# Conflict over conservation



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

*Conflict over conservation*
John Odermann The Dickinson Press
Published Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Many agricultural producers are blaming state wildlife groups for not being able to graze or hay their Conservation Reserve Program acreage. 
The accusations follow a lawsuit filed by the National Wildlife Federation against the U.S. Department of Agriculture dealing with the release of CRP acreage for "Critical Feed Use."

Greg Link, assistant chief of the wildlife division at the North Dakota Game and Fish, said the anger expressed toward state groups is misplaced.

"We're talking about the National Wildlife Federation, which is a national group based out of Washington," Link said. "... We don't think this was a wise move, but just like there are different ag groups, there are different wildlife groups. That's a private group. They can do whatever they want."

"Producers always want to blame someone it seems to me," said Clarence Bina, the Executive Director of the North Dakota Wildlife Federation. "And we're a convenient target."

The controversy arose on May 27 when the USDA issued a special CRP "Critical Feed Use" release to provide livestock producers with an additional food source for their cattle due to feed shortages.

North Dakota wildlife groups, while confused by the USDA's release without going through the regular channels, weren't overly concerned it would have a negative impact on wildlife populations in the state.
"Other states were going, 'Gosh, this is really going to smack us hard,'" Link said. "And we're going, 'Gosh, I don't know,' we get a certain percentage of our CRP hayed every year after the primary nesting season."

"We didn't think that this was an issue in North Dakota for us," Bina said. "We believe that the management of the CRP acreage is consistent with good wildlife habitat management. Even in times of drought."

Link said the main issue the Game and Fish had with the release was it wasn't presented to the state's technical committee, which is comprised of representatives from wildlife and agricultural groups in the state.
"From our standpoint up here in North Dakota, we weren't quite sure what the release was about because there was so little coordination," Link said. "... But we didn't think it had any significant impact to wildlife."
The NWF sued the USDA on the grounds that the USDA had violated the statutory public input and environmental review process, which had been previously established.

The North Dakota arm of the NWF was offered an opportunity to sign onto the lawsuit, but the groups denied the request. Indiana, South Dakota, Washington, Nebraska, Louisiana and Kansas Wildlife Federations signed onto the suit.

"This isn't the first time the North Dakota Wildlife Federation has not agreed with or signed onto actions by the National Wildlife Federation," Bina said. "... We just try to do the best thing for North Dakota hunters and fishers and trappers, and try to sustain our habitat to provide for hunting, to keep the resource up."

On July 24, U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour declared the USDA did not conduct the appropriate environmental review process before opening the land for haying and grazing and halted the release.
Link said the ruling led to a lot of frustration on the part of producers in North Dakota who needed CRP for grazing and haying, but didn't know where they stood.

"There was a lot of confusion amongst producers about what that meant," Link said. "... The emergency provision was still in place, the management provision was still in place."

Managed haying and grazing is still allowed under the provisions set forth in the 2002 Farm Bill. Link said he fears the lawsuit could have negative effects on the CRP and other conservation programs in the future.
"To go off and make a big hullabaloo about it, make a big deal about it is probably going to have more of an impact here in North Dakota than the release would," Link said.

A negative reaction with landowners choosing not to reenroll their land into the programs is very possible Link said. 
Link said the Game and Fish has also received reports that landowners, frustrated by the ruling, may not welcome hunters this fall to hunt on their land.

Bina said before landowners blame wildlife groups maybe they should gain the proper perspective.

"One of the things I'd like to say to them is they ought to join and I'm not being cynical or smart about this at all. They ought to join a local wildlife group," Bina said. "Then I think they would see that we do have deliberations about this and we do have concerns about North Dakota producers and farmers and ranchers."

Some damage to the relationship between hunters and landowners has been done Link acknowledged, but he hopes producers can separate their frustrations with a national group from individuals close to home.

"When producers this fall, if they try to take it out on sportsmen that show up wanting to hunt, you know, they're directing their frustration at somebody who had nothing to do with it," Link said. "I realize that this will probably have an effect on landowner-sportsmen relations, but it's unwarranted because we're talking about different people. The folks that initiated this are sitting in Washington."


----------



## h2ofwlr (Feb 6, 2004)

As usual, follow the $, and God forbid if any sportsmens or conservation group keeps them from making a single $.

