I think it may be worth mentioning in responses to the DNR commissioner that much of the increase in Sandhill Crane populations since the 1970s have been due to the enormous amount of work and funding by birding and non-hunting conservation organizations. This is again not to say that Sandhill Crane hunting would necessarily be inappropriate, but that a huge number of "stakeholders" in this issue were completely left out of the discussion. Taking non-game status from a very popular and once uncommon species without any input from non-hunters who funded its current high population levels has serious implications for how supportive of the DNR's Non Game Wildlife program people will be in the future.
Best, Laura Erickson Duluth On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:29 AM, John Green <[email protected]> wrote: > This is a message from Jan Green > > As far as anyone can tell there was no DNR public process of noticee and > comment for creating a hunt for Sandhill Cranes in Minnesota. The decision > was directly from Commissioner Mark Holsten. > > Last spring it was rumored at DNR that they were considering this change. > I naively assumed that it could not be done without a hearing because > Sandhill Cranes are not listed as a game bird species in Minnesota statutes > (97A.015 - definitions). Instead the Commissioner relied on statutes > 97B.803 and 97B.731 for regulating migratory game birds. These relate to > the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and their classification of "webless > migratory game birds". That classification covers species that are not > taxonomically waterfowl. > > In Minnesota, species that may be hunted under that federal program, which > flows from the Migratory Bird Treaty Acts, are: King Rail, Virginia Rail, > Common Moorhen, American Coot, Sandhill Crane, Wilson's Snipe, American > Woodcock, White-wing Dove and Mourning Dove. There is not a DNR rule for > King Rail, Common Moorhen and White-winged Dove, but the rest are legally > hunted in Minnesota. So is American Crow but I am not sure how that fits > into the regulatory structure. > > Regardless how one feels about hunting, and I am not philosophically > opposed, this was a terrible decision. It was done without any analysis of > the science or the management implications for the several crane > sub-species. Outrage is appropriately expressed to the DNR Commissioner. > > Jan > > ---- > Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net > Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html > -- -- Laura Erickson For the love, understanding, and protection of birds There is symbolic as well as actual beauty in the migration of birds. There is something infinitely healing in the repeated refrains of nature--the assurance that dawn comes after night, and spring after the winter. --Rachel Carson Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. ---- Join or Leave mou-net: http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=mou-net Archives: http://lists.umn.edu/archives/mou-net.html
