# No license increase? No DNR



## foxriver6 (Oct 23, 2007)

This is a 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. This document will be shared with the Legislature and will be made public, so if you receive media calls, please direct them to Mary Dettloff at 517-335-3014.

While we seek a resolution, we must be prepared for the worst. If we do need to lay off employees, we will be looking at any and all opportunities to place those employees in other funded vacancies, and will continue to explore additional cost savings and program efficiencies. 

I again want to stress that we are still working toward a funding solution that will abate the need to implement these cuts. As difficult as it is, I ask that we all stay focused on our jobs and safety during this very difficult time.



*Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Outdoors* 
*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&#8217;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&#8217;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&#8217;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&#8217;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&#8217;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.


----------



## Spanky (Mar 21, 2001)

Thanks for posting this, I was going to but wanted to check first.

This is not a good thing for anyone in this state, unless they are a poacher, pot grower,or arsonist! I sure hope our legislators wake up soon, and stop dragging their feet.


----------



## stinger63 (Nov 25, 2003)

WOW if this happens our outdoor rescources will literaly turn into a free for all.Poachers will bound and take over our hunting and fishing places and no one will be able to darn thing about it.
Gramcrackerholm has realy destroyed this state great job.


----------



## Firecracker (Aug 19, 2005)

it was on the news this morning.. they said with no increase on Licences they are forced to shut down Camprounds and let go DNR people..


----------



## hoythunter (Feb 23, 2005)

*DNR Cuts Mean 79 Layoffs Imminent*
Barring a last-minute legislative decision to accept the Department of Natural Resources' (DNR) hunting and fishing license fee increase package, the department will be forced to lay off 79 employees and discontinue or scale back a number of services, DNR Director Rebecca *HUMPHRIES* told employees today.

If nothing is done about the situation in the next 12 months, at least 37 state parks and eight interpretative centers will close, meaning a cut of 253 more staff.

Cuts of $8.2 million are needed at the DNR to balance a Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 budget heavily reliant on declining user fee revenue. For most of the year, DNR officials have asked the Legislature to approve a recommended fee increase package.

But after the Legislature swallowed hard on a 10 percent income tax increase and an expansion of the use tax to services, the political will to raise hunting and fishing fees simply isn't there. Word is the Republican-led Senate, in particular, simply is not interested in moving the fee bills after approving $1.4 billion in new revenue for the current Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 budget.

That means starting Nov. 1, two more campgrounds will be shut down, growing the total to 22. Two of the state's fish hatcheries and a research station will close, putting at risk $2 billion in fishing losses from the roughly 4.5 million fewer salmon and trout in the state's water ways. The state's research vessels will be grounded. About 28,300 acres of waterfowl areas will be closed off to hunters.

Roughly 6,000 nuisance Canadian geese cannot be removed from southeast Michigan as has been the practice. Conservation officer numbers will be reduced, opening the door to more poaching, increased accident and injuries due to hunter safety violations or reckless use of boats, snowmobiles and off-road vehicles, Humphries said.

Cuts in the timber-marking program will impact tourism and the state's $13 billion timber industry, she said.

An unknown number of field offices also will be closed. The emergency dispatch for poaching will be cut off from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Conservation officers also will no longer be available for law enforcement backup, said DNR Spokeswoman Mary *DETTLOFF*.

Humphries described the cuts as the most "severe budgetary" measures put in place and they only will get worse, she said. The DNR already has swallowed $20 million in program cuts since Fiscal Year (FY) 2005, meaning 50 conservation officer positions have been left vacant.

It's meant scaled back programs fighting bovine TB and other wildlife disease. Fewer personnel are available to fight forest fires, fix trails and mark timber for sale.

A review of the FY 2005 budget passed by the Legislature calls for 2,070 full-time employees. That number moved to 2,082 in FY 2008.

If changes don't improve by April 2008, Humphries said the DNR will stop taking reservations for any state park into Fiscal Year (FY) 2009. It simply may not be open. Humphries said this cut will be a $580 million blow to the economy.