I have an idea, lets cut off ALL the payments of federal tax dollars to the farmers! Oh wait--the farmer can opt NOT to enroll their land into CRP, WRP, and other programs, and opt NOT to receive crop subsidies and they can do what ever they want with their land, cut hay when ever, and plant whatever free of Govt interferance.

But the producers want to the cake and eat it too. Meaning they want and take the Govt $ (that is our tax $ that we pay to the Feds), but do not want to follow the restrictions placed on them when receiving such $. Hmmm.... they are greedy for $ it is as simple as that.

Well producers, you do have a choice to opt out of all Govt rograms, so do it and quit your biatching. 8)


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> As usual, follow the $, and God forbid if any sportsmens group keeps them from making a single $.


They are not making it they want to steal it. They want their cake and eat it too. Well, the taxpayer paid for the cake.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

The National Wildlife Federation is federally funded. They and a few other groups like the wildlife society get 85 million taxpayer dollars per year and there are millions upon millions available through grants. www.teaming.com So let me understand this. The taxpayer federally funded national wildlife federation sued the taxpayer federally funded farm service agency for mismanagement of CRP.

It would seem Mr. Bina is trying to put some distance between the north dakota chapter of the wildlife federation and the national wildlife federation. The north dakota chapter is just a bunch of local boys right.

Look at www.ndwf.org/contactus.asp
The president is Dave Brandt, a federal biologist from The Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center in Jamestown. And Thomas Sklebar is a retired federal biologist from the same.

Clarence Bina is right. North Dakotans should join a local wildlife group and then vote these federal agents out.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> The National Wildlife Federation is federally funded.


I doubt that, do you have a source that I can confirm it? Most people I talk to can't keep North Dakota Game and Fish separated from U. S. Fish and Wildlife much less National Wildlife Federation.


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

DG,

Are you saying that a federal employee should not belong to a local organization?

Wow, I guess all postal workers should not be allowed to join there local wildlife club then huh?


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

I was a teacher for 33 years.I guess I shouldn't have belonged to any of those groups either since federal $$$$$ helped pay my salary.

How about the the armed services?They get everything from the federal gov't.

Leo.....better quit Delta,NRA etc.

I thought the Wildlife Federation was member funded.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I thought the Wildlife Federation was member funded.


That's what I think, but I have not heard back from DG yet.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> Hmmm.... they are greedy for $ it is as simple as that.


My land just became posted for that statement!! 

Maybe I'll print that hogwash and hang it up at the SCS. I bet farmers will like reading that :eyeroll:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> My land just became posted for that statement!!


If they can't get their way it always comes down to blackmail doesn't it? Or am I wrong? It may not be, but it sure looks that way. Maybe we should print that comment and hang it in the mall. It goes both ways doesn't it? How many taxpayers would say to heck with the farmers?


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> If they can't get their way it always comes down to blackmail doesn't it? Or am I wrong? It may not be, but it sure looks that way. Maybe we should print that comment and hang it in the mall. It goes both ways doesn't it? How many taxpayers would say to heck with the farmers?


Definitly not blackmail.. we own the land we don't ask you to use it for sport. The only answer is for you to buy your own land I guess. That is pretty funny though. :lol:


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Plainsman

The wildlife federation is not member funded. At the big pow wow in January 08 at Bismark 30 people showed. At ten dollars per annual membership equals $300. Nobody goes to these meetings anymore because the NDWF leadership is totally out of sync with the rank and file.

You are testing my patience here. On many occasions I have steered you toward www.teaming.com Either you have not been there or you pretent nothing is amiss. The NDWF says they speak for sportsmen. Well even their affiliates are named at teaming. Dakota Birding, Dakota zoo, Audubon Dakota, Dickinson Convention and Visitors Bureau, Grand Forks County Prairie Partners, The Nature Conservancy-North Dakota, World's Largest Sandhill Crane Foundation and Wahpeton Breckenridge Area Chamber of commerce to name a few.

If there are any sportsmen working at these places I seriously doubt they go to NDWF meetings, pay their dues and want the NDWF representing them.

