Ron's Ramblings

Storm Clouds coming.....

MN Bound Editor — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:32:25 +0000

WE MINNESOTANS LOVE OUR LAKES.
IT'S ON OUR LICENSE PLATES.
WE GO NORTHBOUND AS A WAY OF LIFE TO RESORTS AND CABINS AND FAMILY VACATIONS. OUR LAKES AND RIVERS ARE IMPORTANT TO WHO WE ARE.   WE PLAY IN WATER. WE PADDLE AND FLOAT.   WE LEAD THE NATION IN BOAT OWNERSHIP.   WE CATCH MORE WALLEYES.
INDEED WE ARE THE LAND OF SKY BLUE WATER. AND PROUD OF IT.

BUT TODAY IN MINNESOTA THERE ARE STORM CLOUDS ABOVE….

AND TROUBLE BELOW.

IN TWO WORDS, INVASIVE SPECIES.   THESE ARE PLANTS OR ANIMALS NOT NATIVE TO MINNESOTA'S WATER AND LANDSCAPE.
SOME WE KNOW WELL. CARP. FOR EXAMPLE. WE ALSO KNOW HOW DESTRUCTIVE THEY ARE.

EURASIAN WATER MILFOIL IS ANOTHER. IT'S SPREAD SO FAST IN OUR LAKES, IT'S LIKE AN EPIDEMIC. NOT MANY YEARS AGO, MINNESOTANS HAD NEVER HEARD OF THIS INVASIVE SPECIES.   NOW IT CLOGS OUR OUTBOARDS AND FISHING HOTSPOTS.

TODAY OUR MINNESOTA LAKES AND RIVERS ARE THREATENED LIKE NEVER BEFORE BY STRANGE CREATURES WE'VE NEVER HEARD OF.     ZEBRA MUSSELS. SPINY WATER FLEAS. ASIAN CARP AND THE LIST GOES ON.   MANY OF THESE INVASIVE SPECIES ARE ALREADY IN OUR WATER (RUSTY CRAYFISH) OTHERS ARE ON THEIR WAY…UNLESS THEY'RE STOPPED.

IN RECENT YEARS THE MINNESOTA DNR HAS LAUNCHED A CAMPAIGN TO ALERT US ABOUT INVASIVE SPECIES. WHY? BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT TO LOSE. A WHOLE LOT.
ZEBRA MUSSELS ARE NOW THRIVING IN MILLE LACS, THE STATE'S PREMIER WALLEYE FISHERY. SO WHAT? THESE TINY MUSSELS COULD CAUSE A SERIOUS DECLINE IN THE LAKE'S WALLEYE POPULATION. THAT'S WHY.

THE SILVER CARP, ANOTHER INVASIVE HEADING TO MINNESOTA BY SWIMMING UPSTREAM IN THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER, HAS REPLACED GAMEFISH POPULATIONS IN ILLINOIS AND TURNED BOATING INTO A HAZARDOUS JOY RIDE.

GET THE PICTURE?

INVASIVE SPECIES ARE A SERIOUS, SERIOUS PROBLEM. IF WE LOVE OUR LAKES---AND WE DO---WE'VE GOT TO STOP EM FROM SPREADING AND, IF POSSIBLE, ERADICATE EM WHERE THEY ALREADY EXIST.

AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S A HUGE TASK.

FOR STARTERS, MINNESOTA LAWMAKERS HAVE PASSED STRINGENT BOATING LAWS AIMED AT HALTING THE SPREAD OF INVASIVES FROM LAKE TO LAKE.
BUT ZEBRA MUSSELS AND MILFOIL DON'T READ LAWS. YOUR DNR CAN ONLY TRY TO ENFORCE THE RULES.
STOPPING THE SPREAD OF INVASIVE SPECIES IS REALLY UP TO YOU. FOLLOW THE RULES. CLEAN YOUR BOAT. DON'T GO DOWN IN HISTORY AS THE LAZY ANGLER OR BOATER WHO SAID RULES ARE FOR OTHER PEOPLE.

WILL IT WORK? CAN WE HALT THE SPREAD OF EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL OR ZEBRA MUSSELS OR INVADING CARP?

IN TRUTH, NOBODY KNOWS. BUT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE DOING NOTHING IS A PRICE WE MINNESOTANS DON'T WANT TO PAY. WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF LAKES, BUT WE CAN'T AFFORD TO LOSE ANY OF THEM.

