Anybody know how DNR fared in budget?

[Gregg S]

Mike, anybody;

 

Do we have any idea how DNR fared in Gov's budget and what implications might be for park closings, etc?

Gregg

[Mike Clifford]

I don't have a synopsis on what it means for the IDNR, but you can view the entire Capital Budget here:

http://www2.illinois.gov/budget/Documents/FY%202011%20Capital%20Book.pdf

 

Directly from the IDNR website:

 

March 2010 Revenue Report

http://dnr.state.il.us/Revenue/March2010RevenueReport.pdf

 

Hunting and Fishing License/Permit Fees

 

March 09/Actual

$260,811

 

March 2010/Actual

$1,119,981

 

% Change

329.42%

[jim bielecki]

I don't know what other people may think about fees, but it's my opinion that they should be higher. I don't mind paying more as long as it goes to the resources and the environment. (Using the money for projects like building docks and slips for Chicago marinas is an example of poor use of IDNR fees. Or using the money to build bike paths. Those types of projects should come from other funding sources). I think if the money comes from outdoorsman the money should go back to the outdoors...DNR personnel, land acquisition, environmental repair projects, endangered species reintroductions ect. I believe the DNR is on the right track which is why I am in favor of higher fees. More needs to be done at a faster pace. Urban development infringes on the quality of the envronmental opportunities we have which should be balanced better with preservation. I also think that more people are using our state parks than ever before, they need to be be maintained as a result. Higher fees should result in better quality experiences for all of us. I also think that in order for the DNR to be more successful, politics must be removed from the process. I think more can be done efficiently if politics were to be separated from environmental programs we have. It should be self regulating due to the professionals the DNR employs to make educated decisions regarding our resources. Those decisions are best made without additional influences that impede positive progress. They are on the right track...we should all do our part to volunteer when we can. It can be as simple as adopting a local stretch of river or stream to pick up trash. If you think about it, if there are less funds for the DNR, we should all do what we can to contribute by volunteering to help out. This results in offsetting the discrepancy. Being proactive and being positive demonstrates to others that we can all make a difference. Even though there are several areas that are polluted where we fish...each time I go out I pick up trash...over time, each time I go back the area gets better and better. You can't do it all at once and it's not realistic...this mind set is very discouraging...you need patience and goals. For example, each time I go back to a local pond, I clean up a different stretch of shoreline. I make simple goals for specific areas. By doing this, I can reflect on the progress I've made and stay positive. One piece at a time adds up over time. It's funny to say this but sometimes I think the wildlife in the area are thanking me when they honk, quack, or croak when I'm out there. I'm not embarassed to say "your welcome".

[ronk]

I don't have a synopsis on what it means for the IDNR, but you can view the entire Capital Budget here:

http://www2.illinois.gov/budget/Documents/FY%202011%20Capital%20Book.pdf

 

Directly from the IDNR website:

 

March 2010 Revenue Report

http://dnr.state.il.us/Revenue/March2010RevenueReport.pdf

 

Hunting and Fishing License/Permit Fees

 

March 09/Actual

$260,811

 

March 2010/Actual

$1,119,981

 

% Change

329.42%

Mike

Are you able to clarify why the huge year-year difference in the license fees?

[Mike Clifford]

Ron,

I want to say it is because of the fee increase.

Now that I think about it more, I wonder if it has anything to do with "actual" revenue going towards the IDNR as well.....meaning that under Blago, some was siphoned into the GRF.

Can't say for certain.