|
|
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | This is a Michigan DNR-All message.
As you know, our continuation budget expires November 1. We continue to work with the legislature and the administration to find a funding solution for our 2008 Department budget. Part of our budget solution was built around the passage of hunting and fishing license fee increases. In meetings that NRC Chair Keith Charters and I have had with the legislative leadership, it is clear that there is little support for passing those fees at this time. Without that revenue or other funding sources, we are looking at deficits in not only game and fish programs but also in other activities across the Department.
In order to be prepared to address those deficits, I have started the process to make significant program cuts beginning as early as November 1, 2007. Attached you will find a document that outlines programs that will be affected.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Outdoors
www.michigan.gov/dnr
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FUNDING CRISIS
General Fund reductions and depletion of several of our major restricted funds (Game and Fish Protection Fund, Forest Development Fund and Park Improvement Fund) will require additional and more severe budgetary measures than have been implemented to date.
Since Fiscal Year 2005, DNR has reduced its programs by more than $20 million. These reductions were much more extensive than the list below, but to give you a few highlights, the cutbacks included:
· significant reduction of conservation officers with more than 50 vacant conservation officer positions, resulting in reduced effort in public safety and protecting natural resources, delays in responding to complaints, and little or no officer presence in certain areas of the state
· a 60 percent decrease in production and planting of hatchery Coho for Lake Michigan, resulting in a negative impact on sportfishing and the charter boat industry
· fewer wildlife population surveys and reduced bovine TB and CWD monitoring, compromising the Department’s ability to manage wildlife populations and monitor for diseases, which increases the risk for a disease to become established and endanger wildlife populations
· fewer fire officers and reduction in fire equipment replacement, jeopardizing wildfire protection
· a decrease in timber marking as a result of not filling vacant positions and decreased disease monitoring compromising the health of our forests
· decreased staffing and maintenance of facilities in our state parks and recreation areas and eliminating all non-emergency trail repairs
Without the prospect of license fee adjustments to offset structural deficits in the Game and Fish Protection Fund projected at $2.5 million in Fiscal Year 2008 and $13 million in fiscal year 2009, or finding resolution to address additional deficits in the Forest Development and Park Improvement Funds, drastic reductions to programs and staff will occur. Listed below are the additional program cuts, by fund, that will be implemented beginning November 1, 2007.
General Fund
Reduction of $1.05 million
Reduction of 12 staff
The Department will implement the following reductions:
· Closure of state forest campgrounds, pathways, cross country ski trails
This reduction will increase the number of closed state forest campgrounds from 20 to 22 and elimination of all pathways. These closures will result in a significant decrease in recreational opportunities which will impact local economies that depend on the tourism generated through these activities.
· Reduce disease surveillance for bovine tuberculosis
This reduction would result in the loss of the TB accreditation level currently awarded the state. This will have a significant impact on the cattle industry. Monitoring for chronic wasting disease, avian influenza, West Nile, etc. will be greatly reduced increasing the health risks for wildlife and humans.
· Elimination of general conservation law enforcement by conservation officers
Conservation officers will not be allowed to address general conservation law violations which will degrade public lands such as game areas, state forests, state parks, etc.
Game and Fish Protection Fund
Reduction of $6.2 million
Reduction of 58 staff
· Close 2 fish hatcheries
Loss of 1.2 M coho, 1.9 M Chinook salmon, 845,000 brown trout, and 485,000 rainbow trout. The economic impact of these reductions will be monumental as fishing boosts the state’s economy by $2 billion annually.
· Eliminate remaining fish surveys (creel clerks)
Angler harvest data will not be collected and is therefore not available to use to assist in the management of the state’s fisheries resources. This will also eliminate the ability to evaluate ports across the state for compliance with the 2000 Tribal Consent Decree.
· Close research station
Eliminate the ability to evaluate and make management recommendations on inland coldwater fisheries including trout rivers streams and lakes negatively affecting fishing opportunities.
· Eliminate university research and reduce fish health activities
Opportunities will be lost to respond to current disease issues.
· Eliminate use of Great Lakes research vessels
Twenty five years of continuous data collection on harvest mortality and fish health would end compromising our ability to adjust harvest regulations and hatchery stocking programs.
· Reduce conservation officers
This will result in increased illegal activity such as poaching, increased accidents and injuries due to violations of hunter safety regulations and reckless operations of ORV, boats, snowmobiles, etc. Remaining conservation officers will be at greater risk due to the lack of backup, increased response time, etc.
