Anderson: Overseeing $189 million in habitat development is all in a day’s work for Mark Johnson

Mark Johnson, 67, is retiring next month after 11 years as executive director of the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council (LSOHC). A hunter and angler, Johnson holds a bachelor’s degree from Bemidji State University and a master’s in management from the College of St. Scholastica in Duluth.

Before joining the LSOHC, Johnson was a regional director for the Ruffed Grouse Society, ran the state’s Turn In Poachers program and was executive director of the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association.

In 2008, voters approved the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment, dedicating three-eighths of 1% of state sales tax revenue to fish, game and wildlife habitat; clean water; arts and cultural heritage; and parks and trails. The Outdoor Heritage Fund, which pays for the habitat work, is overseen by the LSOHC.

In the interview below, Johnson explains how the council works and what the nearly $2 billion it has recommended for fish, game and wildlife habitat since 2008 has accomplished. The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Q: Fraud in state government is in the news, and the Outdoor Heritage Fund has grown to $189 million, which is distributed annually for game, fish and wildlife habitat. Can taxpayers be assured the money is being managed wisely and legally?

A: In the 17 years, the LSOHC has recommended, and the Legislature has approved, nearly $2 billion of project work. We’ve been audited regularly by the Legislative Auditor. We’ve had minor issues over receipts and such. But it’s been caught early. It helps that all of our money is paid as reimbursements. Work has to be approved and completed before a vendor is paid.

Q: How does the council review proposals?

Q: How are council members chosen?

A: The governor recommends members, as do the House and Senate. The minority party of both houses also gets representation. Politics aren’t eliminated, but they’re minimized.

Q: Your staff has four members, including you. Is that enough?

A: Approval was given this year for another staff member, which was needed. But the genius of our work is our interactive online system, which is where all projects and financial reporting are done. System improvements are continuous. But it allows us and the council to do our work and keep track of it.

Q: When voters approved the Legacy Amendment in 2008, they didn’t want the Outdoor Heritage Fund to supplant money already being dedicated to conservation. The money was intended to supplement previous appropriations. Is that happening?

Q: How do we know habitat work recommended by the LSOHC is being done well?

A: By law, at least one-tenth of 1% of money appropriated for projects must fund an expert panel to go into the field and review projects. This group consists of DNR and/or Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) biologists, in conjunction with university or other experts. Their reports go to the council and the Legislature.

Q: What have the experts found?

A: They don’t only grade a wetland or other project, for example. They also look at techniques and protocol. What’s being learned by the projects? How can we use that information to improve future projects? The short answer is they’ve found a few projects with weak spots but no real lemons.

Q: Are habitat projects approved randomly or in a given year approved as part of a package?

Q: Are projects geographically distributed?

A: There are some areas of emphasis — such as southern Minnesota, where most of our prairies and wetlands are gone. But generally, yes, including in the metro, the projects are spread around. Our northern forests are one example. We permanently protected more than 186,000 acres of working forestland owned by Blandin that will forever be open to public recreational use.

Q: This year alone, more than $31 million of Outdoor Heritage Fund money was recommended by the council for grasslands and prairies, and almost $29 million for wetlands. Yet ducks still aren’t doing well.

A: I’m not sure anyone knows the answer completely. I do know we’ve learned a lot, and we’re constantly applying the science of what we’ve learned, and also the art of it. Agriculture has a huge impact, obviously. I think it’s fair to also ask how much worse would it be if we weren’t doing the work. A lot worse, I think. In time, maybe, we’ll answer the duck question. Meanwhile, the expertise that Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever, The Nature Conservancy, the DNR and the Fish and Wildlife Service bring to this effort — it’s never been done before. Not anywhere. We’ve got as good a chance as anyone to figure it out.

Q: What’s next for the council?

Q: Improvement suggestions?