Jim Sweeney's Notes on Jan. 2015 NRC MTG

[ridge]

Greetings to members of The Concerned Sportsmen of Michigan & friends. For those of you that focus on deer

hunting, the January meeting did not have a lot related to that subject but there was some interesting

information on other topics presented.

January 2015 NRC meeting summary

There have been some changes made on the NRC that were announced at this months meeting. Governor

Snyder has appointed John Matonich as the new Chairman and has also filled the seat vacated when John

Madigan resigned from the Commission. The new Commissioner is Christine Brumbaugh (R) from St. Louis,

Michigan. Christine comes from a farming background, she and her husband operate a large sugar beet farm.

She also is a member of Michigan Farm Bureau, a member of their Grain & Seed Oil Committee and is a Member

of the board of directors for Greenstone Farm Credit. The other change that was announced is that

Commissioner Rex Schlaybaugh is the new Chairman of the Wildlife policy sub-committee, replacing John

Matonich in that capacity. The Wildlife Policy Committee is now composed of Rex Schlaybaugh, J.R. Richardson

and Tim Nichols.

Wildlife Committee meeting–

Editorial note - each Chairman puts his own stamp on how committee meetings are run and what the committee

focuses on. Some past chairs have put a significant amount of focus on deer hunting due to their interest in it.

Commissioner Schlaybaugh is not a deer hunter, his primary interest in the outdoors is fishing, specifically fly

fishing. He also places a lot of emphasis on catering to the desires of stakeholder groups, as he places a high

degree of importance on private/public partnerships much in the same way that Russ Mason does. So groups like

QDMA, Pheasants forever, Trout Unlimited, etc. that have partnered with the DNR tend to be well received.

At Chairman Schlaybaughs request, the Wildlife Committee meeting started this month with a mini-symposium

focused on a discussion of water withdrawal issues in Michigan. Participating were Jim Dexter, DNR Fisheries

Division Chief, Bill Creal, the head of the DEQ's water resources division, Dr. David Hyndman, head of the

geologic studies department at MSU, Brian Burrows, Executive Director of Trout Unlimited (TU) of Michigan and

a member of the States water use advisory council and Tim Baird, President of The Anglers of the Au Sable

(AOTA), a private stakeholders group.

While the content of this discussion was interesting, in and of itself, it was also a fascinating glimpse of how

natural resources politics is conducted in this state and also something of a cautionary tale for those

stakeholders who are interested in influencing policy.

The basis of this issue revolve around concerns that TU and AOTA have voiced, regarding the impact of major

groundwater withdrawals have or may have on the quality of many trout streams in Michigan. Their concern is

that extracting too much groundwater has the potential to cause both temperature changes and reductions in

flow rate in these streams, which in turn threaten the viability of trout survival, thus having a negative impact on

sport fishing. There are two state agencies involved in the issue, the DNR controls regulations governing take

and the DEQ controls the issuance of water withdrawal permits. The current system of issuing permits includes

impact assessments that are designed to insure that the level of water withdrawal does not have a negative impact on the ecology of the stream in question, including the fish population. There are two major sources of

large quantity water withdrawal, irrigation for agricultural purposes and hydraulic fracking . Currently, fracking

is exempt from the permit process governed by the DEQ, although there is a separate process that has to be

gone through in those situations. As part of the permit process, the DEQ uses what they call a Water

Withdrawal Assessment Tool (WWAT), which is a stream flow depletion model used to measure the potential

impact that a new extraction well might have on a specific stream. A critical part of this model is based on

estimates of stream flow that they obtain from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).

Jim Dexter, DNR fisheries Chief started off the discussion by giving a brief rundown of some pertinent facts;

Michigan has 20,000 miles of trout streams, trout fishing represents a major tourism draw and Michigan offers

some of the best trout fishing in the world, in addition to concerns about groundwater extraction, climate

change is also pushing thermal viability in many existing trout streams in Michigan and the quality of the fish

produced has been dropping in recent years due to that impact, particularly in Southern Michigan.

