Quote:
Why would you stock pike in a lake? Why don’t they stock any bass?
Crawdaddy, you should have come and asked those questions! Bass are doing fairly well in south central MN but northern pike are spawning habitat limited in spots. Pike fry stocking is mimicking natural spawning where in lake reproduction is not sufficient or connectivity to adjacent wetlands is gone.
Allen,
No offense taken. I’d urge people in this democracy to pick their battles on incrementalism. Everyone is lumping DNR Fish and Game with all the other departmental agencies and general government. One popular conservative Minnesota radio talk show host this week compared DNR Fish and Game to the Department of Education. That’s a terrible comparison. Education keeps slipping while costs increase and administration levels rise. DNR Fish and Game have very little administration while their maintenance, materials, and fleet has risen. They are dealing with the same inflation issues the rest of us have dealt with the last dozen years. The reason that DNR Enforcement and Fish and Wildlife have dedicated funds are to track where those dollars go. Between that simple fact and the B.O.C., they are the gold standard by which other government agencies should operate. If other groups ran this way, you could isolate inefficiencies and track where the money is really going.
As for stocking, which lakes are they? Did you contact the respective manager for those lakes and let them know you are displeased with stocking winterkill lakes? It’s entirely possible that they are stocked because they winterkill. Many lakes are used for growing out walleyes for fall harvest for the reason that they do winterkill and prevent carryover fish from eating young of the years. Some fishing lakes are managed as boom and bust to count on winterkill wiping the slate clean for fast growth. The DNR has a set of guidelines for walleye stocking and they aren’t supposed to stock fingerlings in lakes that winterkill. If they are doing this, I would complain to the local fisheries office about it and get a good reason why they are doing it.
John,
Let me lead by saying thank you for starting this thread.
On to businees: Chris wasn’t ever explicitly talking about performance-based audits. If he did have an issue with how he was treated, he should take it to that employee’s supervisor. It’s just like asking for the manager at a company. Regardless, is the title of this post not fees? We should be talking financially since that’s the crux of the issue. I give Chris credit for seeing the forest through the trees even if wolf depredation is a sore issue for him.
Maybe my tone was a bit strong (i.e. you catch more flies with honey than vinegar), but you’re probably detecting a sense of urgency. If the legislature doesn’t pass a fee increase in this session, you will see programming and services hit the cutting room floor. It takes a year for the fees to take effect and in that time the budget will have gone red.
I can’t encourage people enough to contact their representatives and urge them to support the fee increases. People with an axe to grind are contacting their legislators to vote it down. If most people are supportive or indifferent to an increase, they aren’t likely to reach out and contact their representatives. The majority in the house and senate are told to view taxes and fee increase as one and the same. Without some constituent feedback, I could see fee increases failing.
Quote:
The “opposition” two years ago was the DNR. “The time is not right to raise licenses”.
‘course if they wouldn’t have spent $650,000. on a study to see if they needed to raise fees, we wouldn’t need to raise fees.
Let me translate that first quote for ya Brian, it was spoken by Assistant Commissioner Bob Meier in 2010… “Governor Tim Pawlenty, through his political appointee Mark Holsten…has instructed me to tell you all that we don’t need any license fee increases. Chant it with me now…no new fees or taxes. And Remember to vote T Paw in 2012!”
Secondly, a question for you Brian, because I know you work with a lot of DNR folks. Have you met any DNR Fish and Wildlife officials that specialize in running focus groups, collecting market research, trending economic policy decisions? Maybe they should hire a couple so they don’t have to outsource it to Responsive Management and Southwick and Associates in another ten years. You know darn well the legislature is going to ask for some reasons for an increase and some comparisons. BTW, Where’d ya find the 2/3rds of a million dollar figure?
I love ya bud and I’m nominating you for next year’s Game and Fish Fund Budgetary Oversight Committee.
Wow, I’m really disappointed in the responses here. I see a lot of folks ignorant or misinformed on some game and fish funding facts.
* To the complainers about the DNR’s AIS policy- first of all, it’s legislated, second and most importantly, its coming from boat registrations. A tiny fraction of your fishing license goes towards any AIS work.
* You want the toughest job in the world after president? Try regulating Minnesota’s sacred white-tailed deer. I guess if you don’t like the deer management in your area it’s grounds for not supporting broader fish and wildlife initiatives including this funding increase. Even a personal shot at the former big game coordinator. Lou Cornicelli worked pretty hard to collect a bunch of public input before Zone 3 APRs went into effect. Nobody ever said it couldn’t be changed back.
*Granrud, you were talking about wolf management with a DNR official several months ago before they came off federal protection! What did you want him or her to say? Their hands were tied. Everybody loves to jump on the DNR about wolves and the state has had a wolf management plan in place for years including hunting, all they needed was federal protection to drop and it didn’t happen. So they got to take the heat when it was a federal issue. Same thing happens to DNR Fisheries with cormorants.
Furthermore Chris, you wanted the conservation officers to selectively enforce laws during the shutdown…you don’t think that would open the state to a lawsuit?
* Legacy money is expressly prohibited from being used to fund the DNR. Look it up.
* Audits are done every year and are mandated. It’s called the Minnesota Game and Fish Budgetary Oversight Committee. Google it.
I’m sorry if I’m coming off harsh here but I just can’t believe nobody is going to stick up for the DNR here. I see a bunch of people complaining about their pet issues. Let’s cut off our nose to spit our faces here guys.
Gentlemen, we must all hang together or we shall most assuredly all hang separately. If we don’t support the DNR they are at a point of not being able to collect information to satisfactorily manage the resource, their ability to provide recreational opportunities is compromised, and at a tangible level, your hunting and fishing opportunities will be less.
Let’s take this down to Garage Logic. You’re going to spend $4 bucks a gallon on boat gas this summer, a scoop of fatheads will cost ya $3, a cold one at the tavern on the way home is $4. Will $5 more, to maintain resources in a coveted outdoors recreation destination state, to go fishing 365 days a year break ya?
Roberds Lake Resort.
Talk about the last of a dying breed: a family owned place that won’t cost you an arm and a leg and in southern Minnesota. Good pike and panfish numbers on the lake, fantastic numbers of catfish, and some slob walleyes.
Great family place. If that’s who is joining you, that is who I would call. If the point of the trip is to fish all day from sun up to sun down, Pepin would be a better choice.
Good luck.
I’ll be your Huckleberry… Let me know if i am on a team before 4pm today.. I am leaving for a week of hunting 
This is my girl. Had to show her off. This picture is 4 months old, she is now 6 months and if she sees it go down its in my hand.. i am very proud
Kevin