· Reduction in emergency dispatch for conservation law violations
Emergency dispatch will not be available from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
· Closure of managed waterfowl areas
Loss of over 28,300 acres of hunting areas. This equates to 300 days of lost hunting opportunity. Hunting alone annually brings in $1.3 billion to Michigan’s economy.
· Translocation of nuisance animals
Nuisance bear and geese will no longer be moved. Over 6,000 geese have been removed in Southeast Michigan resulting in greater wildlife-human conflict and disease concerns.
· Office closures and elimination of presence in field offices
Forest Development Fund
Reduction of $1 million
Reduction of 9 staff
Additional reductions are necessary if $1 million is transferred to the Michigan Department of Agriculture for conservation districts. As these reductions are implemented and affect future revenue, the need for further reductions will compound. Fiscal Year 2008 reductions will be as follows:
· Reduction in timber marking, regeneration, planning
This will negatively impact the amount of timber that is marked, regenerations efforts, oil and gas reviews, use permits and leases, recreation, planning, forest certification and fire response, which will negatively affect tourism and a $13 billion timber industry in the state.
· Elimination of natural features inventory reviews
Loss of forest certification will likely negatively impact the state’s ability to sell timber reducing state revenues.
Park Improvement Fund
Reduction of 253 staff
Infrastructure conditions continue to deteriorate. To address the structural deficit in the Park Improvement Fund, the Department will cease taking reservations in April 2008 for at least 37 state parks, which will close during Fiscal Year 2009. Reductions will be implemented in Fiscal Year 2009 as follows:
· Closure of at least 37 state parks and recreation areas and scenic sites
This reduction will affect millions of visitors annually, eliminating many opportunities for our customers to experience the outdoors through either day use or overnight stays. These closures will also negatively affect local communities who depend on the economic stimulus provided by the state parks. Visitors to our state parks contribute more than $580 million annually to Michigan.
· Closure of 8 interpretative centers
Closure of the interpretative centers will result in the loss of a critical educational opportunity to inform the public about conservation practices, stewardship, and natural resources management.
10/22/07 | |
| | |
| The state government needs to downsize in accordance to it's tax base. The free trade vacuum cleaner sucked the jobs out of the state and hopefully people have or will follow to greener pastures elsewhere. Can't expect the same goverment services without industry or trade that was once in place to create it. For the most part the plan outlined looks solid, cut out the window dressing.
In time either the economy is restored (don't hold your breath) or less pressure on natural resources will result in better fishing and hunting overall for those that were able to stay and prosper somehow.
By in large the state workers are the only ones left who have a 25 year and out career, with a pension and healthcare into retirement. Even the best private industry jobs that remain do not have these perks. If anything those govt. employment luxuries should be cut before the truly essential services are. Afterall the government's customers are the tax payers, the same ones that have had to sacrifice to remain employed in state to be competitive with the rest of the globe.  | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | Downsize.
You nailed it. But I'm still a little ancious about losing those 50 CO's state wide, millions of fish plants during this VHS and Quaga Mussle era, and the other things that might spell less tourism dollars for our state, now that it means even that much more.
I'd like to see them allow more private groups or clubs pitch in and volutarily take on a few chores. Back quite a few years ago, when both our walleye club and the Michigan Salmon & Steelhead Fishing Asscoiation (MSSFA) wanted to volunteer and do more in all the fish harvesting, raising and planting categories we were politely turned down in most cases other then harvesting pond walleye fingerlings for planting, or box raising and feeding a few salmon or steelhead in area club rivers or marinas that connected to the Big Lakes, saying or suggesting in all istances that the DNR professionals could do a better job. I'm sure they could when scientific expertice was called for versus simply compitent labor helping out. But I always figured one professional from the DNR could simply direct any small volunteer crew, and both time and money could be saved to release other DNR personnel to do other things in other places.
I got permission a few years back to help Biologists take and fertilze walleye eggs at the Dow Spillway. That was because one of my better long time friends was that regions Biologist. I was treated civilly but not what I'd call respectfully, and more like a spy for my efforts by the (All high paid Professional) DNR crew that were there that day. I would however personally volunteer some of my own down time again now to do creel surveys, take scale samples, or other easy (non technical) tasks at a few local ramps around the Saginaw Bay if given the chance. And I'm sure others all up and down the great lakes shorelines would as well. I'm not really sure how to convey that message to the DNR now though, or even if doing so at this time would set a new (unwanted in the long run) precident or bruse any professional egos for even considering or allowing it. But the time for all DNR (Job security) issues is long past now with this budget crises looming. All the people who called their reps and told them to turn down the proposed license hikes (IMV) should at least consider doing something (even if small) to help or aide our DNR now. Or don't complain when you see (joe game hog) cleaning his 35 walleyes in clear view of everybody not worrying about getting caught or fined.