----------



## lang49 (Aug 1, 2005)

Firecracker said:


> it was on the news this morning.. they said with no increase on Licences they are forced to shut down Camprounds and let go DNR people..


I know that this has been debated and redebated but- Why are revenues gained from hunters being used to support campgrounds?! 

Fund campgrounds with campground revenue, fund wildlife & habitat managenent with license revenue. Why is this so difficult to understand??


----------



## DanP (Mar 1, 2005)

maybe to put pressure on those in Lansing to act. By doing this you add another group of angry Michigan Citizens, not just hunters and fishmen. 

I do not want to pay more but even with the increases what we get is cheap. Just take the family out to dinner and a moive. 

I am also a camper and parks have been able to increase fees over the last couple of years as funding was cut on the state level.

Maybe the payroll of those in Lansing should be cut to 1995 levels and see if they can still pay their bills!!!!


----------



## Bonz 54 (Apr 17, 2005)

You have to STAND UP and be counted ! How many letters have you written to the members of the NRC, DNR Director, your State Legislators? How many NRC meetings have you attended? You will get absolutely nowhere if you don't STAND UP and make yourself heard. Phone calls, E-mails, regular letters, public participation in open meetings are what is needed to drive your point home. So STAND UP, SPEAK UP, don't just let this problem roll over all of us. My .02 BTW I started today. FRANK


----------



## chamookman (Sep 1, 2003)

Let's start by asking Granmole, why Our license fees go to general fund :rant::rant::rant::help:!!!!!!! C-man


----------



## MuskyDan (Dec 27, 2001)

I have called every person that the MUCC magizine gave me the number for. And I would see a decrease in our bounty before I gave in to a higher tax and that is all the increase is, is another tax on a over taxed state!


----------



## eyesforever (Mar 8, 2004)

stinger63 said:


> WOW if this happens our outdoor rescources will literaly turn into a free for all.Poachers will bound and take over our hunting and fishing places and no one will be able to darn thing about it.
> Gramcrackerholm has realy destroyed this state great job.


Wow, she must be one powerfull gov., to do all this without any help from our legislators!!!!


----------



## Biggbear (Aug 14, 2001)

We keep hearing that we have fewer and fewer people getting involved in hunting,fishing and the outdoors, wouldn't it stand to reason then that we could do with fewer people in the DNR? The memo generated above is being used as a scare tactic, it does sound ominous, we don't have enough CO's now, having even fewer sounds terrible. The thing is there are plenty of places in our State Government and within the DNR where cuts could be made, without laying off CO's and closing campgrounds and managed hunting areas. This is the same thing that just happened with the big "Government Shuntdown." It was a scare tactic to get people to swallow a tax increase with out recalling those responsible. The same line of logic can apply to the State Government and the new taxes. If all these people are leaving our state to find employment, shouldn't the State Government decrease proportionately? This threat is being used because when talk of license increases came about previously Legislators were hit with a barrage of opposition from constituents. The hope is that if people are scared enough about losing programs near and dear to them, they won't oppose the increases this time. My thoughts are much like those already expressed. If hunting and fishing licensed increase, so should campground fees, there should be a fee for using the mountain bike and equestrian trails on State Rec. areas, daily use fees should increase for using the beach facilities at State Parks, etc. The costs should be spread evenly to all users of the resources, not just covered by Hunters and Fishermen/women.


----------



## DanP (Mar 1, 2005)

Camp ground fees have gone up over the last fee years. With the changes from general tax dollars to support falling on hunters and fishermen others that use the resourses should have to pay.

Mushroom pickers / hiking / bird watchers / ect. should all become a part of the program. 

I have written a few letters to Lansing and have yet to get a response.


----------



## Roosevelt (Sep 21, 2007)

Ya let's make everyone pay even more. That's the answer! LOL! 

Most of the state parks I inhabit are unmanned/ unmaintained as it is. Why would a park have to close because of layoffs?

If the government didn't waste our money we wouldn't be having these problems in the first place.

You can write the legislature, governor, senators or whoever but it really ain't gonna do no good. The licence fees and taxes are going up and we all have no choice in the matter. Voting and writing letters is just a pacifier for the powerless.

