How Will Gov Walker's Proposals Effect Sportsman

[wiscwhip]

12/14- Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is today reporting that the state has spent $258,968 on costs related to a proposal from Gogebic Taconite, (GTac), but will not charge the firm for the expenses, which include gathering background data, meeting with county and federal agencies, alerting the public to information about the proposal, and developing rules and policies related to mining. The costs associated with the mining proposal, which are expected to rise significantly, were covered in part by revenue from hunting and fishing licenses.

If we do not change course, expect more of this.

And when everyone quits hunting and fishing because of this BS, the money will come directly out of taxpayers pockets to fund big corporate interests. Oh wait, if Scooter gets his way there will be an open invitation and no studies or reports will be needed or filed. C'mon in boys, 'n start blastin' 'n diggin'!

 

[dipper]

Who cares about the deer, it's our air, water and soil that U can't trust these crooks as far as U can throw them. People have such horrible memories of what pollution really is and there is still Mercury in lakes, Irresponsible water use, soil contamination. Criticial quality of life issues shouldn't be in the direct hands of any politicians. I don't care if it's left or right, neither is a responsible.

 

[dipper]

Actually, they did, sort of. Dan came out strongly against the proposal to bring in Kroll, his report and the his 1st gutting of the WI DNR. He does a blog on their web site. I'm sure it can still be found there.

Here's what I didn't know until I just spoke to him moments ago. Those blogs ended up being used by Dems to show how "Walker wasn't for sportsman after all" and showed up on some liberal web sites, stating that the editor of D&DH is anti-Walker. Truth be told, Dan is FAR more conservative than liberal. Unfortunately, in today's politically toxic age, if you don't blindly support everything conservatives do (assuming that's "your" political leaning), you're labeled a traitor, RHINO or worse. The system has been rigged so that the days of being able to question anything "your" party does makes you deserving of a lynching, even something as simple as what shawn suggests in post #111.

After all the flack he got from those blog posts, Dan isn't sure how he could avoid being used by the libs and not making D&DH seem like it is anti-conservative, which it is not. Heck, the entire industry as a whole leans right, as well as the majority of D&DH readers.

To me, this sums up the biggest problem with politics today, and it's us. One can't even report on how they feel a program or actions will impact the state without being disdained by some of the supporters of that party. People only want Fox News or MSNBC to tell them what to believe. Everyone else is biassed or has some hidden agenda, unless they tell you exactly the same as which ever of those 2 propaganda machines one watches.

Your boss must not have seen it coming, it's never a good idea to kick a hornets nest. In this day in age that's the kind of exposure that gets u fired.....

 

[huthut]

Sure they have recourse, the governor gets to nominate them and they are approved or not by the Senate and can be replaced after their term.

6 years is along time.

No one said that the freeze on additional land purchases under Knowles-Nelson should not be curbed, that is a good and a very easily obtainable goal. Those incoming funds should be used to pay down that debt until it is negligible, then those funds should only be used to make purchases that can be bought outright or paid off within a 3 to 5 year span and with only money from the stewardship fund. Easy. Removal of NRB oversight is irresponsible and a complete and utter power grab for the party in control so they can do as they wish when it comes to regulation of the resources of this state. What gives you the idea that SAK is a product of the NRB? Sure, they allow it to continue to be used, but it has been stated in many independent studies and reports that it is the best thing going. And until someone, anyone, comes up with something better, with a proven track record of results that surpasses the data produced by SAK, then it should remain an integral part of deer management in WI. Not to mention that your DNR/NRB not doing anything about the deer situation is totally unfounded. We are in year 1 of a whole new rule system and management strategy dictated by the DTR report, the NRB is poised to vote on the permanent changes very soon. They are not "rubber stamping" the DNR's recommendations as you incorrectly pointed out, they have removed much verbiage that the DNR wanted to put into that rules package. So yeah, lets cut the throat of the one entity that can help move management forward in a responsible manner and is trying to do that right now, as we speak, and turn it over to puppet Cathy Stepp or maybe you propose we just bypass that as well and just turn control directly over to puppetmaster Scooter? Do you happen to own a mining company perchance? Because those and others like them are the only ones I see as thinking this is a good idea for the long term.