Edited by walleye express 10/24/2007 8:42 AM
| |
| | |
| IMO should start by cutting non-essential services and giveaways for the freeloaders. The best thing that could happen for this state is more advertisements or recruiting methods from greener pastures, to get those that are and able to get out of here. The state needs a chance to breath until the next best thing comes along. A trip to the south or out west is an eye opening experieince, too bad more don't lsee it. In the meantime if they do go, they can come back as a tourist and charter a boat. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 17
| A Japanese doctor says, 'Medicine in my country is so advanced that we can
> take a kidney out of one man, put it in another, and have him out looking
> for work in six weeks.'
> A German doctor says, 'That is nothing. We can take a lung out of one
> person, put it in another, and have him out looking for work in four weeks.'
> A British doctor says, 'In my country medicine is so advanced that we can
> take half a heart out of one person, put it in another, and have both of
> them out looking for work in two weeks.'
> The Canadian doctor, not to be outdone, interjected, 'You guys are way
> behind. We took a woman with no brains, sent her to Michigan where she
> became Governor, and now half the state is out looking for work.'
>
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | Dan:
This raises a lot of good questions. I think we (the DNR) definitely need the involvement of the public right now in helping to resolve the pending budget crisis. However, the way they could help the most is to advocate with the legislature for inclusion of the DNR in general fund appropriations and to simply pass the license fee increase bill. As it appears right now, the legislature is not only omitting the DNR from sharing in any of the new revenue being raised by their tax increases, but we are hearing that they are further more saying that they will not pass the license fee increase any time soon. This is the source of the budget crisis in the DNR. The simple fact is that you cannot run a natural resource agency without dollars. The DNR actually enjoys considerable public support (for our mission). We are a "quality of life" agency and nearly all citizens benefit from this. We have a long history of being user supported and we ask little of the general fund. Yet hunting and fishing and other outdoor activities generate billions of dollars in economic activity in the state and many hundreds of millions of tax revenue, yet none makes it back to the DNR for game and fish support. We either need general fund support or a license fee increase. Its that simple. Here are some startling statistics; Michigan is responsible for the stewardship of more water (coastal and inland) than any other state in the country, twice as much as the next closest state, 14 times the average state. Yet, Michigan spends just $0.95/acre of water while the national average is $15.80/acre. See the attached PowerPoint for these stats and graphics. We are woefully underfunded by national standards. The current budget short fall is $2.5 million and with no license fee increase (by 2010) the short fall will be $40 million. This is a turning point for the DNR. If our funding situation isn't modernized, the future Department will be unrecognizable by what we know today.
In regards to your idea and question of using volunteers in lieu of DNR personal, I would say a few points: First our experience is that while many are enthusiastic to volunteer, when the time comes, only a hand full will actually show, and of those some have to leave early, etc etc. Day two many discover that our work has elements of hard physical labor, the weather is often inclement, the novelty wears off fast and the work becomes tedious and laborious. Day three, no one shows up. You can't plan field projects not knowing what your personnel resources are. For example, creel survey interviews are admittedly not terribly hard to do but the data recording does have to go into an electronic PDA device and it can be finicky. Secondly, there is science behind the creel survey design and to be statistically valid (usable) certain criteria have to be met. This shifts have to be 8 hours long. Often there are few to interview still the clerk has to remain. Boredom is a real challenge in this job. Then many of these shifts have to start as early as 6 am. Many have to start later but don't end until 10 PM. Then we need these shifts covered 5 days a week. We also need air flights to do the pressure counts. Those are expensive. There are liability issues too. To pull off a statistically valid creel survey on Saginaw Bay we have 5 full time clerks working a total of 8,667 hours/yr. Say you can find volunteers to give 8 hours a week for 10 months out of the year (very hard to do I would suspect) you would need 108 such volunteers.
Probably 80% of our work is not field work. It is desk work, working on computers, doing analysis, writing reports, attending meetings, representing the state. Volunteers simply can't do that sort of work for obvious reasons. Still, I agree that there are times and places that volunteers can and have been a big help. We regularly use volunteers with our walleye pond program. The Chinook net-pen operations, and many others. It has to be a right fit however. These programs have to be designed and nurtured over time consistently working with specific clubs or organizations. I regret if any stakeholder volunteer was ever treated with anything less than respect by a person with the DNR. It should never be that way, I can only say that frustration is running high amongst employees right now. We are all eager to do our jobs but are being stymied by a lack of financial resources. Michigan spends less on its Fisheries resources (management and research) than any other state in the country on a per water acre basis. While we have more staff than many other states, we have far far more resources to be responsible for. I encourage clubs, lake associations, and user groups to contact their legislators and call on them to fully fund the DNR and not let the revenue needs of our states precious resources fall between the cracks. Put another way, this is not about the DNR, it about our natural resources, our heritage, and our quality of life in Michigan. That's what's at stake. These things have ranked high in Michigan's priorities for centuries. If we don't act now, ours will be the first generation to fail to meet the standards established by all the Michiganders who have come before us.