Buying into the propaganda put forth by our elected officials is a foolish way of lying to yourself. 

Oh no! the government's gonna close. ROTFLMAO!

Maybe if the government did close all those sucklers would die off and we all could get back to living life the way it was meant to be lived. Free and independant!


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

'It's gonna be bodies out the door'
DNR director says agency's funding woes critical
http://www.ludingtondailynews.com/news.php?story_id=37964&newsgroup_id=


----------



## MichiganFreedom (Oct 30, 2007)

Well! If this lady is to be believed, they'll be shutting down pretty much all the services of the DNR. Poachers will run amok, we'll be shooting ourselves, and we'll all be shut out of our own land because we all know that every time we go into the field or camp in a State Forest Campground we have and need a conservation officer looking over out shoulder to make sure we do everything right and don't destroy anything!

The number one issue this brings up, in my opinion, is how far off course we've let our government agencies get in having authority to shut off public land. This nonsense about shutting state forest campgrounds, besides being just wrong from a _Who owns this land?_ standpoint, is a *Big Brother Government Entity - We're Gonna Pressure You To Do What We Want* scare tactic that can easily be seen to be illogical. The campgrounds that were shut down already, I'm sure, were getting enough fees to support more than just those places, especially after the 150% fee increases that went into effect in May. That's right, the fees are now one and a half of what they were, and some fees doubled and they did away with Senior discounts. Check the DNR website: michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10365_10883-168427--,00.html

Here's the main message:
_*May 11, 2007

The fees for camping at state forest campgrounds will increase effective Monday, following action taken by Department of Natural Resources Director Rebecca Humphries at Thursday's meeting of the Michigan Natural Resources Commission.

For designated campground sites, the fees will go from $10 to $15 per campsite, per night. For equestrian, off-road vehicle and semi-modern campgrounds, the fee will increase from $10 to $20 per campsite, per night. Designated group campground rates will increase from $3 to $6 per person, per night. And for cabins at two state forest campgrounds - Presque Isle and Lime Island - the rates will be raised from $35 and $45 per night, respectively, to $65 per night. Senior rates at campgrounds and weekly rates at cabins will be eliminated. There will be no fee for dispersed camping on state forest land.*_

I laugh at the part where she says "There will be no fee for dispersed camping on state forest land". I don't believe they have the legal authority to implement such a fee for camping in the middle of the woods.

They claimed to have saved $75,000 by closing them. At $15 per day do you think 250 campsites aren't used in each of these 20 campgrounds per year? Even if one only had ten sites it would only take 25 days of the campgrounds' being full to make it's quota. There's no way the little work needed by these places isn't being paid for by the camping fees! Most of them are only visited once a day by a DNR worker, and they don't even need that. Also, $75,000 would probably only pay two conservation officers, at most. Were there only two officers taking care of all 20 campgrounds?

What does any of this have to do with pathways and cross country ski trails? They don't do anything to keep them open, so how will it save money to close them? Personally, if they close such things, I'll be frequenting the ones they close and we'll see what difference it makes.

"*Conservation officers will not be allowed to address general conservation law violations*"We don't need the DNR looking over our shoulders or wasting our money! 99.9% of us are honest sportsmen and sportswomen and any affect the DNR had on poaching is negligible. Let us hunt and fish in peace. Leave the campground gates open and let the users take care of them. Use our money for trash service and toilet emptying or implement a trash carry out policy. Post signs asking people to police each other, that will make the slobs too paranoid to damage the grounds, and implement a volunteer maintenance program for things like taking care of wooden posts, broken outhouses, and gravel drives. As far as officers being scarce for monitoring snowmobiles and such, *good!*. Some of those officers have been acting like Gistapo agents, making threats about "taking that snowmobile" just because someone accelerated past them, and they could never cover enough area to make a difference if they were needed, anyway.


