Governor, keep your hands off DIF&W

The road to consolidation of natural resource agencies is paved with broken promises.

The Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine asked this question in its 2006 gubernatorial candidate survey: Will you oppose any proposal to merge the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife into a large natural resource department?

Gov. John Baldacci responded, “Yes, I will oppose such a merger. I have said repeatedly over the past four years that departments like Inland Fisheries and Wildlife may be small by comparison to other state agencies, but they serve large and distinct constituencies that deserve, and have reason to expect, that they will have an agency whose focus is on their interests and needs.”

He was right. And now he’s wrong.

Two recent Bangor Daily News editorials (Feb. 9 and 19) urged consideration of the governor’s proposal to consolidate four natural resource departments. We strongly disagree.

First, we must acknowledge that DIF&W is broken and neglected, unable to perform its mission. It is asked to do too much with too little. Those who oppose consolidation do not defend the status quo. We demand that this critically important department be strengthened, not torn apart.

Four years ago, DIF&W was studied by the Management Assistance Team of the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Fifty-seven recommendations for improvement were submitted. None of these recommendations has been implemented, including one that would have restructured the agency to make it more efficient and effective.

The MAT report found that DIF&W is a “virtual mother lode for the state, economically speaking.” On Dec. 19, 2007, a new national study reported that “Maine’s 266,000 hunters and anglers are among the most prominent and influential of all demographic groups, spending more than $581 million a year on hunting and fishing” and creating 8,800 jobs.

We know from examining research on superagencies in other states that sportsmen lose programs and services and consequently disconnect from the department they have always been willing to fund. We cannot afford this result in Maine.

You cannot fault sportsmen for being suspicious of this latest move. We remember very well the days when DIF&W’s revenue was taken to fund other programs. To stop those raids, the Legislature asked the people of Maine to put this department in the Maine Constitution and protect its revenue.

On Nov. 3, 1992, 74 percent of Maine voters, 463,627 strong, endorsed a constitutional amendment that protected DIF&W’s revenue. Their message was simply this: Keep your hands off the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.

Today, we face a clever attempt to direct sportsmen’s dollars to other programs by stuffing those other programs into a new successor agency. The constitutional protection we worked so hard to achieve, that won the overwhelming support of the Legislature and a huge vote from the people of Maine, could be lost if DIF&W is merged into a successor agency. I don’t believe sportsmen or the people of Maine will let this happen.

We will do whatever we have to do to protect the integrity, independence and revenue of the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. It’s time to recognize the critical role this department plays in Maine’s economy and heritage and give it the funding and modern tools it needs to serve what is now widely recognized as our state’s principal asset: our quality of place.

Instead of using his chain saw to cut up the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, the governor ought to take up his hammer and build a better department.

George Smith is the executive director of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine.