 |
|
|
| 3/9/2010 11:01:00 AM | Email this article • Print this article | DNR citizen advisors ask governor to intervene in access issue
Heidel, Bonde say Stewardship rule undermines rights of sportsmen, women
Two members of a Department of Natural Resources citizens advisory committee formed to help the agency fashion a rule to safeguard outdoor recreation activities on lands purchased with state Stewardship dollars are asking the governor to step in and rescind the final version of the rule.
The Natural Resources Board has passed the rule and sent it to the Legislature. The Senate Committee on the Environment has scheduled a public hearing on the rule for March 16.
But Sandy Heidel of Onalaska and Larry Bonde of Kiel, who represented the Wisconsin Conservation Congress on the advisory committee, say the rule uses watered down language to undermine the Legislature's intent to guarantee access for activities such as hunting, fishing and trapping on those lands.
Writing as private citizens and not as representatives of any organization, the two pointed to the governor's continued control of the agency as the basis for their request for him to force the agency to modify the language.
"With the failed attempt to override your veto on the appointment of the DNR secretary behind us we need to move forward on issues important to sportsmen and women," Heidel and Bonde wrote. "You remain in control of the Department of Natural Resources and it's time for the sporting public to recognize that and respectfully ask you to exercise your authority, as those in the environmental and business communities have, to step in on our behalf."
Executive action needed
Heidel and Bonde said the governor's intervention was necessary to protect the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers because the rule curtails provisions in the 2007 state budget granting access for hunting, fishing and trapping on Stewardship funded lands.
"For the sportsmen and women of this state there is no bigger issue than having a place to hunt, fish and trap," they wrote. "Access to public lands is the number one solution when it comes to sustaining our sporting heritage. The Stewardship Program was reauthorized with specific language included to stem the loss of access on Stewardship funded lands."
Heidel and Bonde said the rule now before the Legislature undermines that specific language.
"The proposed rules water down language on access that Deputy Secretary Pat Henderson negotiated on your behalf," they wrote. "You sent Pat to negotiate an agreement to increase funding and he agreed to a package that included a promise of access for hunting, fishing and trapping."
The funding increase was conditioned on the access provision, they observed, saying they considered that a fair offer and took the governor at his word that access would be protected and defended when grant recipients tried to use restrictive policies to close the Stewardship funded lands.
However, Heidel and Bonde stated, since that time DNR staff has awarded grants in the millions and created loopholes for grant recipients that showed a lack of commitment to protect access for sportsmen and women.
The rule codifies that attitude, they wrote.
"These rules brought forward now allow grant recipients to set access restrictions and prohibitions that do not reflect the legislative intent or the agreement you reached with legislative leaders in 2007," Heidel and Bonde wrote. "In order to gain the funding increase you sought you agreed that the Natural Resources Board would be making the decisions on each Stewardship grant if access for hunting, fishing or trapping was going to be curtailed in any way. Unfortunately your staff has written rules that absolve the NRB of this responsibility."
It's up to the governor to control the agency, they wrote.
"You need to step in and see that that provision is restored," Heidel and Bonde wrote. "The buck must stop with the NRB and they need to take responsibility every time a Stewardship dollar is spent and access is denied. Anything less is abdicating their responsibility and quite frankly it shows their disinterest in the needs of hunters, anglers and trappers."
The two accuse the DNR and NRB of repeatedly yielding to the wishes of grant recipients over the needs of the sporting public when awarding grants to municipalities and land trusts, and that many lands now closed to public access by those municipalities and land trusts would be open if the state itself had bought them.
"But somehow when these same properties are purchased with Stewardship and owned by the land trusts or local governments they are closed to public access," they wrote. "The reauthorizing language leveled this playing field and called for the same rules to apply to all Stewardship funded lands both DNR owned and grant funded. This has not happened because staff at DNR have not lived up to the agreement you approved and signed into law."
No one knows
Heidel and Bonde said DNR statistics showing the amount of Stewardship land open to hunting and fishing is misleading, while the amount of land open for trapping has never been quantified.
"Truth is they don't really know how many acres of land funded with Stewardship grants and owned by land trusts are really open to hunting, fishing and trapping," they wrote. "Some land trusts provide open access; others prohibit it, and some charge for access."
While the DNR has created an elaborate mapping website so the public can see where grant funded lands are located, access information can be obtained in many cases only by calling the land trust, they wrote.
"Since this land was purchased with taxpayer money, shouldn't this information be in the DNR's hands at all times?" Heidel and Bonde asked. "And shouldn't it be available to the taxpayers of this state? Shouldn't DNR be required to publish a directory so all citizens can have this information?"
Heidel and Bonde said the agency and the governor had no idea how the public can use all of the land it has purchased.
"Please exercise your authority over this agency and these rules on behalf of sportsmen and women and withdraw these rules and modify their language to bring them into compliance with the reauthorizing language you negotiated in good faith," they urged the governor.
Hearing
The March 16 hearing was scheduled after state Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-Waterford) and five Assembly colleagues expressed the same concerns as Heidel and Bonde.
The ostensible purpose of the rule is to guarantee that most lands bought with state Stewardship dollars remain open for nature-based outdoor recreation activities, including hunting, fishing trapping, hiking and cross country skiing. That statutory requirement was part of a legislative compromise in the 2007-09 state budget to secure a 10-year reauthorization of the Stewardship program.
The statute allows only narrow exemptions from the access requirement. Activities can be prohibited only to protect public safety, to protect unique plant and animal communities or to accommodate usership patterns. The rule would create standards by which the NRB would determine whether it was reasonable to prohibit one or more nature-based outdoor activities.
After the public hearing is held. the rule will take effect if the committee does not formally object.
If the committee objects to the proposed rule, the rule must be referred to the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR). That committee must take executive action on the rule and may nonconcur in a committee objection, object to the rule (that is, concur with the reviewing committee), or seek rule modifications.
That review period is 30 days. The review period may be extended for an additional 30 days (or more, if modifications are agreed to) in the same manner as by the initial reviewing committee.
If JCRAR objects to a rule, it must introduce, within 30 days, a bill in each house of the Legislature to prevent the promulgation of the rule. If both bills are defeated, or fail to be enacted, the agency may promulgate the proposed rule.
Richard Moore can be reached at rmmoore1@verizon.net
|
Comment on this story
|
|
|
|