Emotions running wild again and falling to assigning unflattering names to those you obviously do not agree with. Everyone is a puppet that doesn't your standards? Just because there is an honest differing view this shouldn't upset you. I suggest you fully review the statistics of the SAK and then respond back on how great it is. SAK maybe decent compared to some deer estimate formulas used, however it is far from a gold standard that you appear to hold it to. The std dev and variability in the estimates given from SAK are unacceptable to be used as it has been. Hunter's input should have had a much bigger impact on deer management over the last 15-20 years, however no one in the DNR or NRB stepped up to push the appropriate adjustments to the utilization of the SAK formula. It definitely should be used, but with a grain of salt. Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics. Statistical estimates always need common sense input particularly when the estimates are as variable as the ones the are spit out of the SAK. NRB is not a bad thing -- I just struggle as to why they have not been stronger advocates for the citizens. You reference the DTR actions why did it take Walker bring in an outside expert to push deer management changes? From my view point I have been hoping for many years that NRB fight the DNR on deer management in particular. There are many ties between the DNR and NRB board members, not that this is a problem in its own right but they certainly run in the same circles. NRB is close to a rubber stamp for the DNR, you and I can agree to disagree on this. You may not understand this but I actually agree with the concept of the NRB - just a bit disappointed in the true independence of them. With the DNR steering the the deer populations to the low levels now seen in much of Wisconsin-the NRB was not only on the ship they where the co-pilots. I find this is totally unacceptable and I can not give the NRB a free pass as you apparently can.


Lots of good people in our DNR but the biggest problem is the people we attract to the management positions. How many of the really good DNR employees in tune with rural Wisconsin values want to live in Madison. The best thing for those of us that want a more responsive DNR is to have the whole DNR section of Gov't to move north of HWY 29. Guaranteed we would have a lot more managers in tune with the outdoors people of Wisconsin and thus a more responsive DNR.

 

[Terrific_tom]

Huthut, you do realize that 5 of the 7 NRB members as of this date were appointed by Governor Walker. It was also the NRB that initiated and authorized the audit of SAK in 2006 before Governor Walker was in the picture. This is just one instance where the NRB did not rubber stamp what the DNR was saying, there are many more. If the proposal goes thru to make the NRB advisory only it will completely neuter the Conservation Congress also where many new rule changes start. The Conservation Congress is the common person's voice in Natural Resource matters. I will agree that the DNR should have done more with the declining deer numbers, but was this the NRB's fault or the DNR boss which is an appointed position by the Governor that should be monitoring his or her employees. Making sure that adjustments were made to the SAK estimates should be the DNR Secretary responsibility.

 

[wiscwhip]

Emotions, OK Dr. Phil?:rolleyes: It has nothing to do with emotions, but if that is where you want to go then you go ahead and hide behind your emotions. What makes you think I am upset at all? Because I think we have an appointed DNR Secretary that is not qualified for the job she was chosen to do and I point out the fact that she was put in that position because she will tow the party line? And yes, you are correct, Cathy Stepp does not fit my standards as a Secretary of the DNR and I am in the vast majority on this fact. Please prove to me that she isn't a puppet appointee, show me some evidence that she deserves that position from a credentials standpoint, there are many others that are far more qualified to be the head of our DNR. Check out some press releases from the time of her appointment. Walker himself admitted she got the position because she was business oriented, I believe his exact words were that he wanted a "chamber of commerce" type in that position. That is not what we need heading our DNR, ever, and now the power grab is the coup de grace to public input to your management. You're right, hunters should have a bigger voice in the goal setting process, and now they have been given it, all within the confines of the system that you would see dismantled. Yes, it took longer than you, me, and most others would have liked, but that is in the past. The current system must be given a chance to see if it can make the differences that many think it will. And at this point it appears that the NRB is at least trying to distance itself from the DNR, at least with the changes to the DNR proposals so far. You claim that you want the voice of the citizens to be heard, do you really think that once Walker(or any other politician for that matter) has the power to do what he likes without a watchdog that he will hear a word you're saying? He hears 2 things, $$$ and others who can advance his political career. Keep in mind that some of those management positions you speak of are filled by appointment, so we don't "attract" them, they are forced upon us and this will get worse as more power is taken by the appointer. I do not agree with the fact that the proposed plan to gut the NRB will give absolute power to the politicians, if you cannot see that fact then I fear you are a lost cause and there is nothing more anyone can do to make you come around. I am not the only one in this thread that has pointed it out numerous times, whether you hate the NRB or not, it is bad business to do away with what their group is entrusted to do.