Attachments
----------------
 .JPG (83KB - 127 downloads)
Fielder..JPG (70KB - 123 downloads)
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 591
Location: in the boat off the east shore somewhere | ok nice post,, interesting perspective... but if you draw funds from the state budget they also will tell you how to spend it ... the problem with the DNR budget is as you said above yourself .. 80% is desk time and projects unrelated to fish and wildlife.. so what your saying is currently only about 20 % of your budget is directed toward the folks who pay all the fees.. the sportsman are paying for all the other enforcment of groundwater laws and property squabbles , permits to build this or that ... these are state responsibuilities , not dnr.. the dnr was formed for fish and wildlife managment polution and issues of building code or violations although affect the surrounding habitat is not what the DNR was created to deal with... the problem is the dnr is now responsible for far too much ! it has grown to cover too much ground and because the fees and increases over the years have been able too take what should have been spent on our natural fish and game managment and stolen and used for other commitment by the state we need to raise more fees? stop loading the dnr with the resposibuility of this stuff it should have never been done.. the dnr should not be involve if you build a new house on the lakefront... this should be a building code at the state or local level.. they are the ones you send your property taxes to... but the dnr has to take money out of there budget to go and inspect this stuff... why wouldnt you have your building inspectors cover this and charge appropriatly... now it ties up recources and money out of the dnr fund... taken and used for crap totaly unrealated to the wildlife issue... why is the dnr enforcing illegal docks? this should be a state or local issue alone.. if the Dnr starts pulling money out of the general fund then the state will have the power to tell the dnr what to spend it on... according to the noumbers above the state already takes 80% of the dnrs budget in the form of unrealated responsibuility... its a shame it got this far... and its gonna get worse .. you cant put in a bike path or atv path expect the dnr to make room in the budget to patrol and enforce the laws and then take the park sticker or atv registration fee and use it for the states general fund... does a snowmobile registration fee go to the dnr or does it go to the state dmv? does this make sence ... i dont see any state troopers out on sleds setting up speed traps ... this kind of stuff ... bugs me. and why should the Dnr be allowed to raise fees. for hunting and fishing privlages when 80% is being used for other crap.... why should my fishing licence go up because 10 homeowners are complaining there well is contaminated becouse of jim bobs farm... how much money is an issue like this costing ? testing in the state lab... following up on the complaints.. thousands and thousands...dollars and man hours and all getting spent out of the dnr budget and then paid for by fees raised for hunting and fishing and a boat registraition... this is wrong..
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | Bradley.
I sent my DNR buddy your last post on this matter. He answered your question in Line-item form within your post using blue print, but that don't show through on this board. So I seperated pieces of your post and his answeres to those parts of it.
Dan:
This is some good dialog. This is the kind of discussion we need. Some of these things I can reply to. I don't know if this will work or not but I'll reply in the body of the post using a bold color font. I hope it shows on your end.
>>> 10/25/2007 4:22 PM >>>
One of the responders view points.
ok nice post,, interesting perspective... but if you draw funds from the state budget they also will tell you how to spend it ...
There is some risk to this, true. But in reality we can be told how to spend fund from the Game & Fish account (license money) too. Generally the on-going challenge is to work with all decision makers to ensure we are working on the important issues.
the problem with the DNR budget is as you said above yourself .. 80% is desk time and projects unrelated to fish and wildlife.. so what your saying is currently only about 20 % of your budget is directed toward the folks who pay all the fees..
No no no. The 80% I referred to includes very important fish and wildlife activities. The field work often only generates data that then has to be analyzed, written up, presented. Our committee work is the vehicle by which we decide what decisions to make based on that analysis and data. This is not as glamorous as field work but is a critical part of the process and can be exciting too.
the sportsman are paying for all the other enforcement of groundwater laws and property squabbles , permits to build this or that ... these are state responsibilities , not DNR.. the DNR was formed for fish and wildlife management pollution and issues of building code or violations although affect the surrounding habitat is not what the DNR was created to deal with... the problem is the DNR is now responsible for far too much!