Next, Bill Creal outlined the Great Lakes Compact which precludes diversion of Great Lakes waters outside of the

Great Lakes basin and specifically talked about part 327 of that compact, which governs large water withdrawals

within Michigan. Large quantity withdrawals are defined as more than 100,000 gallons a day. He described the

WWAT stream flow depletion model that the DEQ uses to make assessments for permits granted under Part

327. Most of the large water withdrawals that have occurred under Part 327 have occurred in the SLP for

agricultural purposes. He mentioned that there was a trend for increased irrigation use moving northward to the

NLP and showed a map that listed all of the sites where large withdrawals occur. Since 2009, the DEQ has had

requests for 3,151 LQW permits (large quantity withdrawal). 2,172 were passed based on the WWAT

assessment. 979 failed the WWAT assessment but were passed after staff review. 15 permits have been denied.

92% of those permit requests have been for irrigation.

Tom Baird of AOTA then discussed the concerns that AOTA and TU have over the use of the WWAT and the

permit process. They feel that the process does not do enough to protect adverse impact on trout streams and

that there may be flaws in the WWAT that mask some impact. In order to address these concerns they

partnered with the DNR and funded an independent 3rd party analysis of stream flow in a select number of

trout streams. They hired Dr. Hyndman from MSU to conduct this study.

Dr. David Hyndman outlined his study, while he gave a detailed description I'll just give a summary of the basic

points. He claims that the flow measurements taken by USGS, that are used in the WWAT, tend to be taken at

the midpoint or closer to the mouth of streams, where stream flows tend to be at their highest, and as a result

tend to overstate the level of flow, which in turn understates the potential impact that LQW's have on a given

stream. He monitored a number of streams at a number of different locations, starting in the headwaters and at

all points downstream. He has mapped many of the streams in the state using this process and has a good

working model that significantly contradicts the numbers provided by USGS. His recommendation was that the

permit process be revised to incorporate much finer and accurate assessment models, which would prevent the

issuance of permits due to overestimation of stream flow estimates.

Brian Burrows wrapped up the presentation by discussing the impact that warmer water can have on trout by

lowering oxygen levels in the water, which adversely impacts spawning, growth & survival.

Commissioner Schlaybaugh followed up with asking Bill Creal of the DEQ a few questions, whether the DEQ

monitors the impact of agricultural tiling on the water diversion (they don't) and whether he agreed that the WWAT process needs revision. Creal was diplomatic in saying that the DEQ was always open to suggestions but

that only one side of the debate was heard at this particular meeting and that the agricultural and fracking

industries might have different feelings on the issue (paraphrasing).

The whole thing was an interesting example of the conflicting interests involved in Natural Resources policy in

Michigan. On one side you have stakeholder groups and on the other side you have industry and in the middle

you have state agencies, which are charged with protecting the natural resources of the state but are also

saddled with the political realities of being controlled by the legislature and the Governor. Editorial note -

Clearly Schlaybaugh came down on the side of the guys from TU and AOTA and was using this discussion to put

some pressure on the DEQ, which was also pretty clearly on the side of the Agricultural and Oil & Gas industries.

The DNR seemed most interested in not taking sides and just keeping their heads low and out of the debate. All

in all I found the whole thing fascinating.

Due to the length of this presentation, the remainder of the Wildlife policy meeting was somewhat expedited.

Fisheries Division report -

Chief Jim Dexter gave a brief report regarding the completion of a Walleye Management review for the Western

UP. The Fisheries Division had come up with a revised management plan that they then submitted for

independent third party review by a panel of composed of members of the American Fisheries Society NCD

walleye Committee, which included some biologists from Wisconsin. The review has been completed and it

included some recommendations regarding estimating populations, evaluating recruitment an determining the

need for stocking, which the division will assess in regards to their proposal.

He also talked about the divisions assessment of proposed changes to bass regulations. Some of the options

considered are instituting immediate catch and release on a year round basis, moving the opening day earlier to

the Saturday prior to Memorial day and extending the harvest season on Lake St. Clair. The division still has

some reservations concerning the impact of catch and release on bass that are sitting on beds after spawning.

Wildlife Division report –

Chief Mason introduced Anna Mitterling, who is working for MUCC and who will be partnering with the DNR in

coordinating Deer Cooperative efforts. Her position was funded by contributions from QDMA, Pheasants

Forever, MUCC & the DNR.