 

[dipper]

I think he's a walker groupie through and through. Walkers a pos.

 

[Tree Spud]

You guys are funny ... blame the governor, but don't give him absolute control .... criticize the legeslatire, but restrict them from acting ...

Protect the Govt employees who are beyond accountability .... all these great scietists who have been guiding policy for 25 years ...

Walker didn't create this mess ... Public employees did ... you can't hold the CEO (Walker) accountable if he can't eliminate the deadwood...

Wis Public Govt is a "service organization" based on "employees" responding to customer needs ... they are failing ....

 

[shawnv]

You guys are funny ... blame the governor, but don't give him absolute control .... criticize the legeslatire, but restrict them from acting ...

Protect the Govt employees who are beyond accountability .... all these great scietists who have been guiding policy for 25 years ...

Walker didn't create this mess ... Public employees did ... you can't hold the CEO (Walker) accountable if he can't eliminate the deadwood...

Wis Public Govt is a "service organization" based on "employees" responding to customer needs ... they are failing ....

I'm not sure what this has to do with us wanting to keep the NRB as a check and balance between the DNR (public employees) and whomever is in the Governor's office and the State Legislature. Maybe I missed something in a past reply but where did that came up about protecting govt employees??? What has been messed up for 25 years straight, i'm not sure I follow so maybe you can detail what you mean with some specific examples? I may not agree with the DNR all the time but by no means do I consider them an outright failure nor do I want them stripped down to nothing. Cleaning house for the sake of cleaning house is usually never a good idea. I'm open to hearing your side though if you can present a good case so please explain how this will actually improve our Natural Resources in Wisconsin. If you chose not to do that, can you list what you want to see happen related to hunting and fishing and our natural resources that hasn't happened because of the DNR (and NRB) "failure" that will now be "fixed" with no NRB or Conservation Congress authority. Thanks!

 

[Tree Spud]

I'm not sure what this has to do with us wanting to keep the NRB as a check and balance between the DNR (public employees) and whomever is in the Governor's office and the State Legislature. Maybe I missed something in a past reply but where did that came up about protecting govt employees??? What has been messed up for 25 years straight, i'm not sure I follow so maybe you can detail what you mean with some specific examples? I may not agree with the DNR all the time but by no means do I consider them an outright failure nor do I want them stripped down to nothing. Cleaning house for the sake of cleaning house is usually never a good idea. I'm open to hearing your side though if you can present a good case so please explain how this will actually improve our Natural Resources in Wisconsin. If you chose not to do that, can you list what you want to see happen related to hunting and fishing and our natural resources that hasn't happened because of the DNR (and NRB) "failure" that will now be "fixed" with no NRB or Conservation Congress authority. Thanks!

Examples ... deer count, bear count, wolf count ... mis-handling of EAB, CWD, etc ...

Yes, the NRB probably has some value, given the Govt bureaucracy; however, they are just a bandaid on the wound. Why do we need to keep creating NRB, CC, and other 3rd party agencies to deal with DNR? The DNR has done a great job of insulating themselves from the tax payers they serve.

If the Wis DNR was a business, and there were other business offering the same product, would you keep buying their product?

 

[wiscwhip]

Examples ... deer count, bear count, wolf count(all highly subjective estimates that can be misinterpreted, look at other states like MN, PA, IL) ... mis-handling of EAB(yes, it sucked), CWD(another highly subjective item and removing the science is definitely not going to help and WI is at the forefront of CWD research), etc ...