Yes and no. There was a time when these sort of activities were all housed within the DNR, but that changed when Gov Engler split out the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Most of those sort of chore went to them and what remained was a much more traditional hook-N-bullet type of agency. It has been controversial over the years (the split) and there are improvements to the split that I can think of, but on the whole, I think it was a good move.
it has grown to cover too much ground and because the fees and increases over the years have been able too take what should have been spent on our natural fish and game management and stolen and used for other commitment by the state we need to raise more fees? stop loading the DNR with the responsibility of this stuff it should have never been done.. the DNR should not be involve if you build a new house on the lakefront...
Again, yes and No. Some time is expended on these sort of permit reviews and they can become laborious, but they are also one of our opportunities to retain some over sight on development in habitat types that ultimately affect fisheries. On the whole, this is a very small proportion of our time and not the source of our revenue short fall.
this should be a building code at the state or local level.. they are the ones you send your property taxes to... but the DNR has to take money out of there budget to go and inspect this stuff... why wouldn't you have your building inspectors cover this and charge appropriately... now it ties up resources and money out of the DNR fund... taken and used for crap totally unrelated to the wildlife issue...
I will say that, however, that we have seen more and more state financial obligations construed as "natural resource" obligations and passed off to the Game & Fish fund to pay, these are obligations once paid for directly by the legislature in general fund appropriations. I won't go into detail but I agree that its not fair to put that solely on the sportsmen of the state to pay for some of these otherwise state-wide responsibilities. The solution to this is to make these sort of obligations part of a funding overhaul for the DNR. Part of the solution to our crisis could be (instead of generating more revenue) is to give us relief from some of these obligations... I.e. have the state budget pay them directly from general funds.
why is the DNR enforcing illegal docks? this should be a state or local issue alone.. if the DNR starts pulling money out of the general fund then the state will have the power to tell the DNR what to spend it on... according to the numbers above the state already takes 80% of the DNR's budget in the form of unrelated responsibility
..No disagree, see my first points at the beginning of this post.
its a shame it got this far... and its gonna get worse .. you cant put in a bike path or ATV path expect the DNR to make room in the budget to patrol and enforce the laws and then take the park sticker or ATV registration fee and use it for the states general fund... does a snowmobile registration fee go to the DNR or does it go to the state DMV? does this make sense ... I don't see any state troopers out on sleds setting up speed traps ... this kind of stuff ... bugs me. and why should the DNR be allowed to raise fees. for hunting and fishing privileges when 80% is being used for other crap.... why should my fishing licence go up because 10 homeowners are complaining there well is contaminated because of jim bobs farm... how much money is an issue like this costing ? testing in the state lab... following up on the complaints.. thousands and thousands...dollars and man hours and all getting spent out of the DNR budget and then paid for by fees raised for hunting and fishing and a boat registration... this is wrong..
This post raises some valid points. A very healthy exercise to go through would be to examine all DNR activities and decide what are the obligations of sportsmen, and what are general state obligations. The DNR can do this work no problem, in fact I'd like to see us keep some of this over sight, but those line item costs should probably be summed up and then funded via a general fund allocation, not Game & Fish dollars. I should mention that we do get some general fund dollars but its a small proportion and has shrunk. in 2001 general fund appropriations made up 21% of the DNR's budget, today it has been cut to just 9%. Part of the problem too is that our hunting and fishing base in Michigan has been steadily shrinking. There are fewer people buying licenses. You might be tempted to blame that on rising fees but our license fee increases have lagged behind the inflation rate for the most part. Really its an artifact of the growing urban population, single parent households, competition for time to do other things, kids just aren't getting recruited into the ranks of hunters and fishermen like they used to. However, we have many nonconsumptive natural resource users... hikers, bird watchers, mushroom pickers, etc. Many many find ways to enjoy Michigan's natural resources, but we have to way to draw funding from this. This can be part of the recognition that we base general fund appropriations on... the idea that the whole state benefits, the whole state should pay. There was a review done recently of the DNR's budget situation, a review of all activities and funding sources. Several sat on this committee including MUCC. They came up with a package that included some innovative creative funding ideas. Their recommendation formed the current license fee increase proposal (to get us by for now) and then a large initiative to restructure the whole funding picture over the next few years. Basically they wanted to follow the famous "Missouri model" where a small fraction of the state's sales tax is dedicated to Natural Resources. This has resulted in Missouri Department of Conservation being one the best funded agencies in the country, all people help support the funding this way (all citizens and nonresidents too, because its a part of the sales tax), etc. The current change in the tax structure by the legislature was a prime opportunity to explore this, but it seems the political climate has become so rancourous that there is little thought being given to something like natural resources. The bottom line is we've waited too long. Huge drastic cuts are looming over the DNR that will decimate the agency and our ability to provide stewardship over the state's resources. Now we are in desperate need of a "shot in the arm" just to save the agency, let alone the full modernization of the revenue sources to meet our long term needs. The hour is now. People will be laid off shortly, creel surveys are ending at the end of the month. At least one hatchery is slated for closure. Our Great Lakes Research vessel fleet is set to be moth-balled. If the DNR is a patient, then it was left sitting in the ER waiting room for too long, now its gone "code blue" and we have a bigger emergency to solve. Sadly the word we are getting is that the legislature will not even be taking the issue up, instead the DNR is left to make hard choices. There will be no winners in this situation. Perhaps the only thing that can turn this around now is a grass-roots efforts from the citizenry to insist that the legislature not forget the DNR. Virtually all other agencies in state government will see increases this year because of the tax increases the legislature passed except the DNR. It seems we have fallen between the cracks in this process. Simply needed is for them to act on the current license fee increase proposal to get the DNR by for now, if a larger effort of general fund support can't be mustered at this time. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | Here is Your Chance to TAKE Action: Call Today. I just did and did my part.