----------



## foxriver6 (Oct 23, 2007)

"*Conservation officers will not be allowed to address general conservation law violations*"We don't need the DNR looking over our shoulders or wasting our money! 99.9% of us are honest sportsmen and sportswomen and any affect the DNR had on poaching is negligible. Let us hunt and fish in peace. Leave the campground gates open and let the users take care of them. Use our money for trash service and toilet emptying or implement a trash carry out policy. Post signs asking people to police each other, that will make the slobs too paranoid to damage the grounds, and implement a volunteer maintenance program for things like taking care of wooden posts, broken outhouses, and gravel drives. As far as officers being scarce for monitoring snowmobiles and such, *good!*. Some of those officers have been acting like Gistapo agents, making threats about "taking that snowmobile" just because someone accelerated past them, and they could never cover enough area to make a difference if they were needed, anyway.[/quote]

This is one of the most unintelligent thoughts I have seen on this board. No, 99.9% of sportsmen are not honest, at best that figure is 90-95%. 5-10% of "non-honest" people do significant damage to our natural resources. You mention posting signs asking people to police each other, obviously you have not observed the amount of litter on public lands that I have. 

On a second note, for those who do support the House bill that raises hunting/trapping license fees, are you aware that a significant obstacle to passage of the legislation is the NRA? I for one will not be renewing my NRA membership as a result. For those who support the legislation, in addition to contacting your legislators, please also contact the NRA and ask that they reconsider opposing the House bill.


----------



## MichiganFreedom (Oct 30, 2007)

I'm a proud member and they have my back!

What does litter in public lands have to do with the DNR? Have you ever seen a conservation officer watching when someone was littering? Has there ever been enough conservation officers to stop anyone from doing whatever they want in the woods? Sports people have been policing themselves all along, and less DNR officers available won't make any difference. The same issue exists with the campgrounds that are being closed. Anyone can go in there at any time to destroy anything they want. What stops them? Other people being around who don't want it destroyed and will report such destruction to the police.

I think you're giving too much credit to the NRA, as well. They are listened to to the extent that they represent their members in Michigan, who are numerous. My state representative asked us in his area what we wanted for this, and our answer was a resounding 'No New Fees'. I, for one, can help police my own land, and I view the closing of public areas by the DNR as an overreaching denial of my natural rights as a citizen. I urge all sports-people to contact their state representatives and ask them to move to limit the authority of the DNR to close public lands. Let's get them working for us again, instead of dictating their own direction!

If you think more should be charged for license fees you're free to buy an extra license for a type of game or fish that you don't use, or go stick a wad of cash in a campground pay tube. We're not stopping you, and we'll thank you for your donation.


----------



## aspray (Sep 25, 2007)

The budget will likely be voted on without the proposed cuts to game and fish programs, counting on a small increase in license fees (we have heard $5) to shore up the budget over the next two years. 

MUCC and a number of statewide conservation groups are committed to meeting with legislators over these two years to develop a long-term, hopefully broader-based and stable funding solution. As part of the discussion, we hope to also take into account key reforms at the DNR that may help to save money, while increasing the responsiveness and efficiency of the agency. 

I'd be happy to keep this group updated if there is interest.


----------



## UPJerry (Dec 14, 2006)

MichiganFreedom said:


> What does litter in public lands have to do with the DNR? Have you ever seen a conservation officer watching when someone was littering? Has there ever been enough conservation officers to stop anyone from doing whatever they want in the woods? Sports people have been policing themselves all along, and less DNR officers available won't make any difference. The same issue exists with the campgrounds that are being closed. Anyone can go in there at any time to destroy anything they want. What stops them? Other people being around who don't want it destroyed and will report such destruction to the police.


I haven't personally seen a CO watch someone littering, but I have read plenty of reports where someone was ticketed for it.

A certain baseline number of COs is necessary to at least provide the possibility that someone violating the law could be caught, to strike some fear in the hearts of poachers.

But I have agreed with your point of view from the beginning about the state forest campground issue. These campgrounds could easily be kept open, either at no cost or by continuing to charge the current fees, if maintenance and services were reduced. Campgrounds that have few visitors do not need to be visited daily by DNR workers. They don't need to have toilet paper brought to the outhouses, they don't need operational water sources (unless DEQ/health dept. regulations require it), and they don't need trash pickup. How do I know this? Because some campgrounds are run in this manner in the Ottawa National Forest, and there are no problems that I can see.