Yes, the NRB probably has some value, given the Govt bureaucracy(you think???); however, they are just a bandaid on the wound(truly, they are the sutures that keep the Governor and Legislature from allowing big businesses to bleed the states resources dry). Why do we need to keep creating NRB(we do not "keep" creating anything, the NRB has been around in one form or another since 1867, hardly a newly created entity), CC(created in 1934, again, hardly a new thing), and other 3rd party agencies(what other agencies? Are you speaking about the DTR audit crew, a 1 time short term deal?) to deal with DNR? The DNR has done a great job of insulating themselves from the tax payers they serve.(how so, the DNR is there to conserve and preserve our natural resources for all future generations of Wisconsinites, not to serve your agenda because you think things should be a certain way right now, you make it sound like you feel that barstool management of Wisconsin's resources should trump science and common sense management practices. Just because Joe Barstool Taxpayer decides that he should be allowed to have unlimited lines in the water for trolling muskies doesn't mean it should be made a law?)

If the Wis DNR was a business, and there were other business offering the same product, would you keep buying their product? (Yes, when those other "businesses" do not produce any better product than what I am getting now. Please name another Conservation Department that deals with as many issues as WI that is head and shoulders above that of Wisconsin)

One other thing that you forget to mention, many of these "public employees" that you are blaming and are really in direct control of policy are direct appointees of the Governor, namely the NRB and the DNR Secretary.

 

[shawnv]

Not everything that is profitable is of social value and not everything of social value is profitable. The proper role of government is the latter. We can agree to disagree there but then if you are arguing for a business model for government then you must be ready to shut down all government functions that do not earn a profit, regardless of their contribution to our well being.

No public forests, no public boat landings, no CRP programs, no MFL tax breaks, no DNR tree orders and the list can go on and on. That's not to say improvements cannot be made but they does not mean they should be ran as a business because that is not their function.

 

[Tree Spud]

“Examples ... deer count, bear count, wolf count(all highly subjective estimates that can be misinterpreted, look at other states like N, PA, IL) ... mis-handling of EAB(yes, it sucked), CWD(another highly subjective item and removing the science is definitely not going to help and WI is at the forefront of CWD research), etc ...

Yes, the NRB probably has some value, given the Govt bureaucracy(you think???); however, they are just a bandaid on the wound(truly, they are the sutures that keep the Governor and Legislature from allowing big businesses to bleed the states resources dry). Why do we need to keep creating NRB(we do not "keep" creating anything, the NRB has been around in one form or another since 1867, hardly a newly created entity), CC(created in 1934, again, hardly a new thing), and other 3rd party agencies(what other agencies? Are you speaking about the DTR audit crew, a 1 time short term deal?) to deal with DNR? The DNR has done a great job of insulating themselves from the tax payers they serve.(how so, the DNR is there to conserve and preserve our natural resources for all future generations of Wisconsinites, not to serve your agenda because you think things should be a certain way right now, you make it sound like you feel that barstool management of Wisconsin's resources should trump science and common sense management practices. Just because Joe Barstool Taxpayer decides that he should be allowed to have unlimited lines in the water for trolling muskies doesn't mean it should be made a law?)

If the Wis DNR was a business, and there were other business offering the same product, would you keep buying their product? (Yes, when those other "businesses" do not produce any better product than what I am getting now. Please name another Conservation Department that deals with as many issues as WI that is head and shoulders above that of Wisconsin)

One other thing that you forget to mention, many of these "public employees" that you are blaming and are really in direct control of policy are direct appointees of the Governor, namely the NRB and the DNR Secretary.

Yes, got it, Wis DNR .... unassailable defender of truth & justice !!!!

No one but the anointed DNR gods of science should have an opinion ... :rolleyes:

 

[wiscwhip]

Really Tree? Extremism gets you know where. You have been around long enough to know that I am one of the quickest and harshest detractors of the WI DNR on random day to day issues. That doesn't mean, by any stretch of the imagination, that I think they should be gutted, de-nutted, and hung out to dry. They have a day to day job to do, but they also have long term resource conservation and protection to consider. Everyone should have and does have opinions, but when they contradict the best science available, they should be relegated to just that, opinions, not signed into law just because it suits a special interest and the DNR is powerless to stop it. Sound natural resource management is scientific, knee jerk reaction and maximum profitability natural resource management are not.

