MN Conservation Volunteer

And you wonder why we are losing the battle?

https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/mcvmagazine/issues/2022/jan-feb/fur.html

Here is an article from a DNR publication, The Minnesota Conservation Volunteer.

Everything you could want to know about fur, except the most important things, that it is a beautiful bountiful sustainable renewable natural resource.

Much of the MN DNR money comes from their new target group (hikers, bird watchers, school groups). These financial backers are growing and the trapping/hunting community is shrinking (money wise). How do you think this will pan out down the road? They sure are not going to bite the hand that feeds them. Like everything in govt...follow the money.

Much of the MN DNR money comes from their new target group (hikers, bird watchers, school groups).

Could you explain this to me. Thank you.

If you have been following any of the chatter from the MNDNR Commissioners office you will hear word salads like "actionable recommendations for a funding framework that would be sustainable, equitable and forward-looking." "Engage Minnesotans in a conversation about the vision for conservation and outdoor recreation".

Translation; We are tired of serving the same old traditional user groups of hunters, trappers and anglers, that have supported us with their license dollars and the reason this agency was created in the first place. (The North American Model).

Clarification, their money still comes from hunting, fishing, trapping licenses and surcharges on sporting equipment, but in the new reimagined funding framework it would come from the new preferred constituents.

The new target group was an admission from the new DNR commissioner (Strommen) during an interview with Outdoor News awhile back. She also threw in a couple "Organically" buzzwords. Anytime I hear that, I cringe as we know who that buzzword is meant for.

I also talked to a recently retired DNR biologist who explained this in detail to me before the interview. He also cited instances where lands that had rare and protected species on it, were bulldozed for walking paths, pavilions to accommodate the above groups. Like all Govt....follow the money...and it's no longer in fishing/ hunting licenses. Not comparatively anyhow. This new target market has DEEP pockets.

And how do the above "Target groups" feel about killing their precious wildlife? They don't. This biologist's comment to me was "trapping will be the 1st to go...and it's just around the corner". Hope he's wrong but the article I read suggests he's correct, so far.

Well Calvin, from what I have been reading they seem to be fine with biting the hand that has been feeding them. While they won't quit collecting our license dollars, this new diversity and inclusiveness initiative will be used to further cloud and confuse who they actually work for and what their priorities should be. It won't be hunters, trappers and anglers participating in consumptive harvest of sustainable natural resources.

I don’t disagree with your general narrative but you don’t explain how the new “target market” has money that the DNR can harness for their own use? It’s obvious with hunting, fishing and trapping however I don’t know any Audubon-like group that is contributing anywhere near what sportsman are.

This isn't as much about funding as they claim. This discussion, that the North American Model for funding conservation needs to be replaced, has been going on internally for a long time. It is all about diluting the traditional "hook and bullet" base. For a prime example take a look at the makeup of the Wolf advisory group.

Wolf Advisory lie party

Plenty more of that to look forward to if they pull off this reorganization.

Come down to the Twin Cities and surrounding suburbs and you will see how much money ( State, Federal and corporate backing) those groups have. Google Three Rivers Park District to see how well they are funded, what the own and their mission. Endless money supply. My guess is the DNR will try and play both sides of the fence until they can't any longer. We only have to look at California to see where we are heading. And I don't think anyone will argue that MN can't wait to be the next Calif. Well anyone (like me) who's worked for the govt here anyhow.

For the record I have nothing against Three Rivers Park district. It just demonstrates how much money is out there for that kind of environment. It might be one of those organizations you have to see 1st hand to get a grasp, however.

Yes you're right Calvin, no doubt there is plenty of money to be had from the non-consumptive outdoor user groups. What surprises me is how many of the hunting/fishing groups have bought into this diversification of funding sources, not recognizing what comes with it.

Thanks Walleye