Conservation Congress in proposed budget at risk ??

3/15/15 @ 3:29 PM
ORIGINAL POST
trouter
trouter
USER since 7/3/01
I was told by a friend in Madison that the original draft of the state budget called for the Wisconsin Conservation Congress to be disbanded. So I called my state representatives in Madison. They knew nothing about the budget changes until the budget became public. I then called the Governors office. They would not offer any minutes from budget meetings of any kind. They suggested I file a freedom of information request. Which I did. The current issue of Wisconsin Outdoor News reports that Tom Tiffany is behind the changes to the DNR in the state budget. So I contacted him via facebook. He told me that "Gov. Walked drafted the proposed budget. Not me." At this point I was a little confused. The DNR staff had no idea of the changes proposed in the new budget. They were not consulted about the changes. Despite the open records laws in Wisconsin, no open records are available about who added the drastic changes to the DNR in the budget. Who in Madison wants to disband the Wisconsin Conservation Congress ?? Who stopped it from being in the budget ? Why are there no open records of budget meetings???
Edited on 3/20/15 10:29 AM
Post Your Comment
Displaying 31 to 40 of 96 Posts
3/19/15 @ 7:37 AM
swamp people
swamp people
USER since 5/14/12
If land is not purchased Wisconsin will turn into Illinois. The whole point is preservation. What classifies not making sense as all land serves a purpose some is wetland, others fields for birds and insects. Wisconsin does not need to look like Illinois. Keep the land buy more.preserve it so we all have some where to and enjoy wild life or the outdoors, after all it public, because we paid for it. Otherwise where is OUR money going to be spent, more towards the dead beats whom refuse to work, not. Land preservation must continue.

Post Your Comment
3/19/15 @ 7:33 AM
Treeshark
Treeshark
USER since 4/5/09
Why not just increase property taxes on privately owned land? We don't want to start selling off state land, once it's gone its never coming back.

Post Your Comment
3/19/15 @ 6:21 AM
Bozo
Bozo
USER since 7/29/02
Yes,about 18 % of the land is in public ownership,but what does that mean? And 82% of the land is private. In Alaska 95% of land is public. The issue for me is preserving access and important habitat areas,not a numbers game. Listen to Robin Voss talk about this. As development in the Southeast continues it is not about total acreage but rather saving small high quality parcels. And this is very time sensitive, once something is developed it is gone. You can not realistically go back teardown houses to regain habitat.

Post Your Comment
3/19/15 @ 6:02 AM
Bozo
Bozo
USER since 7/29/02
Trouter, the cc is against the changes. The president,who supports the gov,doesn't support this. I agree with you that the process here is what matters.

As to the stewardship fund, we may have to trim it but suspend it for ten years,no. It is a question of what you value. And you could look through the budget and other proposals to evaluate that. That however,becomes a purely political discursion best left for another venue.

Post Your Comment
3/19/15 @ 5:12 AM
trouter
trouter
USER since 7/3/01
I am aware that there are no changes to the Conservation Congress in the proposed budget.

Earlier drafts of the budget disbanded the Conservation Congress.

Are earlier drafts of the budget in minutes of the budget meetings ? Who is involved in drafting additions to the budget ? Who exactly added these items to the budget ?

Edited on 3/19/15 5:13 AM
Post Your Comment
3/18/15 @ 6:40 PM
Tim_T
Tim_T
USER since 6/17/11
One correction to your previous post, trouter. The CC IS NOT BEING DISBANDED. Nothing is being done to the CC in this budget proposal. What is being proposed for change is that the NRB, who currently set policy for the DNR, are being proposed to become an advisory board the the DNR Secretary. You know, the person who is appointed by the Governor and who has absolutely no background in wildlife biology or management prior to her being appointed to the post.

Puke

Tim

Post Your Comment
3/18/15 @ 5:28 PM
trouter
trouter
USER since 7/3/01
The secretary of the DNR was not aware of the changes to her department that were in the budget. What role does the secretary have in making decisions about fundamental changes to her own department ?? If her advise is so important that she is made secretary, why was she not consulted about the proposed changes prior to the budget being published ??

Do secretaries have no input into drastic changes to their departments ??

If the Conservation Congress being disbanded was discussed by those making the budget, why is there no public data about it ? Is the governor's office exempt from open records laws ? Are budget deliberations a matter of public record ?

I do not care for one party or the other. I am interested in the decision making process itself.

Post Your Comment
3/18/15 @ 3:05 PM
nihsif
nihsif
MEMBER since 6/15/01
Yes, if necessary, but that's already in the works, so it's moot

edit: that issue may be different because it falls into the Wisconsin constitution, access to public waters

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/waterways/about_us/doctrine.htm

Edited on 3/18/15 3:13 PM
Post Your Comment
3/18/15 @ 3:03 PM
Chemist
Chemist
USER since 6/17/01
Like the North lake boat landing?

Post Your Comment
3/18/15 @ 3:01 PM
nihsif
nihsif
MEMBER since 6/15/01
1 in 5 acres are owned by the state already, a 10 year moratorium so funds can be directed towards areas that need funding now to get back on an even keel seems like the same thing I would do to my budget till things got better.

A little self control. Plus, I would think there will be provisions for "must do" scenarios

Edited on 3/18/15 3:02 PM
Post Your Comment
Displaying 31 to 40 of 96 Posts