. Let Biologists and scientists run the D.N.R. It can support itself and has proven in the past that it can generate huge surplus revenues as it did in the early 80's before the first of three governors raided that fund. If you take away those pilferings there would be no problem today. So we run a little lean for a couple years. Once that nest egg starts growing again the programs come back and this time there is no one to steal from them. In the meantime I recomend that the D.N.R. increase state park stickers by a couple of dollars and require one to be on the windshield of every car that uses a D.N.R. Boat launch. That way both pleasure boaters and Fishermen share the load equally. They should start a kill tag for Musky and place a 25 to 50 dollar price tag on it. One fish per year. That way anyone wanting to kill one has to pay to replace it. Modest increases of even 1.00 across the boards on all licenses would be huge in the long run. The truth is that in a couple of years the D.N.R. is not going to fall apart but is going to outrun the State government because it has more money makers than the state has. The main reason that the D.N.R. got into trouble started with Blanchard and the first of the raids on the D.N.R. funds. As soon as the government got into the D.N.R. business it was all over. You cant have beuracrats running forestry and game issues. Engler made a furthur mess of things and then Jenny hit it the final time. Even though Engler was out for an entire year she still blames that last one on him. Dates dont lie.

I have complete faith that our D.N.R. can and will recover into a better and stronger enity that does not require funds from the Michigan tax base to operate. Run it like a business was stated by our club president . Here Here I say !!! Well said Will. Kingfisher

[Hamilton Reef]

Even though this information was known it is good that Rebecca Humphries submitted this letter herself. It would be nice if more Michigan DNR haters would actually read it.

[Will Schultz]

It would be nice if more Michigan DNR haters would actually read it.

AMEN!