Chief Mason announced an emergency order signed by the Director, which closes target shooting at the

Middleville State Game Area. It was the result of damage to trees and wildlife habitat, destruction of signs,

littering and a recent incident in which a bullet went through the window of a house in an adjacent

neighborhood. Hunting will still be allowed and target shooters are being re-directed to the Barry SGA, where

upgrades are planned for next summer to the shooting facilities.

The UP Habitat Workgroup announced the addition of a new member, the county forester for Marquette

County. The next meeting is on February 3rd, there will be a presentation at next months NRC meeting

regarding that work group.

Chad Stewart, the new deer specialist, gave a short presentation on the outcome of this years Elk Season. The

number of permits was reduced from last year by 200, based on the opinion that the area can support a larger

herd. The license quota for this year was 100 with an expected harvest of 85 by hunters, with a total harvest of 96 including tribal permits. The actual harvest was 80 elk harvested by hunters (including 3 pure Michigan hunt

winners) and 9 elk harvested by tribal hunters for a total of 89. 37 Elk were harvested during the early season,

including 15 bulls, the rest harvested during the late season. Because of the success of earlier seasons, the

January hunt will not be held this year. There were 2 Elk poaching incidents this year and no change in the rate

of non-hunting related mortality.

Karen Cleveland, DNR bird biologist, discussed recommended changes to falconry and raptor regulations. The

changes include revising the definition of "Raptor" to exclude non-native species of hawks, falcons and owls,

which are born and raised in captivity. Changes would also clarify conditions for transfer of birds to the wild.

The DNR is recommending extending the spring season for the capture of raptors and increasing the cap on

capture of goshawks by non-residents. They are also recommending expanding the areas where Raptors can be

captured in National Lakeshores, National recreational areas, state parks and recreational areas.

Meeting of the Whole –

Director Creagh was absent at the beginning of the meeting today, his assistant Bill Moritz sat in for him until he

arrived. John Matonich was introduced as the new Chairman of the NRC. Commissioner Christine Brumbaugh

was introduced as the new member to the Commission

State Parks Update

Ron Olson, Chief of the State Parks Division, gave an update on the Silver Lake ORV issue. The changes which

the DNR implemented for the new reservation system have been very controversial and overall have not been

well received. Chief Olson recently held a public town hall style meeting at Silver Lake to discuss the issue, 268

people showed up and he described the discussion as "vigorous". The division will take that input into

consideration and come up with revisions to the proposed system which should address some of the concerns.

Ron also gave a brief update on the Island Lake recreation area mining area reclamation project. The bids have

been reviewed and a vendor, McCoy Minerals has been selected for the project a more detailed report will be

submitted at a future meeting.

Forestry Division Update -

Bill O'neill Forestry Chief, introduced Deb Macaulley, who has been appointed as the new assistant chief for the

division. She is a long time DNR employee who has worked in the division for many years.

he also announced that the division was going to engaging in a joint project, a Michigan forest products market

analysis, designed to identify supply - demand issues, identify demand markets, study improvements to expand

market share for forestry products, which should be completed by next summer. This is being done in support of

Governor Snyder's push to grow the forest industries portion of the Michigan economy from $14 billion dollars

annually to $20 billion.

Fisheries Division Update -

Chief Dexter discussed recent articles voicing concerns over the Lake Michigan fishery and how changing harvest

levels have been on something of a rollercoaster in recent years, due to frequent changes in predator/prey

balances. Dr. Tammy Newcomb gave a brief update on the DNR's efforts to increase barriers in the Chicago area, to stop

Asian Carp form getting into Lake Michigan. Dr. Newcomb has been working with the DNR's from several other

states to lobby the Federal Government on this issue. While some progress has been made, there is still a long

way to go.