We have less than a week before the state must finalize its FY 2008 budget
Severe Program Cuts Announced for Game and Fish Programs
Michigan’s hunting and fishing heritage in jeopardy- Call your legislator today!
Your help is needed immediately! On November 1, 2007, a new fiscal year will begin. Without hunting or fishing license fee increase or support from another funding source, Michigan’s Department of Natural Resources has announced the following cuts in Game and Fish Programs:
· Close two fish hatcheries
· Eliminate remaining fish surveys
· Close fisheries research station
· Eliminate university research and reduce fish health activities
· Eliminate the use of Great Lakes research vessels
· Reduce conservation officers by 14 and not fill 20 vacancies
· Reduce hours of operation for the Report All Poaching Hotline
· Close managed waterfowl areas
· Close field offices
· Stop translocation of nuisance Canada geese and bear
While MUCC is concerned about what is included on this list by the DNR, we are even more concerned about the dismantling of our conservation heritage. These cuts will be made and all of us fully understand the significant damage that they will cause on our hunting and fishing programs. While a long-term sustainable funding mechanism is needed, an increase in the hunting and fishing license fees can be part of that solution and will help to avoid these drastic cuts.
Action:
Please call your legislator today and tell them to fix this problem! In addition, call the following four people who control the DNR’s budget and tell them that these cuts are unacceptable and that the DNR’s budget deficit must be fixed. Remind them that hunters and anglers have invested in our great outdoors and because of this investment, we have hunting and fishing opportunities unmatched by any other state. We want these opportunities to continue. We stand ready to invest in wildlife and fisheries management through a license fee increase.
Speaker of the House Andy Dillon: 888-737-3455 (toll-free)
Representative Michael Lahti: 888-663-4031 (toll-free)
Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop: 877-924-7467 (toll-free)
Senator Michelle McManus: 866-305-2135 (toll-free) | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | Got a few E-mail addresses as well.
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
This may (in the long run) effect all you tournament and regular guys who fish in Michigan as well. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 591
Location: in the boat off the east shore somewhere | thanks for the responces and the imput, im sure it was hard to wade threw some of my ramblings , this happens out of frustration . all i see when it comes down to budget time at the federal , state , local or individual budgets like the Dnr that are within the state budget but also make a huge impact on a small local level as well as trying to work with a national agenda and other state influences.. the reason for the frustration is every agency or devision of government seems to be SCREAMING non stop for money... all year , every place i turn , more demand and taxes . the budgets for each group including the dnr have been crying for more money forever but in the past 5 or ten years its been non stop. its a shame that it has come to this.. the problem is that 15 years ago there was a fraction of the spending programs that there are now.. the budget is getting tight and there are a lot of hands out.. its funny how the first place that gets attecked is the DNR, i myself like to chime in plenty often about the sillyness of some of the priorities of the DNR . dont get me wrong.. there is waste in all the divisions of government .. the open checkbook has been the norm for too long. now how do you stop feeding the beast? everytime the average joe puts his hand out to give the beast a small piece of pie joe's arm gets chewed off. im tired of listening to them tell me we need more , im tired of my tax dollars going to waste.,yes the sqeeky wheel is more likely to get the grease.. and we need to have some good choices when it comes to voting and putting people in office that have a better handle on what issues mean something to us.. i just dont see politics as a representive of the people for the people kind of thing anymore.. i dont know if this snowball can be stopped. and then it all trickles down to this... budget shortfalls that have affected things that were put in place many many moons ago to make sure our fish and wildlife resources stay in check.. now what was self generating as far is budget and revinue and could afford to manage without too much of an increase in budget now is falling way short again...just sad.. so some days im fired up and want to join the fight the next day i grow tired and want to give up.. looks like an uphill road for most on all sides of the fence.. to all the guys working in the field with the dnr you have your hands full... for the folks up top handing down the orders and the budget issues seems like a job i woudnt want or be able to last long at either..there is a lot of string pulling going on.. must be hard to be in a position to make the changes needed but the ramafacations may be career ending .. remember it all starts at the top, the tippy top.. above the dnr top. most all are appointed . and appointed by who? and who votes for this who person? we do.. now lets put somone up for office that has some fight in them ... my checkbook cant take anymore of this beast. | |
| | |
| "This raises a lot of good questions. I think we (the DNR) definitely need the involvement of the public right now in helping to resolve the pending budget crisis."