I fear that you will get your way and the DNR, NRB, and CC will be made powerless in the end, as the Legislature is most likely going to see this move forward. Just be sure and let us all know what crow tastes like a few years down the road when something else doesn't go your way within the new power structure. And please let us know how you plan to do anything about it at that time.

 

[dipper]

Hey guys since we are talking profits, let's go back to the good days before the incompetent dnr started and there was no regulation. No seasons, no bag limits and we should be able to sell venison! We've got the demand, with the low fat health movement. Hell venison is $35 a plate at a fancy restaurant. There is a market demand, it's capitalism. I own the land, I feed the deer, I should be able to profit!
While we are at it lets make all government services run like well oiled money makers. Let's have our cops start writing tickets to finally justify their existence. They need to be held responsible for my tax money. If your house is on fire, have a private contractor do it for cheaper price. I bet they would do a lot better job saving your entrapped children! There's no need for the government to be responsible for immunizations. Why should I have to prevent hepatitis? I've never had it! Why should I pay for Roads I never travel, plow them, maintain them.
My tax money needs to go to protect the Economy! We need to spend billions to save the failing banks, and the auto industry. We need to pay for the Milwaukee Bucks new $250 million stadium! What would Milwaukee be without them? That's efficient tax payer $.
Our tax money has to go to companies who supply us all our high paying jobs with great benefits like health care. This is America don't trust the government, trust the economy! It's the only thing that's honest and efficient. The government and mostly it's employees are the enemy!

 

[shawnv]

While this debate is good, we're not going to change anyone's mind of how things should be unless they are on the fence about it. Unfortunately for most it takes life experiences where it kicks your tail to change.

 

[EOB]

These types of issues are important to us, but I don't think enough of the Wisconsin sportsmen are engaged enough in these issues to change an election or think it is major enough to vote for a candidate with a different ideology. For myself I do not think this NRB move is a good idea, but would I actually vote for a Liberal because of it? Mmmm.....

 

[Tree Spud]

How did you guys get on the issue of profit?

No one ever said the Gov't or DNR had to be profitable. What they are is an over funded, over staffed monopoly with little reason to be responsive to those that are impacted by their decisions. And yes, some of those people are tax payers and private business'. The DNR has plenty of left wing kooks who would love to see hunting, fishing, & trapping eliminated. Many of them are all for more wolves being the natural predator of deer than allowing man to hunt deer.

If govt programs like CRP are so important to protecting wildlife. Then why is the same govt artificially subsidizing the corn growing industry, propping up grain based fuel such as ethanol, incentivizing farmers to tear out fence rows, eliminating riparian buffers, and pine tree & hardwood lots?

If the DNR is so trustworthy in their mission and agenda, they why do we need the NRB & CC?

I understand the importance of protecting natural resources, but I would never put absolute faith in the DNR. If the NRB goes away, better have a back up plan. Walker and the legislature may be the only pathway to controlling and reigning in the DNR.

 

[Steve Bartylla]

These types of issues are important to us, but I don't think enough of the Wisconsin sportsmen are engaged enough in these issues to change an election or think it is major enough to vote for a candidate with a different ideology.

I agree. For as bad of a move as I believe this is, I think it's actually a safe bet to say it will help Walker more than hurt him in future elections. In fact, I'd be shocked if he doesn't hold this up as "cutting Gov red tape" and get cheers from the majority of conservative outdoors men and women. Frankly, few even realize the Gov appoints the DNR head and way fewer still have any clue that the NRB is also appointed, are unpaid or have any clue what they do. Now, if one had a half hour to explain all of this and what the future implications of neutering the NRB may very likely be, I suspect that many of those that cheered the move at a stump speech would change their minds, but that's not today's reality.

Today's reality is that is 20 second sound bites that really say nothing of substance at all is what drives most opinions. The desire to spend 30 mins actually learning about a subject and forming your own opinion is lost on the overwhelming majority....They merely want MSNBC and Fox News to tell them what to think in neat little sound bites, accuracy be damned.

 

[wiscwhip]

Walker and the legislature may be the only pathway to controlling and reigning in the DNR.

Or more likely, Walker and the Legislature might run roughshod over the DNR and any recommendations they make to better service the big businesses they have in their back pockets.