There are a lot of hunters in N.D. who work at coal mines or in power plants. Would they want Clarence Bina representing them? www.TargetGlobalWarming.org


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I looked at it. They push for federal funding for certain things, but they are not the receiver of those funds. They try get federal funding for state habitat programs, for endangered species programs etc, but they don't receive that funding. Many counties have a couple hundred members. Heck Stutsman country and Barnes county combined must have 500 members, and yes I still think they are member supported just like the NRA or any other like organization.
The presidents of these local clubs are the people who are willing to put in time and effort. If you don't like who they are join up and get your behind to work. You know haul 300 1500 lb bales out to feed the pheasants etc. Plant a few thousand trees. Take the local kids fishing. That's what these guys do. They also send recommendations to the state National Wildlife Federation and they send those concerns or recommendation along to the national offices. It's a grass roots organization.



> Nobody goes to these meetings anymore because the NDWF leadership is totally out of sync with the rank and file.


Nobody goes to the meetings because everyone wants someone else to do things for them. Also, I would guess that the Bismarck meeting was not for all members, but the local officers of each club went as representatives.

It appears you don't want money spent on wildlife you just want it to come to you in the form of elk subsidies. This is private money, so don't count on getting your hands on it.


----------



## northdakotakid (May 12, 2004)

WoW.. here we go again...

Sportsman VS Land Owners... this should bring us all a lot closer and make it better off for all.

It really gripes me to think that both parties see themselves as self reliant entities ... really, could either party exist in todays world without the other?

Could sportsman exist without the farmer ??

Could farming be sustainable without sportsman and tax payers ??

Set the egos aside for a second, think about it... think about how much could get accomplished if both parties worked together... actually look at what ahs happened... over a million acres of PLOTS... CRP program...

But it always comes back to an idea that either side does not need the other... the days of unposted land is going by the wayside as the idea of land ownership and it's rights have changed and also the extent to which people will go to access land(fee hunting)...

My advice... recongize the co-dependency of the sportsman & farmer... and cultivate it.

Plainsman understand that if there are no subsidies that 5 farms will own ND and good luck getting access...

Buckseye, I think you have more integrity than to post your land bacuase someone made a comment on an online forum. 
If it's posted it is for other reasons to which you have the right ... but that was simply an inciteful comment that only hurts the relationship that is needed for BOTH PARTIES TO THRIVE.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Sportsman VS Land Owners


No, lets be clear about this. This is one individual sportsman debating one individual landowner. He doesn't want privately funded organizations to spend money any way they want. He thinks there is some federal money getting away from him. He evidently thinks he as a landowner has some right to that money. Wrong.

Also, I judge everyone individually. There are bad apples in every barrel, but thankfully the majority on both sides are still good apples. I'm just not going to kiss a bad apples behind for access.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Plainsman

I don't get subsidies. I work at a coal mine. Silly you!

I do have fun getting you spun up. I don't have time this fall but this winter we'll debate everything. It will be great fun.

Former Representative Helen Chenoweth-Hage was a good freind of mine. Before Wayne Hage died he wrote a piece on the state of our country and how we got where we're at. Helen gave it to me and I'll post it here someday.

I don't veiw these issues as sportsman vs landowner
I veiw these issues as landowner vs a small handful who reside inside your former employer.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

DG where did you get the information that NWF was federal funded? I really doubt the Stutsman County Wildlife Federation gets any money. I think it works the other way and they contribute money.

Didn't know you worked in a coal mine. I thought sure you must have other income besides the coal mine. Actually I thought you raised a few elk. That would explain your problem with the people your talking about. I will have to call a guy in Hazen and tell him he was wrong about you raising elk, they must be just a figment of his imagination. Maybe that's history, but I thought the state subsidized you to get started.

Lets take this one step at a time. I didn't find anything about funding on the site you referred me to. So who or what makes you think the NWF is federally funded? This is all I get at http://www.teaming.com/


> A coalition of more than 5,700 organizations supporting increased public funding for wildlife conservation and related education and recreation.


I think you might be misunderstanding the site. When they say they support public funding, it means they encourage the government and others to spend more money on conservation.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Who is the guy in Hazen? I probably know the rat.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I'm certain you do, but I am more interested in NWF funding. It would appear you think it's the tax dollars you didn't pay inappropriately used.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Every year, myself and every angry working man send our tax dollars to Washington D.C. They spend more than they take in. Borrowing more and more against future generations. On March 1st 2007 these steering committees received 85 million. Sen. Diane Feinstein and Larry Craig were on the appropriations. Did you find that on the site. More interesting I believe it was in 2005, Sen. Byron Dorgan and Conrad Burns were on the appropriations. And then there is the Conservation and Reinvestment Act of 2000. Earmark 40 billion. Helen Chenoweth spoke on the house floor against it. There are almost 5000 organizations vying for that money. Everyone complains about environmentalists and animal rights activists at the public trough in D.C. Well................hello..............