I'd like to offer some suggestions on how to avoid what you have termed as a "crisis." As with any business you really need to re-think your operations for the 21st century. My fist sugggestion is do not think of this as a crisis that is your first mistake, rather it is an oppurunity to strengthen your service business for the long term.
The easiest example I could pick from above, here you go:
Creel Survey Clerks (2 Options to consider)
1) Combine activity of existing Boat Launch Attendants and Creel Survey Clerks. Increase operating hours or "open for business," at all launches and access within the state directly corresponfing to known usage patterns.
Direct Savings: reduction in wage costs by a downsized workforce, reduction in state owned vechicles and associated operational expenses.
Revenue Pick-Up: Increase in launch user fees collected.
Improvements Required: Flexible and on-call hours of Launch Attendant/Creel Survey Clerk in accordance to predictable times/weather for usage and seasonal patterns of users. In other words "be there to collect the money when the users are there." No more vacant buildings with 30 truck and trailers in the parking lot...
The same for when they leave the launch after a day on the water, fishing, duck hunting, etc. the attendant is there to take a survey. Should improve validity of data generated. Reasoning, under your own admission CSC's sit aimlessly in parking lots when it is obvious no one is fishing (in my business we would call that waste).
2) Replace Launch Attendants and Creel Survey Clerks with 24 hour AUTOMATED payment, entry and exit survey systems at all major laucnhes and access points within the state.
Direct Savings: 2x's reduction in wage costs by a downsized workforce, reduction in state owned vechicles and associated operational expenses.
Revenue Pick-Up: Increase in launch user fees collected. Open for business 24/7/365 can't do much better than that...
Improvements Required: Research and capital investment in technology. Similar to automated cashiers. Development of a new sticker capable of being bar-code scanned or create a pass-code system based on swiping a drivers license. Again, research required, but without a doubt the ROI is there...
PJS
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | PJS.
Not sure if your even a Michigan resident. But by your taking the time to think out a few solutions and write them down, tells me you've already become more involved then a lot of people directly effected by this. Thanks. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 591
Location: in the boat off the east shore somewhere | ok so its back to raising fees? fine ... why dont you start with somone getting a copy of the budget , if not current find the last one... read the 80 bazillion pages and find out where the spending is going.. im thinking this is public information... just like any buisness there is a list of where every dollar went... then look for idias before you just stick a band aid on it... look for waste or other places things can be changed instead of throwing money at the problem. example: lets say there is an observation tower.. lets say it costs a half a million to keep this thing running , staff maintanance keeping the road passible in winter ect.. this tower was built to spot forest fires lets say... back in the day... today there may be 20 new roads in the aria with year round residents and more county sharifs department patroles , there may be things like cell phones and folks out in this aria all year long that can report any potental threat without the need of the tower in this day and age... lets say its only a half million bucks? but lets say there are 10 towers? all need upkeep and replacement or man hours road work and the such.. things like this add up and the fine folks that operate these towers can be put to work in other arias of deamand.. times change... also lets say there is an issue with some criminal activity... there is a ton of investigation that often times overlaps with another law enforcement agency.. there is a ton of money being spent on lidigation courts and expensive attornys.. i think with the complete list of the budget some eyes will open up when you see where the money is realy going... raise fees at the boat ramp?!!!!!!!!!!!!! good to thing of ways to help out but this is not the reason or the fix for a budget shorfall... wake up. we are talking about millions and millions of dollers and its going somewhere. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 591
Location: in the boat off the east shore somewhere | im thinking this complete budget and where the money went last year and for what and the actual dollars spent to accomplish this and that would blow this thing wide open and i believe that this would be the last thing the powers that be would want you to see. raise fees... im done bending over. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 591
Location: in the boat off the east shore somewhere | did anyone ever find a copy of the budget? or last years spending breakdown...? this thread has been quiet for a wile... either its taking a week to read it or you have just gottin sick to your tummy over the spending .... i havent seen it so i shouldnt talk smart.. just think it will open some eyes ,,, interesting how the subject got quiet ... hmmm? is the can of worms open yet? | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 591
Location: in the boat off the east shore somewhere | oh ya wile your at it.... why dont you get the dnr and the anti fossl fuel crowd to build an oil refinery in michigan as one hasnt been built in this country for like 20 years... after the mother load of oil was found in our southern waters ... we now have the largest oil reserves in the whole world and no way to turn it into gas... keep planting corn boys just pump 1100 gallons of water out of lake michigan for every gallon of corn gas and we wont have any lakes to fish in anyway... problem solved... and next year at the predicted 5.00 / gallon mark,, dont expect the folks of wisconsin to be able to drive north and pay propertytax or boat launch fees anyway.... so raise the boat launch fee all you want , when it costs me 200 dollars to fill the boat with gas and 200 dollars to fill the truck to pull it and taxes cost me another 300 a week there wont be much going on in michigan.. exept for killing game out of season to feed your kids... the the poor game wardents will have there hands full... good luck .. sorry so bitter ,, just a bad day... the sun will come up tommorow.. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | Bradley.
