What’s in the Anglers Bucket? | Minnesota Fishing Forum - Controversies

Fishing Reports Banner

Posts 1 through 7 for What’s in the Anglers Bucket?

     

New? - Register Here!

No Obligations - Click Here for more information. Login

Main Forum Page     |     Fishing Blogs     |     Find a Fishing Partner     |     My Fishing Pals Home     |     To The Top - Minnesota Fishing Forum - Controversies
You Are Currently Viewing - Minnesota Fishing Forum - Controversies  
What’s in the Anglers Bucket? - - - 7 messages. Showing 1 through 7.
Anglers for Habitat
New User
Joined 02/08/2009
Posts:5

Anglers for Habitat's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 1 Posted: 07:22 PM 02/08/09 (CST)
The Lessard Council (LOHC) will be spending 33% from the newly-created Outdoor Heritage Fund to restore, protect, and enhance wetlands, prairies, forests, and habitat for game, fish, and wildlife (approximately $80 million in FY 2010 and $91 million in FY 2011).

What anglers might not have anticipated was that the LOHC dollar allocations would be separated along these lines. A bucket full of dollars for wetlands, a bucket for prairies, another bucket for forests and then the last bucket for game, fish and wildlife habitat? Is the fish habitat bucket becoming a catch-all for whatever is left? Wasn’t the amendment marketed as being dollars for our game and fish habitat?

Not that Ducks, Pheasants and Deer shouldn’t be a priority, nor can we afford not to purchase forest and prairie lands. But where does restoring and protecting aquatic habitat in lakes come in?

Anglers realize what happens up stream; in fields and forests has an impact on water and lakes: Zero habitat loss in lakes is our priority. We need to ensure that aquatic biodiversity in lakes and rivers aren’t neglected by the Outdoor Heritage Funding. In a recent meeting for submitting proposals for Fish, Game, Wildlife Habitat, Proposals totaling 93 million dollars were submitted. Many requests for stream restoration, wetland and park acquisitions; even one to create a Conservation Officers CSI Waters division. Personally I’d fund every single proposal that came to the table. While LOHC funds in the next twenty five years will play a major role in funding projects; I’m still looking for money and groups to restore and enhance fish habitat.

Part of the problem is that most lakeshore is in the hands of individual lakeshore owners. LOHC funds can only be used for public lands which allow all citizens to have access to hunt or fish in or on. So, it looks like that even though we can legally fish in the lakes we can’t fund projects or plans that affect the privately owned lakeshore. Historically concerned citizens have been working with the DNR to reverse the habitat loss which seems to accompany lakeshore development. Alternative shoreline management rules, a 25 year Aquatic Management and acquisition plan, development of whole lake plans especially as they relate to lake vegetation especially preventing the spread of invasive exotic’s all offer some hope for the future.

Anglers, who recognize that restoring and enhancing aquatic habitat is the key to passing on our sport and heritage to future generations, need to find ways to work together toward these goals.

Vern Wagner the author of these comments is a member of Anglers for Habitat a recently formed coalition made up of the DNR Fisheries Roundtable; which brings together; bass, walleye, muskie, northern pike, trout, panfish and bow fishing anglers, along with many lakeshore associations, environmentalist and conservation groups.

Email: anglersforhabitat@gmail.com for more information, a website and forum are in development.

WebDude
Moderator
Joined 02/26/2004
Posts:8490

WebDude's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 2 Posted: 12:29 PM 02/09/09 (CST)
Hey Anglers for Habitat,

Welcome to My Fishing Pals. Glad to have you aboard!



Webdudes Sig
My Fishing Pals facebook
WebDude's facebook
twitter
google+
BigBite
Senior Member
Joined 08/17/2004
Posts:1544

BigBite's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 3 Posted: 03:10 PM 02/09/09 (CST)
Wasn’t the amendment marketed as being dollars for our game and fish habitat?

You are absolutely correct on this question. The problem is that in order to get ammendments passed, we are sold one thing but in reality, it turns out to be something else. Excuse the pun, but it's like the old bait and switch. I hate to keep haranguing a thorn which has always been in my side, but this type of thing has been going on since the lotto back in 1988.

The legislation that placed the lottery amendment on the 1988 ballot provided that the net profits from the lottery would be divided equally between two new funds. The first was an environmental trust fund for environmental and natural resources projects. The second was a fund to finance the new Greater Minnesota Corporation, a quasi-entrepreneurial agency within state government created primarily to enhance economic development and technology transfer outside the metropolitan area.

Boy... has that changed crazy smiley

Even though this allocation was presented to the voters as part of the campaign on behalf of the lottery amendment, the legislature began making changes in it almost before the first ticket was sold. The original allocation remained in effect only for fiscal 1990, the lottery's first year of operation. For fiscal 1991, the legislature reduced the environmental trust fund's share from 50 percent to 40 percent and the Greater Minnesota fund's share from 50 percent to 25 percent. The remainder went for capital improvement projects in natural resources and state universities. To prevent further reductions in the environmental trust fund's share the legislature placed on the ballot, and voters subsequently approved, a constitutional amendment to guarantee 40 percent of net lottery profits to the fund until 2000. (A subsequent constitutional amendment passed in 1998 extended the dedication until 2025).