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I don't think they see a penny of that money for themselves. I didn't see on that site where they got anything.

When this nation started the animals were the property of the state. Unless of course they were migratory then the federal government was responsible. Many people who started growing deer and elk now would like to see the government out of business in the wildlife field. That would leave them with unbridled to do anything they want. Wildlife would be turned strictly into a business. Heck if they could fence in birds just think you could charge $25 per species to go observe them.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Quote

That would leave them with unbridled to do anything they want.

Plainsman

I didn't make up this next saying, but somebody did.

We are from the federal government and we are here to help.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

DG said:


> Quote
> 
> That would leave them with unbridled to do anything they want.
> 
> ...


Ya, I get a kick out of that myself. Check the political form for the thread "good conservative humor".

I believe there are things that should remain private, and things that should remain the responsibility of government. Since animals are the property of the state, they should have control over them. That way all people get the enjoyment and can be involved with hunting etc. The only reason to change this is some private entity has his eye on something he can make money on. Unfortunately the only way to make money from it is to deny it to someone unless they pay. 
In old Europe the king owned everything. If you farmed, you farmed the kings land and paid for it. There was no way you could shoot the kings deer. In other parts of Europe the aristocracy owned the deer. When America formed it's constitution wise men made animals property of the state so that all citizens could receive benefit. Today we have a few citizens who want to go back the other way because it would be financially rewarding for them. Since that is diametrically opposed to the intent of the formers of this nation I would say it is un-American.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Magna Carter...Public Trust Doctrine...North American Wildlife Conservation Model...I can smell what you are standing in.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

DG said:


> Magna Carter...Public Trust Doctrine...North American Wildlife Conservation Model...I can smell what you are standing in.


  That's a heck of a nose you have. I have never been able to smell the combination of historical perspective and constitutional intent, but in my mind and for all free lance hunters it's as sweet as a rose. Today's equivalent of market hunters try to cover it by shovelling heaps of fertilizer over it, but it continues to survive. 
Hopefully the modern market hunters will follow the old market hunters and hide hunters into history. The bones of a million bison and the memories of the passenger pigeon bear witness to wildlife management by private interests. American sportsmen stepped in, put their money where there mouth is and many species on the brink of extinction are common today. Sportsmen supported laws that put limits on game species, stopped market hunting, protected habitat, and a myriad of other beneficial laws. No one has been as selfless as the America hunters.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Jerry Grafsgaard told me to say, hi Fletcher.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Five or six years ago during a drought the ND Wildlife Federation collected contributions for Operation Hayride to help farmers and ranchers offset the expense of trucking hay. They collected tens of thousands of dollars and passed every cent on to producers. There were about 400 receivers.
And three thank yous. Three. 

The NDWF is composed of affilate local wildlife clubs from around the state. Membership is about 1000 people. Each club can send as many people to the annual convention as they wish, but only the locally chosen delegates vote. Voting rights are determined by how many payed up members each club has. The '08 convention had about 100 attending with more for the speakers programs which are open to the public. I am not on the finance committee but do not believe NDWF has sent money to National for quite a few years. Mainly because the money is spent localy. NDWF is totaly grass roots. They just finished youth camp on the big lake. They work the RAP program and sit on the Landowner-Sportsman Council.

The local affilate clubs are instramental in providing boat ramps, fish cleaning stations, public docks, hadicap facilities, parks, public toilets, swimming areas, bird releases, food plots, youth activities like Take-A Kid fishing and hunting, hunter ed, trash collections, fish stocking opportunities and easements for same, local fishing touraments, 4-h camp assistance, grants for archery clubs, tree reefs, trap shooting and public education on conservation. That would be a partial list.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

So much for DG's wild theory about local people. 
Dick, I am disappointed only three out of 400 people thanked you. That's less than 1% that could say thank you for helping ship hay. They must have thought it was owed to them. :eyeroll: I make that comment not with the intent of bashing, but in the hopes of modifying behavior. We often hear about the things sportsmen do bad, but my gosh can't you thank them when they help you?