Wildlife Division Update -

Assistant Attorneys General Peter Manning gave the commission a brief analysis of the recent ruling which

restored wolves to the endangered species list. According to Mr. Manning, the reasoning behind the decision

was based on the manner in which wolves in the Midwest were originally exempted from the endangered

species list. The Endangered Species Act, as passed by Congress, contained very specific criteria for evaluating

whether a species was classified as endangered. The method used by the USF&W service to exempt wolves in

the Midwest was to declare them a different species from Canis Lupis, the historical designation for wolves. By

submitting them as a distinct and different species than all of the other wolves cumulatively in the United

States, the populations in the Midwest no longer met the criteria for being endangered, which in turn exempted

them from the Federal Protections of the Endangered Species Act and allowed individual states to craft their

own laws governing take. The Lawsuit launched by HSUS challenged the designation of Great Lakes wolves as a

new species by the USF&W. The Judge agreed with HSUS that there was no scientific basis for the new species

designation and ruled the wolves in the Great Lakes are Canis Lupis, just like all of the other wolves in the US and

as a result her decision was to vacate the new species designation ruling by USF&W, resulting in wolves in the

Great Lakes region being protected by the Endangered Species Act once more. The deadline for USF&W to file

an appeal in this case is February 17th. Michigan, MN and WI had filed amicus briefs in this case, Commissioner

Schlaybaugh asked Mr. Manning whether the states could file an appeal independent of the USF&W, if they

chose not to appeal, the answer was "maybe". It looks like for the foreseeable future that wolves will remain

protected. Barring an appeal, the only other approach would be to get the Endangered Species Act amended to

allow differnt classifications based on criteria other then species, which is unlikely to happen, given the current

political landscape.

A report was also given regarding a proposed land transfer in the Thumb area, which has been hotly debated in

the village of Sebewaing, where it would occur. This land swap would give 12 acres of land that is currently state

owned to the Bay Shores Camp & Family ministries, which owns the adjacent property, to expand the land they

use for a summer camp for kids. In exchange, they are offering two separate parcels, one is 9.5 acres in

Sebewaing Twp. in Huron Co. and the other is a 7.3 acre parcel in Wisner twp. in Tuscola Co. The state

property that is up for exchange currently acts as a public park for the village of Sebewaing and provides public

access to state owned bottomlands on the shore of Saginaw Bay. There would be an easement retained for

public access across this parcel to reach state owned bottom lands in the future. The property offered in

exchange in Tuscola Co., which is approx. 12 miles away from the subject parcel, offers some public access to

Quanicassee river. The DNR is recommending to the NRC that the land transfer be approved. There is local

opposition from residents of the Village of Sebewaing and there were several people who spoke at public

comment about the issue.

Graymont Mine update -

Bill Moritz of the DNR gave an update on the Graymont mine situation in the UP. The Graymont mine proposal

has been on the table for the last year or so. Last month Graymont withdrew the original proposal, which

included the purchase of about 10,000 acres of state land and replaced it with a new proposal that greatly reduced the amount of land to be purchased and instead replaced it with long term leases and subsurface

mineral leases. It's a complicated proposal, too complicated to describe in detail here. Graymont also

approached the DNR last month with a separate, unrelated proposal which involves a straight up exchange of

subsurface non-metallic mineral rights on a piece that Graymont currently owns the rights to and a nearby

parcel of state land. After consideration, the DNR is recommending to the Director that the first proposal be

rejected due to lack of detailed information in the proposal but that the second proposal be accepted.

Commissioner Pontz asked what the potential value of the first proposal to the state would be, Moritz

responded that based on the proposed royalty rate included in the proposal, that it would generate about $70

million dollars for the Natural Resources trust fund, from limestone sales and an undetermined additional

amount of revenue from dolomite sales. That income would be stretched over the 100 year lease time frame of

the agreement. The Director indicated that there would be another public meeting in the UP prior to him

making a final decision, which is likely to occur sometime in February.

There were a lot of people signed up for public comment this month;

4 speakers related to the Bay Shore camp land exchange

3 speakers regarding the proposed Bass regulations

2 related to the changes to falconry regulations

3 related to the Graymont proposals

6 others related to other various topics

I was only able to stay for the first 5 public speakers, who talked about the Bay Shore Camp exchange and the

Bass regulations.

Interesting meeting despite deer hunting not playing much of a role. It will be interesting to see how much

emphasis gets placed on hunting issues this year or whether other topics have a higher priority.