IF WE LIMIT THE LAKES UNDER SIEGE, NEW   CONTROL METHODS MAY BE DEVELOPED WITH MORE RESEARCH.

A LONG TIME AGO, SEA LAMPREYS ALMOST DECIMATED LAKE TROUT IN THE NATION'S GREAT LAKES. TODAY THEY ARE UNDER CONTROL.

SO---IT CAN BE DONE. THERE IS HOPE. BUT WE LAKE LOVERS MUST ALL WORK TOGETHER TO DO IT.
AFTER ALL, THE GUAGGAS ARE COMING. YES, THAT'S ANOTHER EXOTIC MUSSEL SPECIES THAT'S POSSIBLY MORE DESTRUCTIVE THAN ZEBRA MUSSELS.
YES, THE LAKES WE LOVE ARE UNDER SIEGE. WE MUST WIN THE WAR AGAINST INVASIVE SPECIES.
OR RISK A MINNESOTA HEARTBREAK LIKE NO OTHER.

A Fish Story

MN Bound Editor — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:18:07 +0000

This fish story just in.
Not long ago I was sent a Manitoba newspaper clipping from a March 23, 1999 edition with a most amazing fish tale.
The story’s headline says it all: THEY ATE MANITOBA’S BIGGEST PIKE.
And, yes, it’s apparently true. A resident of Easterville, Manitoba, a small aboriginal community southeast of The Pas, was fishing for food for the family table when he caught (by hook or by net is undetermined) a pretty nice northern pike out of Cedar Lake.   The fisherman and his four children had a picture taken of them holding the pike.
Okay, so it was a little better than pretty nice.
According to Manitoba officials, who utilized computer scanning and imaging to determine the fish’s measurements, the pike was estimated to be 70 inches long or about 10 inches longer than Manitoba’s official pike record.
The pike’s estimated weight is more than 50 pounds.
As a fish story goes, this one is also quite short. Doug Leroux, a regional fisheries manager in The Pas, said he believes that such a fish was caught.
‘’From what I understand, the fisherman was simply out to stock the family fridge when he made the catch.   From what I understand, he gave it to his grandmother. It would definitely feed a family for a while.’’
And so, the largest pike in Manitoba history ended up on the dinner table.
Sad in a way, but, if you think about it, most of the giant fish caught in the last 100 years probably ended up in somebody’s belly. It’s quite possible Minnesota’s record 45-pound pike, allegedly caught in 1929, was cooked as well.
(It’s also possible the Minnesota state record pike isn’t even the state record pike because of insufficient evidence but that’s another story awaiting a DNR decision).
Through the centuries and for as long as anglers have cast for sport, big fish have always held a special place in an angler’s heart. However, in comparison, official state record keeping or big fish awards programs are probably only decades old. In a way, that’s too bad, too. It would have been nice to know, say in 1850, if a 17-pound walleye was viewed as really big or commonplace.
Clearly, the times they are a changing, as the song goes. More of us who fish are releasing more of what we catch in the belief we’re helping the resource (and our own fishing future.)
If you would have told me 25 years ago that walleye anglers someday would willingly release perfectly good-eating walleyes, I would have told you to check your fever because you’re hallucinating.
Oddly enough, the northern pike seems to be the trophy we love to catch and keep.   In my home state of Minnesota, a big pike (more than 10 pounds) may be the rarest trophy of all gamefish.   On lakes that are capable of producing large pike, the rules still allow an angler to keep one pike over 40 inches or so.   Under those rules, if 50 anglers all keep one big pike, the big pike will be gone eventually.   The story of declining or rare pike trophy catches is found in just about every state in the country.
Fortunately, many big pike lodges in Canada have learned the ir conservation lesson and forbid killing of any 40 inch plus pike. Not every lake is capable of producing big pike (food and habitat play a major role) but we need to identify those lakes and establish complete protection if we want to restore our trophy pike angling.
In the meantime, we still must keep fishing fun without the need for an attorney in the boat seat. Fishing is also a way to have good eating. We just need to remember to eat the small fish and let the lunkers go.
Sometimes it doesn’t happen, of course.
My favorite big fish cooked story is about a Twin Cities angler who caught the fish of a lifetime in the St. Croix River. It was a beautiful smallmouth bass with dark golden sides, dashing red eyes and a bass belly that weighed more than 8-pounds.   To this day, I think it was a new Minnesota record smallmouth.
But we’ll never know.
As the angler explained it to me, he was more than excited with his catch and rushed home to share his good fortune with the wife.
‘’What are you planning to do with that?,’’ the wife reportedly said, apparently not as ecstatic as he.
‘’Honey,’’ he said, softening his answer, ‘’I plan to have the fish mounted.’’
‘’It’s not hanging in our house,’’ she replied.
So--now you know why a potential Minnesota record fish---a coveted smallmouth bass--- ended up on a dinner table instead of a den wall.

