(Revised) Opposition mounts to Ohio Division of Wildlife's club grant program changes

Changes to an Ohio Division of Wildlife program intended to assist the state’s sporstmen/conservation clubs in developing their respective hunting and angling supportive efforts are not going over well with the latter.

These changes include a reduction in the total dollar amount that will be awarded; this overall program reduction totaling 33 to 50 percent. The money is distributed in grant form, made available through a competitive application process which itself will now see a reduction of up to 50 percent per successful recipient.

Yet the slashes have outraged some conservation clubs as well as their pro-sportsmen organizations such as the Columbus-based U.S. Sportsman’s Alliance.

The Alliance calls the cuts “a slap in the face” and represent “a huge blow” to clubs in Ohio who were promised this would never happen, especially since the revisions came without consulting the state’s sportsmen/conservation clubs.

Under the revised program the Wildlife Division will and will not:

* Total of $500,000 in grants will be funded for the State.

* Total requested funds for an application cannot exceed $7,500.

* Non-essential items will not be funded, and among them being: Food/drinks; T-shirts; cooking grills; giveaways/prizes deemed not applicable and any other items deemed non-essential for an event.

A series of meetings at each of the Wildlife Division’s districts is scheduled. For District Three the meeting is set for January 11th; District One is February 1^st; District is January 25^th; District 4 is January 24^th; and District Five is January 29^th but at the Green County Fish and Game Club in Xenia. All of them begin at 6:30 p.m.

At each of the Wildlife Division’s five district office to go over the revised program with interested sportsmen/conservation clubs

The background for this program – which began in 2014 – has included funding provided by the federal government under the Pittman-Robertson Fund (supplied via taxes on firearms and ammunition) and the Dingell-Johnson Fund (supported by taxes on many fishing-related items).

Last year 515 clubs and organizations applied for grants, and all applicants received at least partial funding, the Wildlife Division says.

This disbursement protocol again could be the case, depending on the number of applicants that receive the full amount requested (211 in 2017) as well as the strength of the applicants’ request, said Mike Miller, the Wildlife Division chief who also defended the changes.

“The Division of Wildlife is pursuing these changes in an effort to more fully implement all three components of the ‘R3 Model’ (recruitment, retention and reactivation),” Miller said.

“The changes are expected to be used by the clubs to improve and enhance their efforts, not to hinder their progress in the shared goal of recruiting and retaining people that enjoy shooting sports and fishing.”

Ultimately the changes are expected to be used by the clubs to improve and enhance their efforts, not to hinder their progress in the shared goal of recruiting and retaining “people that enjoy shooting sports and fishing,” says Miller.

Then too, says Miller, the changes are being made so the Wildlife Division can pursue buying properties that will be used to “promote activities associated with R3” and similarly to improve shooting range access of all kinds – both public and private - through expansion of offerings and upgraded amenities.

“These added opportunities will be available for the clubs to use as they pursue their mission to engage Ohio’s hunters and anglers,” Miller said.

Miller said as well that the Wildlife Division is developing so-called “R3 Learn To” modules that successful applicant clubs will be able to cooperatively utilize to “help them partner with one another,” and likewise to “host successful events for future and active hunters and anglers.”

“The division is also pursuing an aggressive hunter access program that is expected to include agreements that will open up corporate and private properties for Ohio sportsmen and women,” Miller said. “This is in addition to the new opportunities that have already been secured, and continue to be pursued, on state owned lands.”

The flip side is that seeking and implementing such opportunities will require the Wildlife Division to abandon allowing participatory clubs to enfold such things as free food and beverage into their grant request.

However, the Alliance is not buying the Wildlife Division’s arguments, noting that the revisions came without consultation with the affected interested parties themselves: sportsmen/conservation clubs. That point is particularly irksome to the Alliance.

“This funding cut breaks an agreement between Ohio’s conservation clubs and the Division of Wildlife that dates back to the elimination of the license writing fee for license agent clubs,” said Alliance associate director of state services, Luke Houghton. 

When electronic licenses became available, the Wildlife Division created the “Conservation Club Competitive Grant Program,” intended to ensure that the conservation partnership between the clubs and the state “continued to flourish,” Houghton said.

Under that system the Wildlife Division guaranteed that the grant program would never fall below $750,000 per year, and in many years it has exceeded that total, even breaking $1 million, Houghton said also, noting that the agency “cannot accomplish its mission without strong partnerships with the conservation community.”

“While the cuts to this program are a small fraction of the overall budget of the agency, they are a huge blow to clubs in Ohio which were promised this would never happen,” Houghton said said.