Regards,

Jim Sweeney

The Concerned Sportsmen of Michigan

Attachments:

January 2015 NRC meeting summary.pdf (102.8 KB)

[ridge]

The editor's note (1st paragraph of Wildlife Committee meeting) and the 1st paragraph of the Wildlife Division Report were especially interesting.  It seems that special interest groups will be given additional unique access to the DNR/NRC as if they have not had it in the pass.  Now it seems that it will be done more in the open at least as far as the NRC is concerned.  It is too bad that the sportsmen and sportswomen of Michigan are not viewed as a special interest group.

[daappleknocker]

Ridge, I must disagree with your last sentance. The "sportsmen and sportswomen" are the only ones being listened to. They have organized into clubs and special-single interest groups and because of "social science" have gained favor with those in control. Its the "hunters and outdoorsmen and women", who represent the vast majority of stakeholders, that are not being listened to. 

[ridge]

We meant the same thing.  My post referred to the message in your last sentence.  

[daappleknocker]

Just messing with you Ridge. My personal belief is that the term "sportsman" denotes compitition and I refuse to use the term when referring to the "average Joe" or "non-affiliated" hunters. Hunting, or the taking of an animals life for food, should never be referred to as a "SPORT".

[hlfisher]

I know the Crumbaugh family, in fact I graduated with her Father in Law and that family or I should say her Father in Law anyway was real heavy into deer hunting. He used to get time off from school to go hunting every year, but don't know about her husband Clay.

Her picture was in our local paper because of her being a local girl, I guess tho I will take a wait and see approch with her to see what will happen there. I do know that her mother graduated with my wife and she wasn't dead set against hunting but let it known in school that she thought there were better things to put your time in, that's why I think I'll wait and see.

The Crumbaugh farms are actually closer to Breckenridge than St. Louis.

[ridge]

hlfisher, I think that you meant to say Brumbaugh or is it wrong in the notes?  I think that she might be a balancing vote on the Commission but as you said, we can only wait and see.  My greater concern is the additional influence that Mr. Schlaybaugh and Ms. Mitterling will have as they seem to have deep ties with a number of special interest groups and the DNR.  To me that may mean an increased loss of objectivity and independence if the NRC ever really had those qualities.

After checking the DNR list on their site, I see that the name is indeed CRUMBAUGH.  Thank you for bringing that to our attention, hlfisher. The notes are wrong in this regard and I must say that Jim rarely makes such typos.  Thank you also for your insight, hlfisher, as it is always better to get a personal point of view.  According to the biography on the DNR page, her husband and son are avid deer hunters.  We will hope that means positive things for hunting.  Personally she seems to be more of an angler than a hunter.

Nichols, Matonich (the Chairman), and Schlaybaugh (Chairman of the Wildlife Committee) have very deep ties to special interest groups.  As anyone can see, it only takes one vote to tip everything in favor of the MUCC or other special interest groups.  I specifically name the MUCC because of their unique access to and deep connection with the DNR.  My experience has been that the leadership of the MUCC manipulates the actions of that group and that it is not a group that is operated by the democratic vote of each fishing or hunting member.

I have heard that some of the former LPDMI claim that the MFB have been playing politics with the NRC.  If that is true, then what have the MUCC, the LPDMI, and other special interest groups been doing?  It is pretty obvious that the Commission has become just another political organization that is more about political agenda than it is about what is best for fishing and hunting and the everyday fisherman or hunter. The same could be said for our native resources such as the deer herd or our fish.  Proposal G has become so twisted as of late that science is the last thing that is considered.

[ridge]

Jan 25, 2015 8:11:09 GMT -5 daappleknocker said:

Just messing with you Ridge. My personal belief is that the term "sportsman" denotes compitition and I refuse to use the term when referring to the "average Joe" or "non-affiliated" hunters. Hunting, or the taking of an animals life for food, should never be referred to as a "SPORT".

Thank you for making me think about those terms.  That never really occurred to me.  I fully agree with your statement as I have always looked at hunting and fishing as food gathering activities as well as recreation.  In this regard I will try to remember not to use that term.  Feel free to remind me should I forget!!

[daappleknocker]

                          


         



                                                                              

[hlfisher]

It is wrong on the notes, when they annouced it in the local paper, they showed her picture and I knew her then but have never really talked to her about hunting.