Unique Art

MN Bound Editor — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 13:58:00 +0000

Jim Bellamy is an avid deer hunter with considerable artistic talent. What happens when you combine the two....presto, you have Jim's shaved deer hides that are unique in every way.
After trial and error, Jim came up with the idea to shave the fur, to give it a dimensional look. Jim’s first shaving was his last name, “Bellamy”. Since starting this he has done various logos for bars, sporting good stores and Jim’s work hangs in some resorts. Jim works with each customer on a one-on-one basis, so that no two designs are the same.
An avid fan of our Minnesota Bound show, Jim took a look at our logo and turned another buck skin into a work of art. To see more of Jim’s work go to deerhideart.com <http://deerhideart.com/> or whitetail-innovations.com <http://whitetail-innovations.com/> .
And one more nifty fact about Jim and his passion for whitetail deer: He has been hunting deer since boyhood and has kept EVERY set of antlers he has acquired over the many deer seasons.----Ron Schara

Deer Habitat

MN Bound Editor — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:48:20 +0000

It was the winter of 1968-69 and Minnesota's deer herd was in a free fall. Deep snows. Severe cold. Lack of food. Excessive doe harvest. A perfect storm in Minnesota's north woods was annihilating the state's deer population.
Then, a small miracle appeared. A small group of determined Grand Rapids deer hunters   organized to save their cherished deer hunting traditions.   And they gave themselves a name, simple and direct: Save Minnesota Deer.
And they had one simple goal: improve the state's deer habitat.   I remember interviewing Dave Shaw and other founders and touring snowy woods with DNR's deer guru Milt Stenlund who opened my eyes to the lack of deer browse within reach of a deer.
There was only one problem.   State leaders in St. Paul weren't listening much.
So---to make themselves heard, the Save Minnesota Deer members decided to raise a little hell. State lawmakers had been unresponsive to the deer population crisis…..so carcasses of starved deer ---with puffy faces and ribs showing---were hauled to the steps of the State Capitol.      Pictures of dead deer made the news in the Twin Cities.    The DNR Commissioner, Jarle Leirfallom, personally led browse cutting crews into the snow-bound north to show his concern. And it worked. Lawmakers voted to fund a deer habitat program with a license surcharge.
But it was too little too late. In the autumn of 1971, DNR announced there would be NO deer season.
But the grassroots habitat push didn't end there. In fact it grew so fast, the Save Minnesota Deer group transformed itself into a statewide organization in 1980.   This was the birth of the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association. Habitat remained their battle cry with innovative programs like Hides For Habitat. Members dollars were used for habitat projects.
Now fast forward…..
Today, Minnesota's deer population flirts around record highs, thanks largely to a number of reasons: 1. revised deer management tools used by DNR, such as doe permit systems; 2. better habitat thanks to increased logging of popple because of new product innovations; 3. a series of milder winters; 4. and the decades of watch guard work by members of MDHA.
Now imagine my surprise in recent months to find that MDHA is over its hunting boots in controversy. The organization has become the target of bitter letters to the editor regarding new buck hunting regulations in the state's southeast.     MDHA members are fighting with other MDHA members. Some members are quitting the organization and/or calling for a change in leadership and so forth.
What happened? In my view, this is what happened. MDHA landed in a political quagmire by taking a stand on…NOT habitat programs….but on new deer season regulations that were guaranteed to be divisive.   By taking one side asked for by MDHA members; other members were alienated. It was a lose-lose for MDHA.
For sure, a public debate about deer regulations, seasons, etc., that included MDHA members, is great. That's the democratic way.   And MDHA members ought to express their views. But debates over regulations are not good for organizations whose goal is habitat and protecting the right to hunt deer..   Everybody supports habitat, but nobody wins in a quagmire.
Take note, rarely does Pheasants Forever enter public frays over seasons, road hunting, etc. although their members might. No, Pheasants Forever sticks to its message and purpose: pheasant habitat.
Ducks Unlimited largely takes the same stance. It's a duck habitat organization, period.
Minnesota's deer management is now being usurped by political interests that individual MDHA members may in the future want to support or boot out of office. But MDHA, the organization, ought to concentrate on what they do best: fight for the future of deer hunting via habitat and related issues.
And MDHA's Mark Johnson says that's still the goal, ''MDHA's primary focus must be on ensuring a healthy future for hunting in MN by improving habitat, providing hunter opportunity and increasing hunter access to public hunting lands.   We need hunters, but if we don't have quality habitat where they can hunt our hunting legacy is doomed.''

