Walker vetoes hinder access, conservation efforts

Thanks to Gov. Scott Walker’s veto pen, hunters and anglers can be ticketed as trespassers when crossing railroad tracks to reach public lands and fishing areas; and 11 nonprofit conservation organizations will have a tougher time building trails, and protecting fish and wildlife habitats.

The vetoes surprised some folks who thought they made their case when the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee backed their efforts during its budget review in May and June. Given the JFC’s GOP majority, they thought Gov. Walker would accept its recommendations. Besides, the guv often says he wants to increase hunting and fishing opportunities, and forge partnerships between the private and public sectors.

Pfft. Even though the railroad-trespass exemption would cost nothing, and the combined $1 million in grants to nonprofit groups amounted to mere budget dust in the state’s $72.7 billion spending plan for 2015-17, Gov. Walker vetoed the items.

Let’s look at the railroad-trespass veto first. Safe to say, hunters and anglers have been crossing railways to hunt and fish since train tracks were first laid about 150 years ago. But only recently has a railroad company, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, started patrolling its 214 miles of tracks bordering the Mississippi River to chase off anglers who dare cross, no matter that many folks are walking from paved parking lots the state built for fishing/hunting access.

Have any hunters or anglers been hit by a train? No. Have conductors had to blast their train’s horns at some hunters and anglers? Apparently so. But let’s concede most hunters and anglers know to look both ways for a train, which are far more predictable and less hazardous than rivers, lakes, firearms, treestands and frozen ponds.

Marc Schultz, chairman of the La Crosse County Conservation Alliance, and chair of the county’s delegation to the Wisconsin Conservation Congress, said it’s hard to reach vast stretches of the Mississippi River bottoms without crossing railways. Further, designated crossings are often so far apart that people will effectively be cut off from most public hunting and fishing areas if the BNSF enforces Walker’s veto.

“This state revolves around natural resources,” Schultz said. “These lands and water are the major components of our recreation. We’ve crossed railroad tracks all our lives to reach those resources. They’re culturally ingrained in us.”

That’s why Schultz supported the JFC when it inserted language in the budget to let people walk “directly across the tracks of any railroad.” The JFC added, “This activity would not be considered trespassing and could not be prevented by the railroad.”

Gov. Walker, however, rejected the change, writing: “I am vetoing this section because I am concerned that allowing people to walk across railroad tracks outside of a designated crossing impairs public safety.”

Hmm. If we’re fretting about safety, why raise the speed limit to 70 mph? Why trust people to safely travel 173 feet per second while driving a relatively soundproof vehicle, but assume they’ll be irresponsible daredevils when crossing an 8.5-foot-wide train track on foot?

Schultz is more diplomatic. “I think the governor made his decision on bad information,” he said. “We’re not giving up.”

Meanwhile, Gov. Walker also axed $1.02 million in annual grants that 11 nonprofit organizations have regularly converted into volunteer labor, public access and other contributions that multiplied the state’s investment by four- to tenfold.

The governor explained his veto this way: “I object to earmarking these funds for specific conservation organizations without requiring accountability in the use of these funds.”

Accountability? You’d think the guv would be careful about uttering that word after his Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. awarded $500,000 in unsecured loans to a struggling construction company, and made at least 27 awards totaling $124.4 million to companies without doing formal staff reviews.

In contrast, the groups receiving the far smaller conservation grants have long track records of accomplishments. Most also must make matching contributions, and document their efforts with the Department of Natural Resources quarterly or annually, depending on the grant’s requirements.

For instance, the River Alliance of Wisconsin has been receiving grants of roughly $70,000 annually since 1999, and helps more than 130 river and watershed citizen-run organizations. It files quarterly reports and meets quarterly with DNR staff to review its work. Walker deleted its JFC-approved annual grant of $62,300.

The Gathering Waters Conservancy has received annual grants since 1996 to help citizens preserve, protect and enhance their land and water resources, which often means opening more lands to hunting and fishing. Walker deleted its JCF-approved grant for $124,500.

The Natural Resources Foundation has received annual grants since 2000 to boost private-sector investments and educational efforts on state-managed natural resources, and files an annual report with the DNR. The NRF raises money from donors and members, conducts wide-ranging field trips, and provides grants of its own to the DNR and other organizations. Walker deleted its JFC-approved grant of $75,700.

The Ice Age Trail Alliance has received annual state grants since about 1995 to create, support and protect the state’s 1,000-mile portion of the Ice Age National Scenic Trail, which passes through 30 counties. The trail is managed in a partnership with the National Park Service, and trail work is done by volunteers organized and supervised by the Alliance. Walker deleted its JFC-approved grant of $66,800.

The vetoes shocked Ruth Oppedahl, executive director of the NRF. She said her organization has donated more than $3 million to the DNR to manage state natural areas, and felt gratified that the JFC understood the value of its efforts.

“We had a very positive response from the Joint Finance Committee,” Oppedahl said. “They got the message that for every dollar we receive from the state, we reinvest anywhere from $4 to $10 each year. We’re still here, but this has been a surprising couple of days.”

Denny Caneff, executive director of the River Alliance, said he wasn’t surprised. “It’s petty,” he said. “The DNR didn’t request these cuts, but we kind of saw it coming. With the Walker administration, you’re always wondering. If you say anything about them, you’re setting yourself up to be cut. So even though Joint Finance restored our funding, we knew it might not get past the governor, and it didn’t.”

Patrick Durkin is a freelance writer who covers outdoors for Press-Gazette Media. Email him at patrickdurkin56@gmail.com.