Caledonia Argus

From fins to fur, MN lawmakers and DNR get an earful

Posted: 1/13/04

By Shannon McKinney
Argus News Reporter

Legislators and DNR officials heard a lot of constructive criticism at a legislative hearing in Caledonia last week.

About 150 people attended the meeting at the Four Seasons Community Center, Thursday, Jan. 8, which was hosted by the Bluffland Whitetails Association (BWA).

Audience members had many questions for DNR Commissioner Gene Merriam, and House Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee Chairs, Tom Hackbarth and Dennis Ozment. Several other DNR personnel also answered questions.

The issues included the shortened buck season; new proposed restrictions on keeping trout; a proposed bear hunting season with hounds; land access and the shift in land ownership patterns; the effect of the Wetland law on landowners; and the CREP program.

Trout fishing

Several people questioned the newest proposed regulation on trout fishing, which is aimed at producing bigger, trophy trout. Eighteen percent of streams in southeastern Minnesota may have restrictions that would require releasing the fish so that they can mature.

Ron Payer, DNR Director of Fisheries, said the new proposal is designed to make fishing fun for everyone and produce big and small fish.

Merriam added that this proposal is still at conversation stage and that it was sent out to get public comment.

Francis Bruening of Freeburg asked if theyíve ever told a child to throw a good sized trout back into the stream. ìPlease donít change that,î he said.

Tom Sawle of Caledonia agreed. ìIf he [his grandchild] has to throw fish back on my land, thatís not American!î

Loren Lapham of Caledonia noted, ìThe feedback locally is that people donít care for them [the proposed regulations].î

Tom Dornack of Trouts Unlimited said the trout fishing plan was designed to provide something for everyone. ìMy own kids, theyíve learned conservation. Thereís nothing wrong with teaching kids that at a really young age,î he said.

Bear hunting with hounds

Bruce Brown of Houston, director of the Minnesota Trail Hunting Association, questioned the status of a bill for opening a season for bear hunting with hounds. ìOur [bear license] numbers are down with applications and it could add a lot of revenue for the DNR.î

Hackbarth said it was part of the general fish and wildlife bill that passed committee and house, in the last legislative session, but did not pass the senate. ìThe senate is a problem,î he said.

Merriam added that the legislation has the support of the DNR, but it is not without controversy.

Phil Costigan of Caledonia queried if there were any plans to split the waterfowl season into the north and south.

Ed Boggess, DNR Wildlife Resource Manager, said that has not happened

yet. ìThere has been the concern of the movement of hunters from north to south with double openers,î he said.

Mike Rain of Minnesota City said that changes in the shining law helped a little but did not go far enough. ìItís still a problem especially in this part of the state. I donít know the perfect solution. We need something to curtail recreational shiningî he said.

Light should be used for hunting predators at night. Rain pointed out that more Eastern states allow for the use of lights for predators. ìThis is the best time of the year to hunt coyotes and thereís no snow on the ground.

Merriam responded, ìYouíre right it will take legislation to change that. Right now we can only use lights for taking raccoons.î

Land access, ownership

Clint Miller of Pine Island said that heís noticed there has been a general shift in land ownership patterns where traditional family farms are being replaced with people buying land for hunting purposes. ìIs the DNR looking to help people keep their land or partner with other organizations that could help?î

Merriam said the change in the pattern of ownership is of great concern to the DNR. ìThe best shot for hunting is access and opportunity. In other states, the use of fees for private land is more prominent and there is less public land. The question is, ëHow do we get the biggest bang for our buck?í Do we put more money into land acquisition or buying hunting rights?íî

Bill Lewison received applause when he cautioned that if hunting access worsens, people wonít hunt, and if fishing rights are taken away, people wonít buy fishing licenses. ìYou need to work something out with everybody. Thatís what we elected you for,î he said.

Greg Davids, State Representative from District 31B, said, ìOwning land has itís privileges if you treat them fairly. I own land. I donít think weíre quite there yet.î

Ozment said that these problems are very complex. ìYour legislators are like the people next door. Nobody gives you a shot of wisdom because you got elected. Weíre all in this together. We need your assistance on issues,î he said.

Buck season questioned

An audience member from Houston questioned if there was a biological reason for continuing the 3A buck season when this is an area with an overcrowded deer population.