Now after years of cutting, dickering and overall mayhem by our legislature, this is how it is divied up...




FISCAL YEAR 2007 REVENUE DISTRIBUTION

Total Revenue: $424.25 million

Net Profits to State Programs: $112.35 million


For every dollar spent on Lottery tickets in Fiscal Year 2007:

  • 59.0 cents went to pay prizes to winning players
  • 8.6 cents was used to pay ticket, online vendor and administrative costs
  • 6.0 cents was paid to retailers in the form of commission and incentives

The remaining 26.4 cents went to the state:

  • 14.8 cents to the state General Fund to support services such as K-12 education, health care, aid to local governments and public safety. Of this amount, $1.95 million was set aside to help combat problem gambling. From the Lottery’s inception through June 2007, $930.8 million has gone to the General Fund.
  • 7.0 cents to the Evironment and Natural Resources Trust Fund to finance projects that preserve, restore and enhance our state's natural resources. The Trust Fund is financing 29 projects, totaling $21.4 million, this for fiscal year 2008. From the start of the Lottery through June 2007, the Trust Fund has received more than $428 million.
  • 4.6 cents more to the state's environment which received a boost when the 2000 Legislature reallocated the in-lieu-of-sales tax. This money which was previously allocated to the General Fund now goes to fish and game, parks, trails and zoos.
    • 2.3 cents to the Game and Fish Fund
    • 2.3 cents to the Natural Resources Fund


Conclusion

Do not believe the commercials about how much the lottery helps the environment and natural resources. Only a very small fraction of the proceeds are being used for that. The voters were sold a bill of goods back in the '90's and now most of the money gets dumped into the general fund.

This is why the legislature wants to amend the constitution to guarentee funding for natural resources and the arts. Just think, if this passes, I'll bet you that the funding for natural resources from the lottery are pulled altogether and ALL of the money will get dumped into the general fund. This way, the legislatures can spend it as they see fit, without any input from the voters. The money will be spent on K-12 education, health care, aid to local governments and public safety - EVEN THOUGH THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE LOTTERY WAS TO HELP NATURAL RESOURCES!! So what this means is that they will sell you on something now, but then will change it to suit them later.

Lots to think about here. I am definitely for natural resources but I am against all of the shenanigans the State goes through to figure out new and creative ways to get into our pockets. I am in total agreement with john... when will this all stop?

When push comes to shove... this is what we get for every dollar spent on lottery tickets...

2.3 cents to the Game and Fish Fund
2.3 cents to the Natural Resources Fund
7 cents to the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund

Sorry if this was from a previous post, but gal darn it... we need to educate the fishing community on exactly how our legislators work. I knew this would start happening as soon as the bill passed. Now we have to fight to keep the bill on track as to how it was originally presented and sold to us.

This is crazy... crazy smiley crazy smiley crazy smiley





WebDude
Moderator
Joined 02/26/2004
Posts:8490

WebDude's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 4 Posted: 03:51 PM 02/09/09 (CST)
It is one thing to ask for money because it is really needed, it is another to play on the heartstrings of voters to get something passed. Yes... up here in Minnesota we like to fish and hunt. Yes, we like the great outdoors. Yes, we would like to save the environment for future generations. But if after ten or twenty years, after all the money has been funneled elsewhere, and there is no money left for what it was intended for, I hope... I pray there will still be some of us around to remember why we voted yes. And if another bill like this goes up to the people, maybe there really will be rioting in the streets.




Webdudes Sig
My Fishing Pals facebook
WebDude's facebook
twitter
google+
Bobber Down
Moderator
Joined 10/03/2005
Posts:3021

Bobber Down's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 5 Posted: 04:35 PM 02/09/09 (CST)
Anglers for Habitat,
Welcome to the site, we hope you stick around a while!



MyFishingPals

Gotta Run

jigginjim
Junior Member
Joined 07/24/2008
Posts:69

jigginjim's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 6 Posted: 10:39 PM 02/09/09 (CST)
Figures, the state coffers, dig into our pockets for junk we didn't vote for. The latest bill for arts and wildlife, waters. Gee, they want to spend some of the money on a doggie park. So, some rugg rat mut has a places to poo. mad smiley crazy smiley


jigginjim sig
Jiggin Jim's Guide Service and taxidermy
JCU
Junior Member
Joined 04/05/2008
Posts:70

JCU's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 7 Posted: 09:01 PM 02/10/09 (CST)
Thank You Vern and Anglers for Habitat
Transparency is the key to success.



Muskies Inc Chapter 54
What’s in the Anglers Bucket? - - - 7 messages. Showing 1 through 7.
You Are Currently Viewing - Minnesota Fishing Forum - Controversies  

New? - Register Here

No Obligations - Click Here for more information. Login

Main Forum Page     |     Top of This Forum     |     My Fishing Pals Home
Members Browsing
the Forums:
    dittohead     HellYa     mork    
Users Online:3
Guests Online:50
Total Online: 53


Terms and Conditions