Industry sees need for DNR shake-up

Listen to this article

By Sean Ryan
Daily Reporter Staff The state Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee on Tuesday rejected a proposal to split the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources into two agencies, but Assembly Republicans say the plan still has life. "Its future chances are at least 50-50," said Rep. John Gard, R-Peshtigo, Finance Committee chairman. "I’m very confident the Assembly will include the DNR reorganization in their package. I believe we have a very good chance of getting it through the Assembly. I’m not so sure about the Senate." Gard’s proposal would divide the DNR into the Department of Environmental Management and the Department of Fish, Wildlife, Parks and Forestry. Finance Committee member Rep. Michael Huebsch, R-West Salem, said the DNR is too big and a division would narrow the scope of duties and streamline operations. "We’ve got an agency here that is just enormous that has two related but different responsibilities," he said. "It requires separate oversight." Huebsch said the Finance Committee’s 8-8 vote killed the measure, but the matching Assembly bill has plenty of support and would be resurrected.

Change needed

Jerry Deschane, Wisconsin Builders Association deputy executive vice president, said the DNR must improve its consistency and timeliness when issuing permits to contractors. But he said he didn’t know if the proposed reorganization would achieve this. "It is not at all uncommon for an applicant to work with three different agents for just one project, and it is impossible to get any kind of consistency under that kind of system," Deschane said. "There are some core administrative issues that need to be addressed. I’m not sure these are legislative issues." Donald P. Gallo, environmental lawyer for Milwaukee-based Reinhart Boerner, said the DNR’s size automatically makes it too difficult for department leaders to get all employees on the same page, so contractors in different parts of the state face different degrees of enforcement. He said it’s difficult to predict if a DNR agent will fine a contractor, order them to resolve a violation or even notice it. "It’s important that management convey to the staff or the troops how aggressive they need to be and where they place the dividing line between, ‘We’re here to help you,’ and, ‘We’re here to enforce the rules,’" he said. "It’s like herding cats. How do you get them all to go in the same direction?" Gallo said the size problem is easy to identify, but a solution isn’t. Reorganizing the department or reforming its management system could solve the problem, but he said he didn’t know which would be best. "On one hand I think it’s good that they are together because they go hand in hand," he said. "But I wonder if it’s too big to be managed." Gard, the bill’s author, said he didn’t know if the reorganization would speed up the permit process or make enforcement more consistent, but it would emphasize agents’ responsibility to issue permits. "I think any time you have an agency that is more focused and more accountable that will make it more streamlined and effective," he said. "Whether that means Jerry Deschane will get what he wants, I don’t know."

DNR opposition

Franc Fennessy, DNR deputy secretary, said if the reorganization bill resurfaces in the Legislature, the department would continue its opposition for both financial and administrative reasons. He said the reorganization would eliminate the department’s ability to balance state wildlife management through hunting and fishing licenses and environmental protection through conservation regulations. "We’re assuming that it will remain active until it comes out of the Legislature," Fennessy said. "We’ll continue to offer our 2 cents on the process and why we think the current proposition is not a good one." Gard said the DNR is inappropriately using hunting and fishing license fees for environmental conservation efforts. The reorganization would stop the misappropriation by separating the two interests, he said. "A legislative audit shows that they basically stole 50 percent of their hunting and fishing money that’s supposed to be used for managing natural resources," he said. "The department stopped spending that money on the management side and diverted it to regulation and administration funds." Fennessy said the department didn’t misuse licensing fees and the reorganization would only hamper its efforts. "We do not find compelling the argument that monies are being mismanaged over here," Fennessy said. "That is flatly untrue."
Huebsch agreed with Gard and said the Legislative Audit Bureau doesn’t lie. "I’d like to see (Fennessy) back that up," he said. "The Legislative Audit Bureau doesn’t agree with Franc Fennessy." Madison Writer Sean Ryan can be reached at 608-260-8571 or by email.