Mdc Enforcement Issues

[buffresources]

Some interesting responses. I don't know Mr. Dablemont personally and am only relating what I heard at the meeting. Never got the impression he was "demonizing" the whole MDC...maybe he was/is...I don't know him or his writing that well.

Guess he will have to provide the "proof" of his allocations but it seems like a 2 hour list of these kinds of issues in front of about 50 people would have some element of truth...thats' all I am trying to say.

I have a call into him to ask just that question.

I don't really care if he is in love with MDC or not. The fact that he can apparently say and print such statements without ending up in court tells me they may have some merit. But I guess he will have to provide written "proof"...maybe the names of the people involved in the above issues or?

By the way, he did state over and over there were good people in the MDC, as I too believe, but that issues like the ones he and others cited at the meeting point to a problem.

I guess more on this later?

[Al Agnew]

Larry has been on this crusade for a long time, and I don't really know why. I've read all his books, get his magazine, and even furnish artwork to it now and then, so I've talked to him on a number of occasions. He always suggests he knows a lot more dirt on MDC than he'll say. I don't doubt that there have been some abuses. There always are when it comes to a statewide agency with a lot of bureaucrats and employees. But I'd like to see some proof before I buy EVERYTHING he says. I'm afraid that, while Dablemont might have pure motives, some of the people who are joining his organization are enemies of both MDC and "common sense conservation". Whenever I hear a phrase like that, I suspect that the conservation part gets lost.

But I do know one thing about Larry. He truly cares about Ozark rivers.

[fishinwrench]

Oh hell, Larry..... just speak up will ya? You do email so I know darn good and well you are aware of OAF and pop on from time to time. Surely you aren't too aloof to accompany this discussion regarding YOU and your cause.

The registration is quick and simple if you aren't already registered.....lets hash it out, wanna?

[Chief Grey Bear]

Such accusations should not be made without some kind of proof to back them up.

All I know is that back when they were trying to get the sales tax passed, and for some years after, they were the most friendly, helpful and open bunch to all outdoor writers. Now they seem distant, aloof and somewhat secretive. I've even found them condescending upon occasion, so I'm not a big fan of the MDC any more.

Given the current personality of the MDC, Larry could be onto something, but then again, he always seemed to have a chip on his shoulder about something or the other.

At any rate, I think his accusations deserve some investigation.

Intesting comments. This attitude directed at the MDC wouldn't stem from them declining to force the river smallmouth fishing public of Missouri to abide by sweeping regulation changes developed by the MSA??

Some interesting responses. I don't know Mr. Dablemont personally and am only relating what I heard at the meeting. Never got the impression he was "demonizing" the whole MDC...maybe he was/is...I don't know him or his writing that well.

Guess he will have to provide the "proof" of his allocations but it seems like a 2 hour list of these kinds of issues in front of about 50 people would have some element of truth...thats' all I am trying to say.

I have a call into him to ask just that question.

I don't really care if he is in love with MDC or not. The fact that he can apparently say and print such statements without ending up in court tells me they may have some merit. But I guess he will have to provide written "proof"...maybe the names of the people involved in the above issues or?

By the way, he did state over and over there were good people in the MDC, as I too believe, but that issues like the ones he and others cited at the meeting point to a problem.

I guess more on this later?

Larry Douchemont has had it out for the MDC since he graduated collage and they refused to hire him. He is the FOX news of outdoor writers. His credibility ZERO when it comes to printing facts. In fact, he has never printed any facts in the 20 years that I have seen his column.

The easiest thing to do is toss out accusations. It is another to back it up with hard facts.

Oh hell, Larry..... just speak up will ya? You do email so I know darn good and well you are aware of OAF and pop on from time to time. Surely you aren't too aloof to accompany this discussion regarding YOU and your cause.

The registration is quick and simple if you aren't already registered.....lets hash it out, wanna?

I would love for him to show up here. He won't though. He can't control the conversation and would get pummeled with facts!

Wouldn't surpise me though if buffresources was him or a close associate, testing the waters here. Looks to be a little choppy.

[Outside Bend]

Some interesting responses. I don't know Mr. Dablemont personally and am only relating what I heard at the meeting. Never got the impression he was "demonizing" the whole MDC...maybe he was/is...I don't know him or his writing that well.

Guess he will have to provide the "proof" of his allocations but it seems like a 2 hour list of these kinds of issues in front of about 50 people would have some element of truth...thats' all I am trying to say.

I have a call into him to ask just that question.

I don't really care if he is in love with MDC or not. The fact that he can apparently say and print such statements without ending up in court tells me they may have some merit. But I guess he will have to provide written "proof"...maybe the names of the people involved in the above issues or?

By the way, he did state over and over there were good people in the MDC, as I too believe, but that issues like the ones he and others cited at the meeting point to a problem.

I guess more on this later?

I read the blog- I'm sure there are situations where agents misbehave, and where the public feels they've been slighted. Some of the regulations are tough to comprehend, and I don't think people should be punished when they're trying to do the right thing. But any time you have an organization of thousands- be it MDC, the DMV, Ameren or Wal-Mart- there's gonna be some turds in the punch bowl.

IMO that's all Dablemont's saying- there's some agents that don't know the regs as they should, are misbehaving, or have a Napolean complex- and none of those are unique to MDC. And there's enough inaccuracies in Mr. Dablemont's blog posts to make me take anything he writes with a grain of salt. IMO he's just not making a case it's an institutional problem- just a few bad actors. I wouldn't mind a citizen board, but the Conservation Federation already has a whole lot of say in the direction of MDC- and it's open to everyone. Seems another review panel may be redundant.

