What you think about the MN DNR department of fish and game

[IcEaHoLiC]

Hi all, I am doing a project for one of my classes about the MN DNR (cuz i thought every other topic was boring, and why not teach people about this one!)and concentrating on Fish and Game aspects of it. I need some views from different people on what they have to say about the DNR. I am basically curious to see why you think about the DNR, the conservation efforts to protect fisheries, etc. Basically anything, and I plan on using some of these views in my project, so let me know if you don't want your view to be heard. Thank You all for the help!!!!

Here are a few things i am curious about.....to be more specific (thanks for pointing that it was too broad out, i think i narrowed it down)

1. What do you think that it would be like without slot limits/selective harvest?

2. What would our world of fishing be like without anyone enforcing the rules?

3. Stories about poachers, etc. that you have heard.

4. Anything else you would like to say about the DNR.....good or bad

[luckey]

ice,,

I'm sure people are willing to help out but you must be more specific. Ask a few questions and/or make some statements. Asking what we think about the DNR is just to broad of a subject.

For example, Do you think they have too much authority?

"Do you feel there are sufficient number of field officers to be effective? Does the DNR have enough visisblity?"

Or, perhaps "I think the DNR is under funded, do you agree"

Note: I'm not expressing my opinions here, just suggesting some questions.

Good Luck.

[NEANGLER]

You might also consider how the MN DNR compares to nearby states. What they do different, what other states do that MN doesn't? The future of the MN fishery and new regulations, Poaching concerns(do they have enough CO's to patrol = funding)etc. Get a good list of questions together and you'll have all the help you need.

[Murdock]

I know several MN DNR officers and can honestly tell you they have alot of our same concerns, but due to lack of funding and man power, not all concerns can be addressed in the proper fashion. The DNR office is like alot of other offices. Not enough resources, monetary or personel, to address each concern or issue in the manner required. Just my .02.

[gspman]

I think we should have 3 times as many CO's as we do now.

This is the one that really gets me going...

I also think that monies coming from the sale of fishing/hunting licenses should go to the DNR and/or to conservation purposes. As it is that money goes into the general fund (which really PO's me) so the DNR and sportspeople get royally screwed and that money gets wasted on things that are generally of lesser importance/concern to the sportsperson.

[CodyDawg]

To me, the funding issue is paramount right now. Many conservation orgs are really putting political pressure on the legislature to pass a dedicated funding package. How that plays out will really have an impact on how the DNR performs in the future.

Having said that, the DNR is a state agency, and as such, will have beauracracy and wasteful spending issues. As stated previously, the field staff, and particularly COs, are generally extremely dedicated folks. But people tend to grab on to some example of wasteful spending and try and paint the entire DNR with that brush.

Another issue is that the the DNR has a law enforcement component to it and thus some people will mistrust them and hate them because of it. In my experience, that is because they have something to fear from them.

And my last thought for the moment is that they have a wide audience to try and please. Say they decide to manage a lake for walleyes because all the science says they should. The bass people are gonna be mad. "I used to catch a thousand bass every trip that weighed 40 pounds each until the DNR screwed it up...blah, blah, blah". How often do you hear something along those lines. I know a guy who hunted deer in a little woods on a WMA. The WMA was a fanstastic grassland area (except for the little woods, which provided a predator base), providing nesting cover for upland birds as well as waterfowl, etc. The DNR removed the little woods to help the birds and this guy hates them because of it. A lot of bird hunters love them for it. The DNR is stuck in the middle.

Gotta fly, good topic.

[Quickstrike]

I also wish we had more CO's. I fish almost every day 12 months a year and i was only stopped 4 times this past year! I have seen illegal activity and called TIP only to hear that there are no officers in the area at that point in time. I know we're on a tight budget but I would really like to see more a of pressence with our enforcement. However, I feel that our survey crew is doing a great job up here, I see the creel survey crew all the time. They are always friendly and put up great reports. If we saw the warden as often as the creel surveyeurs a lot less people would poach.

[setterguy]

I think overall the MN DNR does a great job with the limited resources that they have. We are fortunate to live in a wonderful state that allows us to pursue a healthy population of various fish and game species.

I am in agreement with slot limits, if people cannot police themselves, they must be policed. I would also like to see a minimum antler size for deer hunters over 18 years of age.

I honestly think the fishery we have here would suffer without limits/regulations.

Fortunatley I have never witnessed or been a part of any kind of poaching.

Overall I would like to see more enforcement, which means more COs. I would be willing to pay more for licenses, or stamps or access stickers or whatever to make sure that our resource is protected. Good luck with you paper.