Conservation of Minnesota's natural resources is in a lot more trouble, and more immediately, than most people realize. If actions aren't taken in the next 10 years or so to reverse hunting and fishing participation trends; to address the way land, water and wildlife stewardship are paid for; to better monitor and maintain the health of the state's lands, waters and wildlife; and to increase significantly Minnesotans' conservation awareness levels, the outdoors lifestyle that historically has been Minnesota's hallmark will go the way of the horse and buggy.
Unfortunately, this drama — and it is that — is far removed from most Minnesotans' daily concerns. Partly as a result of this disconnect, actions by state agencies, notably the Department of Natural Resources, and even more notably state government as a whole, have been ineffective in addressing these multiple, interwoven challenges.
The good news is solutions exist. But they will require new problem-solving methodologies that are speedy and creative. If instead government continues to address problems central to maintaining a healthy and abundant "natural world'' in its traditionally plodding way, gloom, if not doom, is certain.
Overarching these challenges is a lack of agreement about what Minnesotans want their state to look like 25 years from now, and 25 years from then. What we don't have, in other words, is a goal. Absent such a consensus — which with minor effort could be developed by the Gov. Tim Walz administration — one must assume that, as in the past, healthy, abundant and accessible lands, waters and wildlife are fundamental to most residents' vision of a future Minnesota.
With that assumption in mind, consider in reverse order the four conservation challenges listed in this column's first paragraph. Then e-mail me for possible publication on this page your speedy and creative solutions to each (my e-mail address is at the end of this column).
Increasing Minnesotans' conservation awareness
While higher, perhaps, than residents of some, if not most, other states, Minnesotans' awareness of what could be called the state of their state is nonetheless too low to compel politicians, state agencies, conservation groups and others to further accelerate and improve land, water and wildlife stewardship. Put another way, too few Minnesotans possess what the noted conservationist Aldo Leopold described as a land ethic.
Controlling invasive species and fish and wildlife diseases
Zebra mussels. Asian carp. Starry stonewort. Spiny water fleas. Chronic wasting disease. Lyme and other tick-born diseases. West Nile virus. As presently constructed, the state lacks the political support, staff and budget to battle these and other as-yet-unknown afflictions.
Paying for land, water and wildlife management and conservation
As noted in this space last Sunday, hunters and anglers pay through license fees and federal excise taxes about 80 percent of national wildlife conservation. Yet as a percentage of the population, and in some states in real numbers, hunter and angler numbers are declining. How then to spread the cost more broadly of land, water and wildlife conservation?