I personally do see Ms. Humphries' point in making these announcements, and I support the license fee increases. But at the same time, the DNR's continuing fear mongering as to closing state forest campgrounds (and other unstaffed amenities such as trails) takes away a great deal of the agency's credibility in my eyes.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Legislature slow to act on DNR funding crisis

http://www.mlive.com/outdoors/grpress/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1194009914195430.xml&coll=6

11/02/07 By Howard Meyerson The Grand Rapids Press [email protected]

For 1.2 million anglers in the state, 800,000 hunters and millions of state park and state forest users, these are truly troubling times. On matters of natural resource management, the Michigan legislature seems to have lost its bearings. 

Rather than an august body that articulates its understanding and support for natural resource stewardship and its value to citizens and the economy, it is mired in partisan muscle flexing with no clear vision. 

In part, the problem lies with hiring a bunch of rookies. Their objectives are short term. They have no sense of Michigan's conservation history. They barely grasp that Michigan's landscape and waterscape make the state unique and special.

But what's worse is that senior leadership appears willing to sacrifice Michigan's conservation heritage. Nothing illustrates that more clearly than the legislature's foot-dragging on the DNR license fee package. 

The bills have been sitting since March. But legislators seem unable to muster the courage to do what is right. 

As a result, the DNR is moving ahead with deep cuts to its programs. Its conservation officers, managed waterfowl areas, creel surveys, hiking trails, campgrounds, wildlife research programs and more are all on the chopping block. 

"They (legislative leadership) said they have no interest in passing fee increases after passing tax increases," said Mary Detloff the spokesperson for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. "And the NRA is lobbying hard not to pass the fee increase." 

That's great. So the Michigan legislature is now kow-towing to the National Rifle Association. 

Makes you wonder who those legislators work for when Michigan's own hunting and angling community, represented through Michigan United Conservation Clubs, supports the fees. 

It is pathetic that the Michigan legislature would listen to the NRA malarkey at all. The decision to raise fees wasn't made in a snap. The legislature has known about the problem for quite awhile.

License fees were last increased in 1996. Meanwhile the cost to do business has steadily increased. The DNR was forced increasingly to rely on user fees under the Engler administration as general fund money steadily declined. Those decisions have the legislature's signature all over them. 

The recommendation for an increase came from a special DNR task force in 2006, convened to study the problem after the DNR began talking about the staggering cuts that would be needed. 

The legislature, in its infinite wisdom, announced this week that it will study the problem of long-term funding for the DNR until Jan. 15. That translates to 12 actual working days between now and then, according to Detloff.

Meanwhile, the DNR, having warned of this for over a year, now must cut its programs deeply. It is not allowed to operate with a budget deficit. 

The state budget approved this week leaves the DNR with a number of holes to fill by cutting. That includes a $2.5 million in game and fish fund programs and a million dollar cut in general fund appropriations. 

The legislature tied its hands by prohibiting the DNR from closing the two fish hatcheries, proposed by DNR director Becky Humphries. 

"We now have to find 900,000 other dollars to cut since they said no to hatcheries," Detloff said. "When we sent our list of cuts to them Monday they didn't like any of the cuts. But they don't want to vote on the fee increase. It's like a dog chasing its tail. 

"The director is moving forward with her list of cuts other than the hatcheries. But we have cut more than $20 million since 2005 and there is nothing left but bleeders," Detloff said. 

The $2.5 million fish and game fund deficit will bloom to $13 million in 2009 if nothing is done, according to DNR projections. Meanwhile, 14 conservation officers are expected to go first, as early as January 

The $1 million dollar general fund cut will impact state forest recreation programs and wildlife disease monitoring. 

"We won't be maintaining any state forest trails this winter and will be forced to close more state forest campgrounds," Detloff said. 

The DNR also faces another funding crises. As many as 37 state parks could be closed next year if nothing is done solve the agency's funding issues. The state park fund, which is stable this fiscal year, will face a $5.4 million deficit next year. 