----------



## woodpecker (Mar 2, 2005)

Dick Monson said:


> They collected tens of thousands of dollars and passed every cent on to producers. There were about 400 receivers.
> And three thank yous. Three.


 :bs: I'm throwing the flag on that one!!
I know enough producers in ND to know for a fact that the majority would be very appreciative of an act like this!! Maybe you didn't get written thank yous, but for the majority of ranchers their spoken word is good enough!!
Just my opinion!!!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> but for the majority of ranchers their spoken word is good enough!!


If that is the case, it would be good enough for me too. Maybe they never met face to face with the people who paid for the shipping. If that was the case they should have called or written, or said something to someone. 
Woodpecker, I hope your right. I don't think so, but it is one of those situations that I would be delighted to be wrong. I would appreciate very much if you could find some way to prove to me I am wrong. I am not being facetious I am serious. Being wrong about this would actually make my day.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Dick,

How is my favorite word mechanic? You exaggerate everything. Tens of thousands of dollars for operation hayride. I doubt that. Was K&D Farms one of the three that sent in their thankyou?

NDWF has 1000 members? Another exaggeration. The people at these chamber of commerces' and zoos don't count as they haven't paid their dues for years, don't attend meetings, and most certainly don't have a clue what you guys are up to.

The 08 covention had 100 people atending? A very good source, who was there, told me 30.

Only the locally chosen delegates vote? What!! That sounds like representative government. Everyone should get to vote. Let the people decide.

NDWF is totally grassroots? Ya right. www.ndwf.org/contactsus.asp

Plainsman,

You old fox. How come you didn't touch my Jerry G. post. Thats a heck of a nose you have.


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

OK folks...keep this one on the thread topic.

I notice an under-tone here and I'll lock it so we can move on if I have to.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> You old fox. How come you didn't touch my Jerry G. post. Thats a heck of a nose you have.


Sorry this is off subject. I didn't touch it because I don't know who you are talking about. The last name is familiar from college in 1967, but I doubt it's the same person. This is off subject so should be in the PM's. No one is interested in personal things. I'll PM you.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

DG your info is flawed again which not surprising. Bob Schible raised the money for Hayride. The one ND corporate contribution was $30,000 alone. I think it was about another $20,000 from businesses and individuals, but might have been less. Bob siad three thank yous and he'd know but he's dead now. I did kick in a hundred bucks because I've been through drought. Maybe you kicked in money too?

I was at the convention. I must have missed you there. Some deep thinker always lays blame on NDWF. Total up their yearly thousands of donated hours for public service and weigh it against yours.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Dick,

Found this on fishingbuddy. http://www.fishingbuddy.com/forums/topi ... &tid=31444

I have been seeing the following flyer being posted and passed around in MT. As a land owner it probably will be posted at my door.

In the past some of you have talked about what you do to develop a better relationship with land owners. Taking action against these groups would be a good start.

Sportsman Save your Hunting
Privileges

If you are a member of the national Wildlife
Federation, or a member of a group that is affiliated
With the National Wildlife Federation:

You cannot initiate lawsuits and lobby against the rancher, farmer, and private property owner of this state 40 weeks of the year and still expect to have the pleasure of hunting on this private property the remaining 12 weeks. Remember you are a guest on private property. Hunting here is a privilege not a right. Do not support the National Wildlife Federation, the Montana Wildlife Federation or any group that affiliates themselves with these organizations.

If you are a member of any of these organizations you are 
Not Welcome.

dsmith | Sep 3, 2008 3:44PM


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Fritz, that's to be expected and is hardly surprising. Abraham Lincoln said there are some people who cannot differentiate between a horse chestnut and a chestnut horse.


----------



## DG (Jan 7, 2008)

Dick,

That is true. Most people do not make the distiction between G/F, NDWF, USFWS, TWS or DNR.

It is kind of like Roger K. said, "We need to educate the people what is going on behind those fences."


----------



## jrp267 (Dec 17, 2007)

buckseye said:


> > Hmmm.... they are greedy for $ it is as simple as that.
> 
> 
> My land just became posted for that statement!!
> ...


When you get done posting that why dont you post this. "I think we should end all farm subsidies and let the farmers sink or swim. Sure food prices will go up short term but in the long run we will pay less. End crop insurance. That alone will do more for wildlife than anything else." Jeff Peterson


----------

