MnFish

“How they biting? Soon we will know. I’m referring to the Minnesota Legislature. Will our lawmakers support Gov. Walz budget recommendations to direct $110 million to fix up our outdated fish hatcheries and public boat accesses? As I hope you know, MN-FISH—with your help— has been pushing for this investment for two years.

 
Now you need to speak up again. Call or write your legislators and let them know you support the governor’s budget recommendations for hatcheries and accesses. This is critical. Your representatives must hear from you or they’ll think you don’t care or don’t know or don’t give a damn.

As you may know, the DNR is asking lawmakers to increase our fishing license fees. A resident license, for example, would go from $25 to $30 if this is passed. Now $5 isn’t much. But we also know fishing license fees alone won’t be enough to upgrade our fish management program.

 

 
At the moment, your MN-FISH board of directors is remaining neutral on the fee increase. Why? We want to know specifically what DNR fisheries intends to do with the boost in funding.

 
Anglers always have supported fish management. We just need to make sure the dollars go for that. The last fishing license increase was in 2017. I’ll say this, too. Compared to a ticket to watch the Vikings for 4 hours, a fee of $30 to fish 365 days is pretty cheap. Stay tuned.

Before I close, I must ask you again to support MN-FISH with your membership dollars or contributions. To push for fishing in the legislature requires lobbyist and mailings, etc., and those efforts are not free. If you don’t help, we won’t be shortening the time between bites.”

Good fishing,

Ron Schara

That is all well and good but, I think the $110 million should have been a part of the DNR budget. $5 million a year wasted on the fat cats & infrastructure in St. Paul over the last 20 years covers it. Who beside the DNR has something they think they will never ever have to fix or update?

That $110 million from Walz is nothing more than a wink at sportsman statewide as he steals the $17 billion dollar surplus.

I’m onboard with the fee increase, our DNR services are 100% dependent on license fees. This begs the question, what about all who use our State resources. Bicycles, hikers, bird’ers, rock climbers? We are blessed with a stunning variety of outdoor resources, maybe it’s time for other groups contribute to DNR funding?

I tend to agree with Schara’s comments. But, generally speaking I’m usually against more spending by the government. Mainly because we often don’t know the details of where the money is going or how the added spending will be measured for success. It would be nice to see a breakdown of the DNR’s funding from licenses and fees now and where that money is now being spent. I.E. fishing, hunting, non-game, enforcement, etc. Maybe that info is available, but I’ve never seen it.
I just suspect that, like any government agency, there are a lot of inefficiencies that need to be addressed. Anytime there is something that is asked to be improved, the only response is more funding. Never is it “How can we make what we are doing better?”

Joe, the DNR has an citizen oversite committee. (which I’ve never heard anyone from one of their many oversite committees jump up and down yelling “Look at the Waste”)

Edit

The Who’s Who on The Oversite Committee’s

Vern Wagner wrote:

This begs the question, what about all who use our State resources. Bicycles, hikers, bird’ers, rock climbers? We are blessed with a stunning variety of outdoor resources, maybe it’s time for other groups contribute to DNR funding?

This always irked me as an avid snowmobiler for years. Our license fees went to maintaining (even paving) state trails which then became used heavily by bicyclists, walkers, joggers, etc yet they dont pay one red cent for their upkeep and the paved trails actually eliminated some snowmobilers from being able to use them because of studded tracks.

Brian Klawitter wrote:

Joe, the DNR has an citizen oversite committee. (which I’ve never heard anyone from one of their many oversite committees jump up and down yelling “Look at the Waste”)

Thanks for pointing that out Brian. I had forgotten that this was implemented. And I have found info on their budget. But I’m still skeptical. Lol

Joe Jarl wrote:

But I’m still skeptical. Lol

Aren’t we all?

Brian Klawitter wrote:

Joe, the DNR has an citizen oversite committee. (which I’ve never heard anyone from one of their many oversite committees jump up and down yelling “Look at the Waste”)

Have you heard anything from any of those people about anything? I haven’t, and also never heard of any of them. The few that have a bio on there all seem to be connected politically, either thru their work (DNR/union), or activism…

BigWerm wrote:

Have you heard anything from any of those people about anything?

Nope.

Dutchboy wrote:

That is all well and good but, I think the $110 million should have been a part of the DNR budget. $5 million a year wasted on the fat cats & infrastructure in St. Paul over the last 20 years covers it. Who beside the DNR has something they think they will never ever have to fix or update?

That $110 million from Walz is nothing more than a wink at sportsman statewide as he steals the $17 billion dollar surplus.

