Outdoor Matters
Conservation Leaders Make Plans for Investing in Michigan's Future
A column from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources

During one of the small-group sessions at the Conservation Summit, DNR Resources Management Deputy Mindy Koch (right) discusses the value of conservation in Michigan with (clockwise from left) Tom Bailey, Little Traverse Conservancy; Jeremy Emmi, Michigan Nature Association; Ron Shaver, Mid-Michigan Sportsman Alliance, and Natural Resources Commissioner Frank Wheatlake. (DNR photographs by by David Kenyon)

More than 150 conservation leaders from around Michigan gathered in Lansing February 7 to discuss funding concerns for conservation and how to plan for the future.

The first statewide Conservation Summit was hosted by the Michigan Natural Resources Commission and featured a discussion on the state's economy and the fiscal impact it has had on conservation and services delivered by the Michigan departments of Natural Resources (DNR), Environmental Quality (DEQ), and Agriculture (MDA).

"We have a quality of life that is unparalleled in the country, but the future of conservation as we know and love it is in crisis," said NRC Chair Keith Charters.

Mr. Charters said the state needs a frank, serious discussion about long-term funding needs for the state agencies charged with conservation and protection of natural resources.

In their presentation to the more than 150 conservation leaders from around Michigan in attendance at the first-ever Conservation Summit February 7 in Lansing, the three state agency directors pointed out that the DNR, DEQ, and MDA combined receive only one percent of the state's General Fund spending. The summit was held to begin a serious discussion about long-term funding needs for the agencies charged with conservation and protection of natural resources.

The summit, Mr. Charters said, "is a springboard to do just that."

Today, although the management responsibilities for the DNR, DEQ, and MDA are greater than ever, when put in the context of the rest of the state budget, these three departments receive less than two percent of the total.

Yet the return on that investment has a tremendous impact on the state's economy. In fact, for every dollar invested in conservation, $116 is returned.

However, over the past several years, General Fund dollars appropriated by the legislature to support conservation and protection of natural resources have all but disappeared.

This has caused unfairness in who pays for conservation and natural resources.

A lot of people aren't paying much of anything to support the wildlife, forest, and recreation programs they are using heavily. This includes millions of citizens who enjoy birding, berry picking, cross-country skiing, and many other resource-related opportunities associated with public lands, and even more who enjoy viewing wildlife on private lands.

In the meantime, a lot of other people are being asked to pay more than their share, both to support the programs they use and to make up for the "non-payment" by other users.

Because there are not established revenue programs by which non-payers can pay their share, when costs rise the only way to offset them is to raise prices of hunting and fishing licenses and increase camping fees.

This imbalance was underscored by Matt Hogan, one of the summit's presenters, who is the executive director of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.

During his presentation, Mr. Hogan explained that while hunting, fishing, and wildlife viewing are an engine for state economies, little of that money is returned to state wildlife agencies.

For example, Mr. Hogan said wildlife-related recreation in Michigan produces more than $2.7 billion in consumer spending and creates more than 50,000 jobs, with both generating nearly $280 million in tax revenues.

"Yet less than two percent of those revenues go back into fish and wildlife," he said.

With the help of diverse coalitions, Mr. Hogan said a number of states, including Missouri, Arkansas, Virginia, Texas, Colorado, Arizona, and Maine, all have secured dedicated wildlife agency funding.

In Missouri and Arkansas, for example, citizens support conservation and natural resources with a small portion (one-eighth of one percent) of the sales tax. Wildlife agencies in Virginia and Texas receive tax revenues from outdoor gear purchased in those states, and agencies in Colorado, Arizona, and Maine receive a small portion of their states' lottery revenues.

"The people of Michigan have a very strong history of supporting conservation issues at the ballot box," Mr. Charters said. "The summit brought a broad spectrum of interests together to launch a targeted push to invest in conservation. It's critical that we leave no stone unturned when it comes to thinking long term about new funding sources."

Public polling consistently shows strong support for natural resources protection.

In a recent survey conducted by the Heart of the Lakes Center for Land Conservation Policy, 72 percent of respondents said it was somewhat important or very important for state government to provide adequate funding to preserve Michigan's water and recreational spaces such as parks, beaches, and forests.

During her presentation at the summit, Rachel Kuntzsch, acting executive director of Heart of the Lakes, said the survey also asked respondents to identify possible funding options. Although 47 percent favored user fee increases, 20 percent supported a tax or fee for all citizens.

She said public education is needed to increase awareness and support.

"The summit is a key first step in bringing together leaders to begin an important discussion on the future of conservation in Michigan," said DNR Director Rebecca A. Humphries. "Working alongside our stakeholders, we will address how we can move forward to ensure the great natural resources and outdoor recreation legacy of Michigan is carried on to future generations."

At the conclusion of the summit, state officials announced a coalition is forming to raise public awareness about the need for longterm stable funding for conservation and natural resources. If people are interested in joining the coalition, they may contact any of the following organizations online: the Michigan chapter of The Nature Conservancy at www.nature.org/michigan, the Heart of the Lakes Center for Land and Conservation Policy at www.heartofthelakes.org, the Michigan Environmental Council at www.mecprotects.org, and the Michigan United Conservation Clubs at www.mucc.org.