Conservation Served Up As Egg All Over Their Faces
I’ll preface this up front stating that this blog post is certainly to be of more interest to you if you’re either a Minnesota resident or have hunting or fishing ties to this state. This post is about politics and the often fickle, never predictable world of laws being crafted and proposed. Still, there are some important lessons to be reinforced by the current actions of my home state’s governing bodies that are applicable no matter where you might live.
First, let me set the stage for what this discussion is about. In a nutshell, Minnesota has been trying to enact a law for dedicated funding to conservation programs now for nearly a decade. Over the years the numbers have varied slightly, but basically it’s been a sales tax-based funding proposal that would see roughly 1/8 to 3/16 of a percent of the collected tax earmarked for programs to aid hunters and fishermen (as well as all Minnesotans who enjoy the outdoors). This legislative program was largely inspired by the Missouri model that helped that state fund their conservation efforts now for over a decade.
Okay, let’s fast forward now to the most current legislative session here in Minnesota that officially ended this past Sunday. Despite hopes over the past decade to enact some form of this funding…sportsmen have been on an emotional roller-coaster of highs and lows through the years to get these dedicated funding mechanisms in place. And this year was no different. Despite early optimism in the legislative session…there was a time that followed when things looked quite bleak for any new measure being put on the ballot. You see, to do what conservation groups are seeking requires a constitutional amendment voted on by the people…but first the legislature had to agree on the wording and the structure of the question being proposed for the fall ballot. That’s where the trouble began.
As this session was winding down optimism was at a new high among many conservation groups and outdoor pundits. Take, for instance, this article written by Dennis Anderson of the Minneapolis StarTribune entitled “Landmark legislation is on the way”:
Ah…[knock, knock]…Dennis! Might I suggest you do a Google search on the Internet for a supplier to obtain a new crystal ball. While your optimism and confidence is quite apparent in your article…a veteran outdoors writer such as yourself should have known better. When it comes to matters of the legislature…you wait for the ink on the Governor’s signature to dry before you start dancing in the street. Fact is, once again this year the dedicated funding measure stalled in conference committee and there will be no voting this November on the ballot. In fact, it will be another two more years before such a measure will even stand a chance for passage once again.
Of course, Anderson wasn’t the only Minnesota outdoors writer with a bit-o-egg on thy face. Many of the movers and shakers in Minnesota conservation circles were doing a little premature back-slapping on this proposal. Another outdoors writer and editor, Rob Drieslein, of the Outdoor News had this to say in his weekly editorial comments:
STOP THE PRESSES! STOP THE PRESSES! Looks like the Outdoor News will need a new headliner for their upcoming edition. The only thing they will have to report on this issue is what went wrong and to explain why they totally missed it with their reporting.
Please understand I am not rejoicing in the fact some fellow outdoor scribes took a shot and totally missed the mark on this issue. They should, however, be somewhat accountable for their reporting. They blame the legislature…and indeed there is plenty of blame to go around in those circles…but the local outdoor press completely botched it by counting the proverbial chicken before it was hatched. Seriously, veteran legislative reporters are not foolhardy enough to make some of the statements on passage that I saw bantered about last week on this issue. Count this perhaps as wishful thinking being reported and lending itself to the roller-coaster effect that has put this state’s sportsmen on emotional highs and lows over the past decade.
As a sportsman, I share the disappointment that the legislature in its current configuration could not get the job done to better aid conservation. Indeed, it’s a bitter defeat and a disappointing shame that the measure will not be on the ballot this fall. Still, the local outdoors media in Minnesota better do some introspection on the job they are doing, as well. It might have been the legislature who failed us on passing the new conservation legislation, but it was the outdoors media who has been failing us by unrealistically raising our expectations on these matters. Sure, it’s always a good idea to stay optimistic…but never a good idea to let optimism cloud the realistic judgment a writer reporting these sort of things should have.
I’m sure the postpartum legislative discussion will focus on the legislature and why they can never get the job done for us sportsmen. That good and fine, but let’s not overlook how the local outdoors media better fine tune its reporting style before the next time this proposal comes along. Wipe the egg off your faces and stop doing a disservice to the sportsmen community by reporting your wishful dreams as fact…when you should be experienced enough to know that the legislature has a long-standing history of making fools out of those who prematurely celebrate a legislative victory.
2006 Jim Braaten. All Rights Reserved. No Reproduction without Prior Permission.