^This.

People need to set specifics aside and demand some $ be refunded to those who paid it in. I’ll pay license increases, support fisheries updates, etc AFTER people are refunded some of this massive amount.

People need to set specifics aside and demand some $ be refunded to those who paid it in. I’ll pay license increases, support fisheries updates, etc AFTER people are refunded some of this massive amount.
[/quote]

This will never happen

2022 Gamefish report

I worked in government for almost 30 years. Government waste is a redundant term.
Anytime a government entity wants more money they back off from doing their job to prove to the powers holding the purse strings that they really need more money.
The only problem is they don’t back off doing things that really aren’t as important and they often get used to not doing the work that they wanted extra funds for, so they never really go back to doing everything they wanted the extra funds for.
This state needs to stop relying on hunters and fisherman paying the bill for the DNR.

MN-Fish contacted via email that it was time to renew my membership. I have been a big advocate for MN-Fish but I guess I have lost faith in the organization. They have done a better job this year of getting information out what they are up to, what bothers me who is setting the agenda? I have never seen members asked to vote or contribute ideas they would like to see MN-fish pursue. It seems like MN-fish is interested in my money (I know dutch you told me so) and then go away as MN-fish knows what is in my best interest. On fence to give them one more year or not. Does anyone else think they are starting to accomplish anything?

According to yesterday’s MNFISH update, these are the bills that they are supporting and we should too:

Here are the bills and authors that deserve your support:
1. $60 million – Fish Hatchery Reconstruction/Betterment
Senate: Chief Author: SF1422 Sen. Jordan Rasmusson – Fergus Falls
Co-Author: Sen. Grant Hauschild – HermantownHouse: Chief Author: HF1344 Rep. Jeff Brand – St. PeterCo-Authors: Her, Heintzeman, Gillman, Hansen, Lee,Becker-Finn, Lislegard, Vang, Skraba, Lillie, and Schultz

2. $50 Million – Public Water Accesses
Senate: Chief Author: SF1421 Sen. Grant Hauschild – Hermantown Co-Author: Sen Rasmusson – Fergus Falls House: Chief Author: Rep. Liz Reyer – Eagan
Co-Author: Heintzeman, Gillman

I would have like to see them mention SF2570 and HF2564 since it contains some MNDNR policy language that a lot of people have already worked many years on.

Isn’t this the same $110 million they have been trying to pluck from our tax surplus money? Which by the way should have been used from the DNR budget over the past many years. I’m positive the DNR sets aside money from every budget to upgrade / maintain vehicles and computers. So wouldn’t it be mismanagement not to plan for acquisition and maintenance of accesses? I think even construction guys & mechanics plan ahead to replace nail guns & socket sets.

Sorry….I can’t give MNFISH any credit for this.

All I know is if MNFISH cannot secure a substantial chunk of this new money, it will be a gigantic fail. With $17.9 BILLION new money agreed to today (ironic that it’s essentially the same amount as the surplus) our hatcheries should be state of the art and our ramps paved with gold bricks.

https://www.startribune.com/gov-tim-walz-legislative-leaders-reach-17-9-billion-spending-agreement/600260800/?fbclid=IwAR2ggiKi6lBP1hD96YAvWQCu8vyWYGm-Ka5dxSGvh7Q-cvc_TCySwu5GmlQ

Hey Dutchboy –

Minnesota lawmakers reach historic deal on environment, climate and energy

$308 million for the Department of Natural Resources for reforestation, and to modernize crumbling fish hatcheries, boat ramps and state park buildings, among other facilities.

Eelpoutguy wrote:

Hey Dutchboy –

Minnesota lawmakers reach historic deal on environment, climate and energy

$308 million for the Department of Natural Resources for reforestation, and to modernize crumbling fish hatcheries, boat ramps and state park buildings, among other facilities.

Hope those mn fish guys start replying to emails or I’ll never get to fish with Laura

So how much for Accesses and how much for hatcheries? The ask was 50,000 for hatcheries.

She still hasn’t responded?

There was this also –

Lawmakers also decided against installing a new barrier to prevent invasive carp from spreading farther up the Mississippi River. After a record number of the destructive fish were caught this spring, senators pushed a $17 million proposal to install a noise, light and bubble system to act as a barrier along one of the river’s lock and dams.

Legislators also jettisoned a proposed ban on lead sinkers and instead chose to spend $1 million to keep “Get the Lead Out” — an educational effort to get hunters and anglers to voluntarily switch to nontoxic ammunition and tackle. The program had been funded with settlement money from the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, funding set to expire this year.

