Bill Would Limit MDC and Non-Profits

[awhuber]

Every time it seams I some bill come up lately this Guy is on it someplace. He obviously has a Beef with MDC why doesn't one of the organizations start a recall petition against him ?

It would seam to me that with the amount of people who love the outdoors in Mo it wouldn't be hard to remove a guy like this.

Missouri does not have recall provisions for representitives.

[rFisherk]

Precisely. If you're worried about MDC spending too much money, the last thing you want to do is take away the sort of cooperative programs which don't cost them anything. Friends for Munzlinger has more than $100,000 on hand, and he's taken more than $17K in "gifts" from special interests since 2004. The guy obviously has no problem with outside money funding legislative priorities, so long as the outside money is his.

Where and how did you find this information? Can the same be done for other Senators and Reps?

[Flysmallie]

This is completely asinine.

It's politics, what did you expect? Intelligence?

[SpoonDog]

Where and how did you find this information? Can the same be done for other Senators and Reps?

The St. Louis NPR Station tracks Missouri's state legislator's "gifts", it looks like they have a pretty comprehensive list of representatives. It looks like you can search through candidates and see their campaign contributions here.

http://www.abc17news.com/news/state-agency-accused-of-misusing-taxpayer-dollars/32368112Found this article explaining whats going on with this bill.

MDC's mission is to protect and manage our state's fish, wildlife, and forest resources- with 90%+ of the state in private land ownership, you're going to have to work with private individuals to accomplish that mission. When MDC uses tax revenue to restore a wetland or stream, that means better water quality and habitat for everyone. When MDC uses tax revenue to help a landowner install ag buffers or fence cows from streams, that means less sedimentation and nutrient enrichment for everyone. When MDC uses tax revenue to assist landowners with prescribed burns or conduct forest management, it improves habitat and benefits wildlife for everyone. MDC is using public funds to generate benefits for everyone- I'm not sure what's inappropriate about that.

Munzlinger can couch the bill as protecting private enterprise if he wants, but it's a red herring. Stream restoration can run more than $100 bucks a foot- many landowners simply aren't going to adopt conservation practices if it costs them that sort of scratch. There are successful private consultants in the state, and removing MDC from the equation won't necessarily create a bigger market for them- people could just opt out of doing anything altogether.

[rFisherk]

Thanks for the info on the site, SpoonDog.

[ozark trout fisher]

This bill would kill a TON of great conservation programs. Any project where the MDC is working with TU, DU, or any number of organizations with hunting and fishing-friendly objectives and tactics would go out the window. It is almost impossible to come up with any possible benefit to this, unless you just have a beef with the MDC and want to piss them off with a bill, or on the off-chance it's successful, make it impossible for them to do their job. There are so many bills like this out there that it's almost impossible to detail all of them. I encourage you to visit this page. It's from January, but most of the bills listed here are still alive and still demand your attention.

http://confedmo.org/legislation-threatens-conservation-authority-and-funding/

If you live in Missouri and care even a little about conservation...or even hunting and fishing in general, these bills turn everything that is awesome about this state into a massive question mark. Please, do a little research and email/write your legislator. Or don't complain when there isn't enough money or room to work for the MDC, and your hunting and fishing suffers because of it, as well as your access to it on public land. Because if the sales tax is reduced to 1/16%, the MDC has to pay folks who hit a deer $500, and they can no longer work with NGOs...there is going to be very little they can do.

Then we can look forward to a politically controlled disaster for game and fish management. And in all likelihood, a lot of your conservation areas will be seeing "no-trespassing" signs go up in this way-too-real scenario.

[ness]

"It just appears to me that there's a conflict going on here to use taxpayer dollars to supplement a program to put private industry out of business," Munzlinger said. "That's the reason I filed the bill."

He's an idgit

[Phil Lilley]

Have him name businesses that are hurt by this relationship...

[ness]

Have him name businesses that are hurt by this relationship...

No kidding. He makes it sound like its just destroying companies. I guess there is this one

http://www.terratechnologies.com/Staff_Qualifications/Flick_resume.htm

Run by the guy who testified

[ozark trout fisher]

He's an idgit

I wouldn't be so sure. This bill (and ones like the "MDC pays you $500 if you hit a deer bill") seem a lot more calculated and vindictive than anything. It's a statement to the MDC on the part of the legislators that they are not satisfied with game/fish management not being under their control.