Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ron Kruger

Threats To Conservation In Missouri

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure how many are aware, but there is a group of legislatures with a serious vendetta against Missouri Department of Conservation, and they wish to cripple it at any cost. It bothers them greatly that they have no political control over the MDC and its funding. Since the sales tax for conservation was passed in 1976, various law makers have tried periodically to get control of MDC funding and/or to be able to dictate management of the state's fish and wildlife. Never has there been such a concerted and comprehensive effort to destroy the Department as we know it. They're attacking from every angle.

Here's a listing of all the bills currently under consideration that would damage the way MDC functions.
SJR1 (Munzlinger), which attacks the composition of the Conservation Commission and would politicize it from the inside.

B178 (Munzlinger), which is another attempt to reclassify captive deer as livestock.
HJR 8 (Redmon), proposes a constitutional provision repealing the sales and use tax for conservation.
HJR 27 (Spencer), proposes a constitutional amendment reducing the sales tax by half.
HJR 28 (Spencer, proposes a constitutional amendment requiring the conservation sales tax to be approved by voters ever 10 years.
HB 315 (Brown), requires the DOC to conduct testing of deceased deer found along state highways for chronic wasting disease.
HB 316 (Brown), requires Conservation Commission members to register as lobbyists and follow lobbyist rules and regulations.
HB 317 (Brown), requires the DOC to reimburse automobile owners up to $500 for damages inflicted upon vehicles by deer.

To learn more about this and support conservation in the state, go to http://confedmo.org/

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who lives in a rural area and has had several vehicle/deer encounters I think it would be a great idea if them DOC fronted me $500 dollars every time one of their deer smacks into my vehicle.   I don't think that is a bad idea at all and I'm pretty sure that the DOC could cover that expense out of their petty cash.

 

As far as the rest of the stuff, I've heard some of this from other sources and I e-mail my representatives regularly suggesting that they not mess with the DOC.   Missouri has one of the best, well-funded conservation departments in the USA and it would be a blessing to keep it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who lives in a rural area and has had several vehicle/deer encounters I think it would be a great idea if them DOC fronted me $500 dollars every time one of their deer smacks into my vehicle.   I don't think that is a bad idea at all and I'm pretty sure that the DOC could cover that expense out of their petty cash.

 

As far as the rest of the stuff, I've heard some of this from other sources and I e-mail my representatives regularly suggesting that they not mess with the DOC.   Missouri has one of the best, well-funded conservation departments in the USA and it would be a blessing to keep it that way.

 

No...period.  I too live in rural Mo and have hit deer.  It sucks, but the idea of the MDC somehow being "responsible" for it and reimbursing me is, to me, ludicrous.  This would create an unnecessary layer of red tape in an agency that actually works pretty good.  I want the MDC money that I pay for with my taxes and licenses going towards MDC activities.  Not the inevitable fraud that would occur from this.  $500 would stock a lot of bass.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No...period.  I too live in rural Mo and have hit deer.  It sucks, but the idea of the MDC somehow being "responsible" for it and reimbursing me is, to me, ludicrous.   

Me too . I want the city to pay for mole damage in my lawn .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At first glance, the idea of testing roadkill for CWD seems like a good one.  The rest of this is crap.  I happily pay for my licenses and the extra taxes that are earmarked for MDC BECAUSE they are earmarked for MDC and from all appearances, The MDC is a good steward of their finances and our public lands.  As someone originally from Illinois, I can tell you that it can be a WHOOOOLE lot worse.  MO has a huge amount of public use lands and I am happy to do my part so I and others can enjoy them.  Both now and in the future.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At first glance, the idea of testing roadkill for CWD seems like a good one.  The rest of this is crap.  I happily pay for my licenses and the extra taxes that are earmarked for MDC BECAUSE they are earmarked for MDC and from all appearances, The MDC is a good steward of their finances and our public lands.  As someone originally from Illinois, I can tell you that it can be a WHOOOOLE lot worse.  MO has a huge amount of public use lands and I am happy to do my part so I and others can enjoy them.  Both now and in the future.

 

 

It is nice, though I wish they had a five or seven day non-resident fishing license when I visited, there's no way I would spend the daily price for that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is nice, though I wish they had a five or seven day non-resident fishing license when I visited, there's no way I would spend the daily price for that

 

 

I didn't know they didn't.  That IS too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll agree to disagree.   The MO DOC has managed the deer herd to the point to where there are more deer here now than there were when Lewis and Clark passed through here.  Granted, there are many reasons for this, but their superior management skills are a primary reason.

 

All I'm saying is, take some responsibility boys, when one of your large managed resources happens to wander in front of a citizen driving, and crunches happen, help the citizen out some.  Just cover my deductible.  I know they have enough money in reserve to cover that, like I mentioned earlier, probably out of petty cash.

 

The MO DOC has received the 1/8 cent sales tax for 30+ years now.   They have enough money in reserve, right now, to buy any piece of property they want, should it come up for sale, and they have guys that watch for that sort of stuff.

 

Mind you, I am totally opposed to politicians in general, and Republicans in particular, trying to tap the DOC funding source because is state is short of money in other areas.  However, in the matter of the deer herd, I think that the DOC bears some responsibility, in that they have managed the deer herd so well that deer can walk out in traffic often, let cars smack into them and the total deer herd isn't appreciably compromised.  I absolutely don't think that fronting a citizen 5 bills when they happen to smack into Bambi or Bambi's Dad, or Mother, or brother is going to unduly upset the budget of the MO DOC.  When you strike a deer with your vehicle, it is a genuine pain in the butt and the wallet.  I don't think that guys are going to go out of their way to smack into deer just to make $500.

 

There are some things that the MO DOC could do better.  For instance, when I arrived home at roughly 4 AM this morning, I could hear coyotes helping a lot.  I know guys who have livestock operations, and coyotes are an issue in livestock depredation.  Restoring the coyote bounty wouldn't be a bad thing.

A post earlier, mentioned that the DOC didn't offer a 5 or 7 day out of state fishing license.( other than a daily license)  A custom out of state license option would be nice, where you could get a license for as many days as you needed/wanted is a very good idea.  For guys that have CRP land, ( like me) more funds for wildlife habitat management - native plant management - woodlot management , would be appreciated.

 

 

Edit Just re-read my post - sorry for the rant - kinda . . . . turns out that I am very smart  during my 3rd IPA after work.  I feel better now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully support MDC. And by the way Trees, every time you say, "DOC" I think, "Department of Corrections", which is completely different :D Just sayin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also support the MDC.  I lobbied for the 1/8 cent tax when it first was proposed.  It has done a lot of good and has put 1/2 million acres back into public land.  However, they are picky about what they buy.  I offered them 800 acres along Crane Creek that has turkey and deer in abundance.  They wouldn't even come look at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • fishing

    fishing forum

    fishing rods

    fishing reels

    fishing

    bass fish

    fish for bass
    fish

×