Eelpoutguy wrote:

She still hasn’t responded?

I’ve received no return emails

Eelpoutguy wrote:

Hey Dutchboy –

Minnesota lawmakers reach historic deal on environment, climate and energy

$308 million for the Department of Natural Resources for reforestation, and to modernize crumbling fish hatcheries, boat ramps and state park buildings, among other facilities.

I’ll admit I haven’t followed whats going on in St. Paul but my first inclination is to think this is part of the $17 billion tax surplus they intend to steal. After all I still haven’t heard of anybody getting a refund check.

Maybe the $308 million is from the fee’s they are raising. I dunno, and at this point i’m so disillusioned I barely care.

August 2023:
Special President’s Message
MESSAGE FROM MN-FISH PRESIDENT

 To MN-FISH members and supporters –
How they bitin’? Fair, I hope. Your MN-FISH board of officers has also been chasing a few fish this summer. After all, this is why MN-FISH was formed: to Keep Minnesota Fishing Strong.

Nevertheless, we have not lost sight of our mission. Recently, a few MN-FISH board members, along with Executive Director Mark Holsten, met with DNR Commissioner Sarah Stommen and some of her staff to ask: what’s next? Now that the legislature approved upwards of $95 million to repair and/or enhance fish hatcheries, public boat accesses and urban shore fishing opportunities, what will happen when? I’m glad to say the DNR has been busy setting priorities; which hatcheries and which accesses get fixed first. You won’t notice many changes tomorrow, but you will eventually.

We also talked bait shortages. While there are issues (including drought and winterkill), the DNR and MN-FISH are determined to fix the fathead minnow shortage.

Since we successfully campaigned to upgrade hatcheries and boat accesses, the logical question is: Are we done? You kiddin’? We will again be active in the 2024 legislature as lawmakers debate a bonding bill. Why? Because there is so much that needs to be done with hatcheries, boat accesses, public fishing docks/shorelines, invasive carp controls just to name a few. And all require investment spending.

That said, MN-FISH doesn’t operate on wishful thinking. So, please renew your MN-FISH membership today. And donate to MN-FISH.com if you can. This is your “State of Fishing” and we are fighting to keep it that way.

BTW, I’ll be emceeing Game Fair again this year. Please stop by the booth for a free MN-FISH decal while there!

Good fishing,
Ron Schara, President

PS—MN-FISH is hosting the World’s Greatest Hunting and Fishing Auction in September. Go to MN-FISH.com to learn more about experiences and products available for bid.

 
MN-FISH
1-833-3MN-FISH | 125 1st Ave NW, Osseo, MN
[email protected] | http://www.mn-fish.com

Seems like a subject for the round table at Clives tomorrow night.

I feel like this lobby group may very well be responsible for the significant increase in fees we are about to see in MN. Accessibility isn’t just boat ramps and urban shores. If a person can’t afford a simple license the most basic of sports will be out of there reach. Sure you can say who can’t afford 30$. I can say that in my time I couldn’t afford 30$ and that’s when being able to escape into fishing was most important in my life. Maybe MN-Fish isn’t just about raising taxes, but it sure feels like it.

In all my years in public sector work I have encountered MANY of these groups.
This one is all about relationships from one ‘Known” personality to another.
This current regime could care less about the nuts and bolts of what we want/need in terms of outdoors and will throw just enough cash at it to be seen as concerned and supportive of one of the most resources this state has ( but is not as important as the rest of their agenda – political? Yep)
This group needs a leader who will be vigilant and cut from a cloth that is not “legacy” in origin and until then it will just limp along while what few members it has will continue to wither away. I am sure a good portion of the increases will be to fund ANYTHING they do for us. The $17 billion dollar surplus – same black hole as the one in Public education.
Yes, very apathetic but just being a “realist” – in my own humble opinion

Riverrat wrote:

I feel like this lobby group may very well be responsible for the significant increase in fees we are about to see in MN. Accessibility isn’t just boat ramps and urban shores. If a person can’t afford a simple license the most basic of sports will be out of there reach. Sure you can say who can’t afford 30$. I can say that in my time I couldn’t afford 30$ and that’s when being able to escape into fishing was most important in my life. Maybe MN-Fish isn’t just about raising taxes, but it sure feels like it.

How so? and what do you consider significant?
I would imagine that if fees do become “significant” and people can’t afford to be able to escape into fishing, the state will figure out a way to let those people fish for free anyway.