Teacher & Hero

MN Bound Editor — Mon, 25 Jul 2011 13:35:14 +0000

Prof. Jim Schwartz, of Edina, and former head of Journalism School at Iowa State University, died in July at the age of 95. The family asked if I would speak at his funeral at Mt. Olivet on Saturday, July 23. The following are my remarks about a man who meant so much to me and all of his students.

FIRST, I'D LIKE TO GIVE MY THANKS TO THE FAMILY OF JIM SCHWARTZ FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ABOUT ONE OF MY FAVORITE FISHING PARTNERS.
YES, JIM AND I SHARED A FISHING BOAT IN RECENT YEARS IN PURSUIT OF HIS FAVORITE FISH, THE LARGEMOUTH BASS. AS IN LIFE ITSELF, SOME DAYS WERE GREAT; OTHERS NOT SO GOOD.

BUT I'M NOT HERE TO TELL FISHING STORIES ABOUT OUR TIMES ON TEN MILE LAKE AND HIS CABIN AT HACKENSACK.

JIM WAS MORE THAN A FISHING PARTNER TO ME. HE WAS MORE LIKE…WELL, MY HERO.

A LONG TIME AGO, BACK AT IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY, JIM WAS THE FIRST JOURNALISM PROFESSOR TO READ WHAT I WROTE ABOUT FISHING AND HUNTING AND FISH AND WILDLIFE. HE ENCOURAGED ME TO KEEP WRITING AND TO PURSUE A JOURNALISM CAREER WITH AN EMPHASIS ON FISH AND WILDLIFE BIOLOGY.

AND WHEN MY PATH AS A STUDENT GOT A LITTLE ROCKY, IT WAS MR SCHWARTZ WHO SHOWED COMPASSION WHILE ALSO OFFERING A SWIFT KICK TO MY REAR.

NOW AS I LOOK BACK AT MY OWN LIFE'S WORK ….FROM NEWSPAPER COLUMNIST TO TELEVISION HOST…..MY GUIDING LIGHTS WERE MANY.
BUT ONE OF THE BRIGHTEST CAME FROM MR. SCHWARTZ. AND I AM BUT ONE OF HUNDREDS OF HIS FORMER STUDENTS WHO WOULD SAY THE SAME ABOUT A PROFESSOR WITH A WONDERFUL GIFT OF TEACHING.

DECADES LATER, WE WOULD ONLY DISAGREE ABOUT ONE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE.

HE INSISTED THAT LARGEMOUTH BASS WERE GOOD TO EAT.

I SAID THE ONLY GOOD BASS WAS THE ONE NOT IN MY FRYING PAN.

ONCE AGAIN, HE'S UNDOUBTEDLY RIGHT. IF THERE'S A BASS LAKE IN HEAVEN, IT'S PROBABLY FULL OF GOOD EATING SIZE BASS.

CATCH 'EM ALL, JIM.

License fee increase?

MN Bound Editor — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:45:33 +0000