Boggess of the DNR cited a long tradition and the desire of the community to keep the buck season as a reason for keeping the buck season.

Also, in an attempt to control the overpopulation, they have allowed some doe permits to be used during the 3A season. ìItís no longer bucks only. But there will be more permits over time. Weíre trying to move slowly to evaluate as we go along. Weíre never going to make it an antlerless season,î said Boggess.

The audience member responded, ìIt seems to me that when you put a limit on antlerless deer, it creates more overcrowding. All across the country, state after state is getting rid of their buck season.î

Boggess responded, ìThereís not a biological reason to have a bucks season. Weíre trying to balance biological and social.î

Mike Staggemeyer of Caledonia commented that he would like to see venison donated to people who could use the meat.

Shortend buck season opposed

He also asked if the five day season could be split up into two weekends to allow for more hunting.

The buck season this year was shortened from nine days to seven days with one less weekend in an effort to preserve the buck population and stem the doe population.

Merriam noted that the law was just passed last year and it will be modified but not rescinded. ìWe are trying to look at a comprehensive policy to try to control the transfer of CWD. We are going to propose to the legislature to exempt carcasses that are going directly to license processing centers.î

Lou Cornicelli, DNR Big game/Season Program Coordinator, said the buck season was shortened to try to reduce the harvest of bucks. ìI donít see us going back to a second weekend anytime soon,î he said.

Carol Sweeney of Brownsville said that the shortened season disappointed her son, and she was saddened to hear that a second weekend would not be added anytime soon.

CREP encouraged

Broberg encouraged the use of the CREP (Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program) as an opportunity for preservation of land especially in the Root River basin. He said, ìWe have heard that by having permanent easements that it diminishes the the value of the land, but that is a hollow comment.î

A landowner benefits from CREP by first being enrolled in the CRP(Conservation Reserve Program), which is funded by federal dollars and pays landowners to keep erodable farmland idle. Landowners can go one step further with CREP, which shares up to 70 percent of the cost of enhancing the land by planting a grass cover, or restoring a drained wetland.

Broberg also said that currently only two percent of license dollars go toward the fisheries. ìWe need a better mechanism to assure funding.î

He also proposed the idea of setting the license fees in accordance with inflation. He thinks a 25 cent increase for every year allows for more flexibility. The process of not raising license fees every several years forces the DNR to save money for the shortfall for when the license fees donít cover the expenses.

Wetland Act questioned

Broberg, who also works as a professional geologist, said the Wetland Act needs to be looked at. He said, ìIn Minnesota, if you own wetlands, nothing good can happen to you. You have a law that nitpicks people to death, a law that turns people away from protecting the land. The worse thing that can happen in a property transaction is for someone to tell you that you own a wetland. It goes back to the legislative intent is not being followed by the law.î

In a later conversation with The Argus, Merriam said that the Wetland Act has been positive for the environment, but that more needs to be done to keep the wetlands protected. He said this is the first time that he has heard of Brobergís type of complaints about the Wetland Act causing headaches for people who own wetland. Merriam said they are currently in the process of trying to get a better understanding of the current wetland situation in Minnesota and what can be done about it.

An audience member requested that rules for future deer seasons be made more clear.

Other issues

ï One audience member, who said he was a taxidermist, questioned if there were any plans to rescind the law that limits transportation of deer carcasses across the state border. He said it cost him $13,000 in business last year. He said, ìI think that chronic wasting disease is bull.î

ï Joe Hammell of Caledonia asked that DNR and legislators consider how it can educate the Hmong population on abiding ëno trespassingí signs and other hunting laws. He said the Hmong hunts on a regular basis, and in the past few years when they hunt on state land they just keep going. ìA great number of them will shoot just about anything,î he said.

Hammell said the U.S. Immigration says 40,000 more Hmong will come to the U.S. and most will live in the St. Paul area. ìWe need to recruit someone to do education,î he said.

ï Jeff Broberg, president of the Trout Association, asked that the line be held on the right to carry (a concealed firearm) legislation that was recently passed. In the past, county sheriffís had discretion on who was issued a license to carry concealed weapons. Now, those who meet the requirements of the law can carry a concealed weapon.

Hackbarth said, ìThe feeling is to not address that issue and not go there and jeopardize what was accomplished.î

Top of Page