The state park problem will not be solved by raising license fees. All of its money comes from state park users who pay entry and camping fees. But it is a problem that directly impacts this state's natural land legacy. 

It further illustrates the need for a more comprehensive approach to conservation funding in Michigan beyond user fees. That problem needs to be addressed by an attentive legislature working in cooperation with the DNR rather than against it. It requires a legislature that is concerned about Michigan's conservation legacy and heritage. 

A legislature that isn't concerned is one that is not doing its job.


----------



## Roosevelt (Sep 21, 2007)

Only 12 working days between now and Jan. 15? That's 2 1/2 months! Maybe that's the real problem. Not the NRA. Time to cut the fat eh?

If state lands close and licence fees go sky hi the gun ownership and everything that goes along with it will go down in the long term. People are not going to buy guns and ammo if it's too expensive to buy a license. People sure ain't gonna do it if there's no public places to hunt. New people will not bother getting into it because it's getting too technical, expensive and becoming too hard to find a legal place to shoot or hunt. Not to mention fish!

I believe the NRA, if they are indeed the reason for these delays, is acting accordingly. I don't understand how you have determined it is a right vs. left political struggle.

Do you believe that the NRA is somehow sabotaging Granholm or the democratic party by preventing, according to you, the fee increases?

Michigan is a key area for anti hunter's to try and get a foothold. If they can do it here they will have a much easier time doing it elsewhere.

There are alot of people in Michigan that haven't seen an inflationary increase in their paychecks in the last eleven years either. Most likely a decrease. We're still making due.

Charging shroomers and birdwatchers is not the answer. What cost is incurred by the state for their participation in the outdoors? None! As far as I know the DNR hasn't started a mushroom restocking program yet. I do agree that mountain bikers should have to pay a separate fee because of trail maintanence, parking and such. It's only fair. I really don't know how much more say they could have. They too have a fairly strong lobby group.

Maybe an increase in the specialty areas of hunting and fishing would be appropriate. Elk, Turkey, Salmon, steelhead. I just can't see making a small game hunter or bluegill fisher pay for something he or she doesn't get a benefit from.

If fees need to be raised it should be in the areas where the money is being spent. 

More money should come from general taxes in the state to pay for outddor stuff not just from sportsmen and women. Everyone in this state benefits from our great outdoors.

As I said before it's unfortunate that our state as a whole is so poorly managed. If we had a leaner more efficient system in place these problems would have most likely never arose.

I don't understand how the DNR or government expects us to pay newer, higher taxes and fees when we can't even find a job. Or if we do the job pays less than half of what we used to get.

Our entire state, country and society as a whole is teatering on the verge of a major breakdown. History truly does repeat itself. All we have to do is sit back and watch. Frivolous issues like "DNR fee increases" keep us from seeing, accepting or addressing the real issues at hand. It keeps our simple minds busy so we don't dwell too much on the real problems facing our society. Problems without answers. Problems we all know are there but we have no solution to.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

The NRA violators are celebrating their victory to cut 34 CO positions!


----------



## steveh27 (Oct 23, 2000)

Tom,
Your last post was just too extreme & not needed. More intelligent discussion & debate are needed, not ranting & raving. And I am not a member of NRA as I think they're a bit too extreme.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

The NRA violators are celebrating their victory to cut 34 CO positions!


----------



## NEMichsportsman (Jul 3, 2001)

The legislature has yet again thrown the sportsman of MI under the bus. 

In the long term our "Service industrialized" state will suffer because nobody will be traveling to our state to hunt, fish, or camp. This will result in thousands of layoffs from the fast food and doughnut industries. And we thought the minimum wage jobs were secure:lol:

I guess I am tired of ranting, I have called anybody that I thought would listen in the legislature. Not much else to be done at this point. 

The state park issue might be the one thing that will prompt the legislators to act...the politically correct- bird, mushroom, and butterfly crowd might hold enough political clout. With the prop 3 defeat last year the elected officials aren't real fearful of sportsmen as a voting block.

I keep trying to find a silver lining....Does anybody know if we can hunt in the 37 state parks that will be closed???


----------