I’ve been thinking about.......DNR’s proposal to raise some hunting and fishing license fees.
Should license fees be increased? Or, not?
Opinions might vary but I do know this:
Minnesota hunters and anglers DESERVE a legislative debate (hearings, etc.) about DNR’s need for an increase and what those fees might be.   However, according to media reports, legislative insiders say the idea of raising fees in a Republican-controlled Legislature is already a dead issue.
No discussion. No debate. No nothing.
Republican Party chairman Tony Sutton reportedly sent a letter to Republican legislators warning them that raising anything, including license fees, would violate Republican principles.
Whoa. Let’s pause here for a second.
Tony Sutton is certainly entitled to his opinion. So are the rest of us.
But I don’t recall seeing Tony Sutton’s name on the ballot last fall; which means he wasn’t elected to represent anybody in Minnesota.
On the contrary, Minnesota voters did send Republicans and Democrats to the Legislature to, hopefully, do what’s best for Minnesota.   And that includes exploring the need for more revenue for the DNR’s fish and wildlife programs that are largely supported by license revenue via the Game and Fish Fund.
DNR says the Fund will go into the red by 2014.
The point is this:   I don’t think there’s a hunter or angler in Minnesota who wants the Game and Fish Fund to go broke.   Not on our watch.
I don’t think there’s a license buyer out there who wants to see the state’s hunting and fishing opportunities decline.
In essence, a license to hunt or fish is nothing more than a user fee. And those of us who pay that fee have long debated about how the money is spent and how much is spent and how much is wasted and so forth. This is democracy in action.
We can also agree or disagree on the need for higher fees. No problem. But our lawmakers also should have the same discussion.
We deserve it. We also have 18 fewer conservation officers in the field, which is only a good thing if you’re a poacher.
Hunting license revenue is subsidizing DNR fish management programs because of budget imbalances. That needs to be corrected.
The DNR’s proposed license fee increases also seem to reveal something else about us. Unlike a few neighboring states, Minnesota doesn’t play the game of gouge the nonresident very well.
For a seasonal nonresident fishing license, DNR is suggesting a $44 fee. A Minnesotan in South Dakota has to pay $62 to fish; Wisconsin charges $50.
To hunt ruffed grouse or pheasants in Minnesota, DNR proposes a $97 fee for nonresidents; South Dakota charges $114 for pheasants and $75 for three days of waterfowl hunting.
A nonresident deer hunter in Minnesota would pay $160 under DNR’s proposal. To hunt deer in North Dakota, a Minnesotan must pay $200; in Iowa, $529.
The average ticket price to watch a Vikings football game is $110. It’s valid for one afternoon.
The price of a seasonal resident Minnesota fishing license is $17; DNR would like to raise it seven bucks....which is roughly what a beer costs at the football game.
So what’s our pleasure? More beer or more walleyes?

The Two Line Debate

MN Bound Editor — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 15:34:10 +0000

I’ve been thinking......
About the two line fishing debate.   While I intend to agree with my friend, Joe Fellegy, that two lines opens a possible Pandora’s Box, and therefore we ought to leave well enough alone, I’m not convinced that ends the issue.
On the other hand, Joe may be rockin’ the boat for phantom concerns that will not impact gamefish populations. If there is such evil in two lines, why haven’t fish managers from other states come to the same conclusion?
Frankly, I’ve played with the two lines in Wisconsin and sometimes it’s more bother than worth, although bobber fishing with two lines is very doable.
My take on the two line debate is this: On border waters, such as Wisconsin, where two lines are permissable, Minnesota’s laws should be changed to allow Minnesota anglers the same option.   Anglers on Lake Superior also make a good case for increasing the fishing line limits as Wisconsin also had done for trolling in such large water.
If two lines, indeed, means greater enjoyment with minimal impact on our future fishing success (gamefish populations) I suggest the Minnesota DNR establish a few experimental two line lakes and measure what’s happening.
But until we know, I’m siding with Joe.
I’ve been thinking.....
About DNR’s conflicting stance on winter feeding of wildlife. As long as I can remember, DNR officials have discouraged winter deer feeding by anybody. The practice sets the stage for deer diseases to be spread.   Folks who throw out corn for mallards have been told the same story. Don’t feed pheasants; it makes them vulnerable to predators, disease.
And it makes sense.
So....why are DNR officials putting their stamp of approval on artificial feeding of swans on the Mississippi River near Monticello? Ther StarTribune recently featured a story about the amazing and fast comeback of trumpeter swans in Minnesota and two kind folks who are dumping nearly a ton of corn a day in the river to feed more than 2,000 swans who frequent the open water on the river. The couple who are doing the feeding are kind-hearted folks. That is not the issue. Kind-hearted folks also have fed deer and ducks and have been told by DNR to stop.    Yet, according to the newspaper story, the swan feeding has the ‘’blessing’’ of DNR officials.
What happened to DNR’s concerns for spreading disease? Or don’t unnatural concentrations of swans pose a problem for swans?     Or what about the concentration of, to be kind, ‘’swan droppings’’ in the river?
Hey, DNR, what is your official position on winter feeding of wildlife? The deer in my backyard look hungry?

Pheasants Forever?

MN Bound Editor — Fri, 11 Feb 2011 22:03:07 +0000

The following is an edited speech I delivered to the Pheasants Forever Pheasant Fest banquet in Omaha on Jan 29.   .