Don't take this the wrong way. You make some great and valid points, and your posts shed lots of new light on the subject. Even my DNR bud was impressed with your thoughts and suggested solutions. Even though appreciated, at some point this subjet, the debate and your answers to it reminds me of my buddys first deer, when he brought it over to my house on top of his car that cool November morning. I thought at first he had picked up some Road Kill he found on the highway, it was that mangled. He had shot the poor animal 11 times. The first shot put it down, but every time it would twitch, his knee jerk reaction was shoot it again. Theres a time to quit shooting the already dead deer at some point and let the senators and citizens of our State of Michigan determine what course all this will take. If the mistakes they made all these years are not clear to them at this point, God help us all.
Edited by walleye express 10/30/2007 12:06 PM
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 591
Location: in the boat off the east shore somewhere | hey dan... id like to apologize ... didnt sleep much last night.. a bit crabby... tell your buddy congradulations on his deer... somtimes in the frustration and senslessness of things like this it gets a bit impersonable... make sure the congradulations gets to him... first deer i dont care if your 15 years old or 50 is a big day... ironic i lost my uncle yesterday and there arent many(family) of us left... odd it was my birthday , the anaversery of my mothers death a couple years ago... , not to draw pitty but my uncle sunday was up north and enjoying a weekend invited by some freinds to the lake.. out fishing for bluegills he hooked into a musky,, first of his life.. did a lot of fishing years back and they managed to get it into the boat for some pictures without a net.. 45 incher fat and sassy... he text the pics to everyone... a big day,, the next day clipping the lawn you can tip over.... I ment it when i want you to congradulate your buddy for me ,,, its a big day when something like that happens in the outdoors... memories of a lifetime... even if there is only a day left in your lifetime... so in the heat of battle over budget and laws and making decision that affect your family and our country or state.. the day in the woods or on the lake , a photo a memory foot print is left with us... when something threatens the future of our grandchildren and the thaught of our resources not being avialable or preserved for them , gets us all wound up... its important to us... the memories are important... with out that deer or fish or campground.. hunting cabbin up north... with out them something would be missing... keep up the good fight ,,, we will be fine... there is no question of your passon , just seems sometimes we are trying to put out a fire with matches... good luck .. non of this is easy,, get out and enjoy the day tommorow too... thanks for your hard work ... thank your buddy at the DNR ... its evident he is a good man. Brad.... | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 2680
Location: Essexville, MI./Saginaw Bay. | Seems God did help us.
October 30, 2007
Dear Capt. Manyen:
Thank you for contacting me to express your concern over proposed cuts in the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). I share your concern for our state's natural resource heritage and I appreciated hearing from you on this matter.
Recently, the DNR put forward a list of reductions that would have taken effect in the event that the legislature and Governor failed to come to an agreement on the 2008 budget. "I am happy to report that the Senate and House of Representatives adopted House Bill 4354, which contains the 2008 DNR budget, on Tuesday, October 30, 2007". It is currently awaiting the Governor's signature and it is anticipated that she will approve the bill.
Under the legislation, funding was provided for the threatened programs. Details on the contents of HB 4354 are available on www.michiganlegislature.org.
Once again, thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Michelle A. McManus
State Senator
35th District
Edited by walleye express 10/30/2007 4:17 PM
| |
| |
|