[Outside Bend]

All I know is that back when they were trying to get the sales tax passed, and for some years after, they were the most friendly, helpful and open bunch to all outdoor writers. Now they seem distant, aloof and somewhat secretive. I've even found them condescending upon occasion, so I'm not a big fan of the MDC any more.

I agree to a point Ron, but it's a two-way street. Lots of folks in this state are hostile to MDC, and the agency fights a battle of many fronts- protecting resources, educating the public, and dismissing the misinformation sowed by legislators, the Farm Bureau, property rights nuts, etc. It's got to be draining- and if you walk into a meeting full of angry folks who don't understand your position or intentions, I can understand how you'd come across as distant or aloof.

It's also part of the agency's culture. Employees don't know which landowners have what connections, or who's hanging out at the gas station or coffee shop when they drop in. They're encouraged to be a little guarded, because you never know who's listening. It's probably a bit paranoid, but with folks like Mr. Dablemont around, waiting to swoop in every time MDC makes a misstep, it's probably understandable.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Such accusations should not be made without some kind of proof to back them up.

All I know is that back when they were trying to get the sales tax passed, and for some years after, they were the most friendly, helpful and open bunch to all outdoor writers. Now they seem distant, aloof and somewhat secretive. I've even found them condescending upon occasion, so I'm not a big fan of the MDC any more.

Point well taken, Their changed attitude bothers me, because I've never written a negative thing about them,

The MDC may view that a little differently.

And, Grey Bear, what I said has nothing to do with my recent association with MSA, but with my dealings with MDC since moving back to my home state a few years ago. I never act blindly based upon a personal agenda, but try to assess every subject with journalistic objectivity. Even concerning the wishes of MSA, I expect the MDC to act in a way that is most favorable to the environment, the resources and the public as a whole--as a whole. Being independent of the legislature also should make them independent of special interests.

However, your generalize statement makes me wonder the exact nature of your concerns or complaints about MSA, and I would like to see an open discourse between you and the policy makers (I don't do that. I just edit the newsletter) of MSA. How about starting another thread to address your concerns? It should lead to a healthy discussion concerning the best ways to manage this portion of the resources.

You don't act blindy based upon personal agenda but think the MDC needs to be investiaged because LD has a personal agenda against them?????

My concerns with the MSA have been well documented. I don't think we need to go down that road, or river , again.

[Outside Bend]

Point well taken, Outside Bend. My point is the "agency's culture" seems to have changed, and maybe I notice it more because I was in another state for well over a decade and didn't experience a gradual transition. If anything, being independent of the legislature with earmarked tax funds should make them more open and responsive to the public and the press, not less.

Their changed attitude bothers me, because I've never written a negative thing about them, and still think they are one of the best in the nation. If you want real frustration, check out Kentucky or Illinois.

And, Grey Bear, what I said has nothing to do with my recent association with MSA, but with my dealings with MDC since moving back to my home state a few years ago. I never act blindly based upon a personal agenda, but try to assess every subject with journalistic objectivity. Even concerning the wishes of MSA, I expect the MDC to act in a way that is most favorable to the environment, the resources and the public as a whole--as a whole. Being independent of the legislature also should make them independent of special interests.

However, your generalize statement makes me wonder the exact nature of your concerns or complaints about MSA, and I would like to see an open discourse between you and the policy makers (I don't do that. I just edit the newsletter) of MSA. How about starting another thread to address your concerns? It should lead to a healthy discussion concerning the best ways to manage this portion of the resources.

I understand the sentiment, Ron. I agree that MO doesn't have it as tough as many other states, and I do wish MDC was a little more openly appreciative of the sporting public. But there's a lot of MDC folks who feel they're putting their career on the line every time they open their mouth, that if they get too cozy with conservation groups, folks like the Farm Bureau will use it to polarize opinion against them (MDC).

But I think if folks build a rapport with their regional MDC folks it really helps to grease the wheels. Get involved with groups like SMA, TU/FFF, Quail/Ducks Unlimited, NWTF, Conservation Federation, and the rest. See if their are volunteer opportunities- helping with fieldwork, habitat improvements, public outreach. Talk to them at fairs, be present at meetings and events. If they know you're an ally, they'll generally open up.

[LarrySTL]

"Stories of a 1.5 million dollar contract for writing a book for MDC given to a former employee with no outside bids"

A lot of Buff's post is never going to be proveable, at least not here. However, if the book thing is true, perhaps Buff or LD himself might let us know the author's name, the ISBN number of the book, etc. If that much were real ( I'm not holding my breath), getting a copy of the contract ought to be do-able.

This seems like a simple place to start, no matter which direction it cuts.

[Al Agnew]

You know, that book thing is interesting. The folks at MDC contacted me a while back to see if I was interested in furnishing cover art for whatever anniversary it is of the Design for Conservation, since I had done the cover art years ago for another milestone of the Design. But they said they weren't sure whether they could just commission me to do it because they might have to bid it out.

While I know it's some sort of requirement that when public money is involved you're supposed put the project up for bids, in this case, and maybe in the case of the book (assuming the story is true), there might be valid reasons why you'd want a particular person to do the job, not just the lowest bidder. Maybe there was only one person who had both the knowledge of the subject and the writing skills to do the book justice. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't want some artist who had never depicted MO wildlife to do that cover just because he was an otherwise decent artist who submitted the lowest bid. And I'm pretty sure they'd rather have an ichthyologist (wow, I spelled that right on the first try) with writing skills writing a book on fish rather than an author who could write but had never gotten fish slime on his hands in his life.