BACK IN 1982, AN IDEA WAS HATCHED BY A GROUP OF MINNESOTA BIRD HUNTERS. IT WAS A DREAM IDEA REALLY.   LET'S HAVE PHEASANTS FOREVER.
FOREVER? HA. IN MINNESOTA THAT'S WISHFUL THINKING. MINNESOTA HAS YEARNED TO BE A SOUTH DAKOTA FOR DECADES WITH LITTLE SUCCESS.   WHY? LITTLE GRASSLANDS. LOTS OF BLACK EARTH FARMING. FENCEROW TO FENCEROW. WETLANDS, 90 PERCENT DRAINED IN PHEASANT COUNTRY. AND DON'T FORGET WINTER.
SOUTH DAKOTA IS FAMOUS FOR PHEASANTS. MINNESOTA IS FAMOUS FOR WINTERS.
NO MATTER. THE IDEA OF PHEASANTS FOREVER GAINED STRENGTH AND MEMBERS AND HOPE.
TODAY, PHEASANTS IN AMERICA ARE NEARER BEING--- FOREVER--- THAN EVER BEFORE.
PF MEMBERS NOW NUMBER MORE THAN125,000 STRONG.
YOUR COLLECTIVE STRENGTH RESTS IN 600 CHAPTERS ACROSS AMERICA.
THE MONEY YOU RAISE STAYS HOME AND GOES ON THE GROUND.
YOU'VE TOUCHED   MORE THAN 5 MILLION ACRES TO MAKE LIFE EASIER FOR THE RINGNECK PHEASANT.
YOU'VE HELPED FINANCE MORE THAN 1,000 LAND PURCHASES, PRESERVING MORE THAN 135,000 ACRES TO SUSTAIN WILD CREATURES, INCLUDING RINGNECKS.
YOU'VE PAID FOR A PRESENCE IN THE NATION'S CAPITAL TO HAVE A SAY IN FEDERAL CONSERVATION AND FARM PROGRAMS.
BUT THE CHALLENGES TO PHEASANTS FOREVER HAVE NOT DIMINISHED.
WE ARE ENGAGED IN A GREAT WAR ON THE LANDSCAPE, TESTING WHETHER THIS NATION HAS THE WILL TO CONSERVE ITS NATURAL RESOURCES.
I DROVE THROUGH MY HOME STATE OF IOWA TO GET HERE THE OTHER DAY. I SAW A DEAD ROOSTER IN THE ROAD DITCH. I THINK IT DIED……OF LONELINESS.
HOW SAD….WHAT'S HAPPENED TO MY BOYHOOD HUNTING GROUNDS WHERE I AS 12 YEAR OLD SHOT MY FIRST RINGNECK WITH A .SINGLE SHOT .410, A CHRISTMAS GIFT FROM MY PARENTS.
HOW SAD…. IOWA'S PHEASANT POPULATION HAS COLLAPSED TO THE LOWEST COUNTS IN HISTORY.
HOW SAD….ALONG WITH THE BIRDS, THE NUMBER OF PHEASANT HUNTERS IN IOWA ALSO HAS DECLINED AND WITH IT THE NUMBER OF IOWANS WHO GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THE BIRD'S FUTURE.
WHY THIS PHEASANT COLLAPSE IN IOWA? WINTER WEATHER? SPRING RAINS? FLOODING? CORN PRICES?   ALL PLAYED A PART.
BUT THE BIGGEST REASON IOWA'S RINGNECK COUNTS ARE IN THE TOILET IS BECAUSE OF THIS NATION'S FEDERAL FARM POLICIES THAT EMPHASIZE TEMPORARY CONSERVATION PROGRAMS.
IN MINNESOTA, BIRD COUNTS IN 2010 PLUNGED AS WELL TO 22 PERCENT BELOW A 10 YEAR AVERAGE.
WHY? TEMPORARY CRP AND OTHER FEDERAL FARM PROGRAMS WILL EVENTUALLY BRING MINNESOTA BACK TO MEDIOCRE PHEASANT NUMBERS.    IT'S HAPPENED BEFORE.
RINGNECK PHEASANTS ALSO ARE VULNERABLE IN NEBRASKA, KANSAS, NORTH DAKOTA AND YES, EVEN THE BIRDS OF SOUTH DAKOTA ARE FACING TROUBLE AS THE ACRES OF CONSERVATION RESERVE LAND GO BACK UNDER THE PLOW.
