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.
