Minnesota's fish and wildlife programs would feel the financial pinch under Gov. Tim Pawlenty's budget proposal announced last week.

The Department of Natural Resources would trim all $2.8 million of general fund dollars now going to the Fish and Wildlife Division -- 3.5 percent of the division's total funding. That means the division would be funded almost entirely by hunting and fishing license fees from the Game and Fish Fund and would receive no tax dollars from the general public.

The cuts could mean reductions in research on fish and wildlife populations and habitat, land and water habitat management projects and environmental review processes. Working lands initiative and shoreline restoration grants could be reduced.

The realities of the state's financial bind -- it has a $4.8 billion projected deficit -- dictated the trim. The fish and wildlife cuts are part of $7.2 million in general fund reductions proposed for the agency, including another $1.9 million that would be spread throughout the DNR.

Dave Schad, Fish and Wildlife director, said that while his division's work primarily benefits hunters and anglers, it also benefits all citizens of the state. "It's disappointing that hunters and anglers will assume the full burden of the conservation work we do out there, but these are pretty extraordinary times," he said.

DNR Commissioner Mark Holsten said it's uncertain whether layoffs would occur, but some positions are being left open and hiring restrictions are in place. The Fish and Wildlife Division, with about 600 employees, has 25 unfilled positions.

The Legislature ultimately will set the 2010-11 budget and will decide whether to change Pawlenty's recommendations. The proposal calls for a $357 million DNR budget for fiscal year 2010 and $368 million for 2011.

"We want to make sure their cuts are fair and that they have the least impact on natural resources as possible," said Sen. Satveer Chaudhary, DFL-Fridley, chairman of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee. He said legislators will want to go through the DNR's budget "with a fine-toothed comb" after the state legislative auditor recently found that the DNR couldn't document whether it was properly spending revenues from the $95 million Game and Fish Fund. Holsten has said the agency has been revamping its management and financial systems to address those concerns.

Schad said there might be ways to save money without slashing programs, such as through office consolidations. A big unknown: The contracts for most of the DNR's 3,200 employees expire this spring, and new contracts could have a major impact on the agency's budget. "The governor has said he would like to see a salary freeze and concessions," Schad said.

No new officers Meanwhile, the DNR's conservation officer force will remain understaffed, with 15 vacancies unfilled, under the proposed budget. With retirements, that number could increase. For the first time since 2004, the agency won't hold an academy to produce new officers.

"We'll be shorthanded," said Julie Siems, a conservation officer in Faribault and president of the Minnesota Conservation Officers Association. "We're trying to look at the positives: We're not laying off people."

Lands and minerals Among the proposed general fund cuts are $1.9 million to the Lands and Minerals Division. But under the proposed budget, costs of mine land reclamation and real estate services that had been paid for by general fund dollars would be paid for by users, including utility companies, local governments, private individuals and mining companies, mostly offsetting the cuts.

License fees rising? Another looming financial concern for DNR officials: The Game and Fish Fund is projected to dip into the red by 2013, when expenditures are projected to exceed revenues. That means the DNR either will have to significantly cut fish and wildlife programs or staff, or raise license fees to prevent a shortfall.

"A fee increase has to happen -- the question is when," Holsten said. "Raising fees at this time, with this economy, is the wrong thing to do." But discussions about raising fees likely will have to begin by 2012 to deal with the projected deficit. The last general fee increases occurred in 2001.

Doug Smith • dsmith@startribune.com