  FEDERAL FARM PROGRAMS THAT DEAL WITH CONSERVATION ON A TEMPORARY BASIS MAKE A MOCKERY OF CONSERVATION OF SOIL, WATER AND WILDLIFE AND DELIVER A FALSE PROMISE OF LAND AND WATER ACCOUNTABILITY.
WE MUST BRING THIS WASHINGTON CHARADE TO A HALT.
THIS FALL   DRIVING ACROSS EASTERN NEBRASKA TO FILM PHEASANT FOREVER TELEVISION EPISODES   I CANNOT FORGET A MASSIVE CROP FIELD OF ROLLING HILLS, SOIL LAID BARE FOR CORN OR SOYBEANS, WITH NOT A BLADE OF GRASS FOR WATERWAYS TO SLOW EROSION AND NOT A TERRACE TO BE SEEN.
WHAT HAPPENED TO BASIC SOIL CONSERVATION DOWN ON THE FARM. AGAIN, I'M BLAMING A FEDERAL POLICY THAT DOES NOT REWARD SOIL CONSERVATION, INSTEAD   REWARDS BLACK EARTH FENCE ROW TO FENCE ROW FARMING THAT LEADS TO INCREASED SOIL EROSION, DECLINING WATER QUALITY AND SOMETHING CALLED A DEAD ZONE AT THE MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER.
ON ANOTHER TRIP, I WAS VISITING WITH A SOUTH DAKOTA FARMER WHO WAS SHOWING ME HOW HE UTILIZED FEDERAL FARM PROGRAMS TO HELP WILDLIFE, GUIDED BY PHEASANT FOREVER FARM BILL BIOLOGISTS.   HE SHOWED ME A CRP FIELD THAT WAS DESTINED TO GO UNDER THE PLOW. HE SHOWED ME A BEAUTIFUL 10 YEAR OLD STAND OF TREES.
HE SAID, I'M NOT GOING TO DIG OUT THE TREES.
I SAID, DO YOU MEAN YOU CAN TAKE OUT THOSE TREES IF YOU WANTED TO?
OH YES, HE SAID. THE FEDERAL PROGRAM ENDED.
BUT, I OBJECTED, WE THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS PAID TO HAVE THOSE TREES PUT IN?   WE PAID FOR SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION; WE PAID FOR WILDLIFE COVER AND NOW 10 YEARS LATER, MY GOVERNMENT IS SAYING…OH, JUST KIDDIN' THE TREES AND THE BENEFITS CAN GO AWAY?
DOES ANYBODY THINK WE CAN SUSTAIN SOIL, WATER AND WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION IN AMERICA WITH THIS KIND OF GIVE AND TAKE WITH A GOVERNMENT STAMP OF APPROVAL?
WE CANNOT.
INTERESTINGLY THE DAY AFTER MY SPEECH IN OMAHA, THE SUNDAY OMAHA WORLD HERALD RAN THIS NEBRASKA HEADLINE, ''CLOSER MONITORING PUTS MORE WATER ON CONTAMINATED LIST.''
AND WHEN I RETURNED TO MINNESOTA THE SAME DAY, THE MINNEAPOLIS STARTRIBUNE   RAN A STORY ABOUT GROWING CONCERN FOR WATER QUALITY IN SOUTHEAST MINNESOTA. DO OUR WASHINGTON LEADERS UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING IN FARM COUNTRY?
  WHEN DO WE REPLACE THE USDA NONSENSE? WITH COMMONSENSE?
IN OUR RUSH TO PLANT MORE AND MORE CORN IN THE NAME OF ETHANOL, IT SEEMS WE ARE WILLING TO RISK EVERYTHING. OUR SOIL. OUR WATER, OUR WILDLIFE….NOT TO MENTION OUR WAY OF LIFE.

New Year's Resolutions

MN Bound Editor — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 20:46:20 +0000

New Year’s Resolutions I’d like to see from a few of my close personal friends:
Gov. Mark Dayton: I promise to select a new DNR commissioner who has the right credentials, who was a hunter and angler and who had a professional background in natural resources (and that means no political crony) and I will deliver on that promise.
New DNR Commissioner: I intend to hold regular press conferences to discuss current events, announce new initiatives and I will no longer simply rely on a ‘’news release’’ as my only mass communication to Minnesotans. And that’s not all. I will ask our fish and wildlife managers to think outside of the box, which means being bolder in how we manage public hunting areas and fishing lakes. When the fishing sucks, why do residents need to beg for change in how we stock, manage, whatever?
U.S.Sen. Amy Klobuchar: I resolve to sponsor a public forum about Minnesota’s ethanol program, its economic and environmental benefits or lack, thereof, and to settle questions about the reality of using corn-based ethanol in the future.
U.S. Sen. Al Franken: Although I’m a staunch supporter of ethanol subsidies for corn growers, I will conduct an investigation into why there are so many hillsides being plowed in Minnesota and what happened to soil conservation practices?
Tony Sutton, chair, Minnesota Republican Party: In the future, I resolve to understand why Minnesotans voted to raise their sales tax to preserve the state’s outdoor and natural resources and why the Legacy Amendment is so unlike those nasty tax hikes loved by DFLers.
Brian Melandez, chair, Minnesota DFL Party: I resolve to use my DFL connections to kick some ass regarding how the money for arts in the Legacy Amendment has been doled out and to make the artsy folks accountable in the future.
Dale Garner, Iowa wildlife chief: Somebody needs to tell it like it is to Iowans. As long as Iowa is ground zero for fence line to fence line farming, drainage ditches, field tiling, brush clearing, weed control and---from the Mississipipi to the Missouri---an endless sea of corn and soybean fields, Iowa is losing its pheasants, quail and, more importantly, an autumn tradition. Correction, it may be gone already.
Laura Ragan, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Those of us who work with the nation’s endangered species program will resolve to stand tall in support of our own profession, scientific wildlife management, and enlist wolf experts (Dave Mech, where are you?) to speak out about delisting the gray wolf in Minnesota and counter the biological nonsense from animal rights wolf managers. And if I get fired for standing up for the principles of wildlife management regarding the wolf I expect other professionals will come to my defense (Dave Mech, where are you?).
Gary Roach, walleye fishing expert: At the 2011 WaveWacker Walleye Tournament, if my partner Ron Schara gets the first, biggest and most walleyes in our boat, I will tell the world but if I outfish him I will say nothing.

Troubled waters

Ron Schara — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 15:24:39 +0000

Once more, Minnesotans are being told their 10,000 lakes are in trouble, courtesy of the state’s largest newspaper.
It’s not the first time such a warning has been delivered in a powerful way. With conviction. With mounting evidence of declining lake water quality.   And dire predictions   about the land of sky blue waters eventually turning pea-green.
Here’s my prediction: We won’t do enough to keep the blue and halt the green.
Why? Because we never have.
At the moment, many of the state’s water laws are antiquated and have been so for a long time. Drainage rules dealing with wetlands and ditches date back to 1915.   At the turn of the century, the only good wetland was a drained one.
Yes, but we treasure out lakes more than swamps. Yes, but. Shoreline regulation and management of lakes is obviously inadequate or the dire warnings of pollution would have faded away a long time ago. Enforcement is weak or non-existant. Exceptions to the lakeshore rules are many as the news reports pointed out.
Our county commissioners often vote between a rock and hard place. Counties boast about saving loon nesting sites until.......a big development comes along.   Know this: when push comes to shove county commissioners like tax money more than loons. And it’s always been that way. Why? Counties need money to operate, to provide the services we demand. Sorry loons.
Instead of 10,000 lakes on our license plates, how about 10,000 loopholes?
If an industry dumps pollutants into a Minnesota river, there are laws with teeth to make the company pay. If a farmer’s cows take many dumps in a Minnesota river, well, it’s the farmer’s land and farmers can do what they want. Well, almost anything. If a farmer dams up a creek and deprrives the neighbors downstream, he’ll be court ordered to halt the practice. If the same farmer, plows up hills and washes his topsoil and farm chemicals into the same creek....well, it’s his land. Meanwhile, his farmer neighbors might be trying to do the right thing with land, soil and water conservation. Doing the right thing with soil and water may make for feel good.   But there are no consequences for doing the wrong thing.
Lakeshore owners are no different. A cabin owner is free to speed up the greening of a lake to the detriment of everybody else on the lake.
In other words, in Minnesota, there are no serious consequences for cabin owners or farmers for dumping pollutants into water.
Private ownership of land is a hallowed right in America. But polluting public water ought not be a right. We all need to be accountable for anything done with the public’s natural resources.
But that’s not the state of Minnesota at the moment.
Minnesota desperately needs political leadership who will do the right thing for our lakes and rivers. But don’t float your boat.
It’s never happened yet.