Houghton says that Ohio’s sportsmen’s clubs are "vital to conservation and hunting, fishing and trapping," providing an army of volunteers that conduct youth education and recruitment events, women’s events, veteran’s events, shooting events, hunter education classes and much more, Houghton said.

“Ohio’s conservation clubs are vital to the recruitment of new hunters, anglers and trappers; and are the social hub of communication to the sportsmen’s community,” Houghton said.

“The use of club grounds are most often donated, along with thousands of volunteer hours that provide the Division of Wildlife with the match to receive Pittman-Robertson dollars,” Houghton said. “All of these things are in addition to the actual vital work the clubs do.”

And not allowing clubs to fund food, beverages, cooking equipment and offering premiums to program participants “is a slap in the face to clubs that provide nearly everything else for free,” Houghton said as well.

“Giving kids a hot dog and a soda at a recruitment event is no great burden, and it actually provides a benefit to the clubs that are doing all of the work and ensures an enjoyable event for the participants,” Houghton said.

While Miller says the Wildlife Division “is in good financial standing” and that the agency is “working to re-prioritize our outreach efforts focusing on true recruitment, retention and reactivation efforts,” the Alliance is far from certain the agency is being entirely truthful on the whole cloth of the subject.

“First, despite pleas from Ohio’s sportsmen and women that the Division of Wildlife needed additional funds during last year’s budget battle, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and the Division of Wildlife have insisted that the agency is flush with funds,” Houghton said who then offered the rhetorical question “ If that is so, why cut funding to this important program?”

Houghton said the Alliance strongly encouraged all of Ohio’s sportsmen/conservation clubs to attend the Division’s five district meetings to “make sure your concerns are heard.”

- Jeffrey L. Frischkorn

JFrischk@Ameritech.net

Northeast Ohio is referred to as the state's Snow Belt - and for a very good reason

Yes, certainly the month of December ended with a flurry of snow squalls (pardon the pun) though the month and to-date totals are seemingly not out of line with the historical record.

As least as it applies to Ohio primary Snow Belt of Lake, Geauga and Ashtabula counties. It is a different world during the winter up this way.

Last month (December, 2017) Chardon (typically referred to as Ohio's Snow Belt capital though I'd give that honor to either Thompson and Montville townships. But I digress) recorded a snow fall total of 40.1 inches. That figure is 2.5 inches LESS than what fell in December, 2016.

And Chardon's to-date snow fall total and as of December 31 is 41.1 inches... In 2016 that statistic was 44.6 inches..

The greatest snow falls ever recorded for December at Chardon include the 48.9 inches in 2000; the 49.4 inches in 2010; the 58 inches in 1969; the 60.65 inches in 2005; and the 69.5 inches in 1962... The average snow fall for December at Chardon is 26.58...

Since record keeping began during the winter of 1952-1953, Chardon has recorded total snow fall depths of at least 100 inches on 41 occasions. The leaders included the 161.45 inches during the winter of 1959-60; the 142.2 inches during the winter of 1977-78; the 147.55 inches during the winter of 1995-96; the 157.58 inches during the winter of 2004-05; the 148.2 inches during the winter of 2006-07; the 151.3 during the winter of 2010-11; and the 142.5 inches during the winter of 2013-14. The season average snow fall for Chardon is 108.23 inches.

The least snowiest December on record for Chardon is the 1.7 inches that fell in 2014. The least snowiest winter ever for Chardon was the 46.4 inches that fell in 1979-80.

- Jeffrey L. Frischkorn

JFrischk@Ameritech.net

Cold, snow slows - but doesn't stop - Ohio's to-date deer kill totals

Ohio’s deer kill continues with a total to-date animal count that’s ahead of where the tally stood at the same point in 2017.

Based on data provided via the Ohio Division of Wildlife’s electronic-based tele-check system, 165,392 deer were killed as of Tuesday, January 2nd. That figure is 6,443 more animals than were taken for the same period ending January 3rd, 2017 which was 158,949 animals.

Take note, too, that the immediate previous reporting period ending December 26th, 2017 showed a then-to-date deer kill of 163,638 animals. Thus, only 1,754 deer were taken by hunters between the December 26th reporting end-date and the January 2nd reporting end-date.

For comparison purposes – and for statistics to be meaningful comparisons are the holy grail – the 2016-2017 season spread from its December 27^th, 2016 and January 2nd, 2017 reporting deadlines was even fewer deer; 1,592 animals, to be exact.

Which might be surprising given the deep chill virtually all of Ohio’s been under since about Christmas. You’d have thought the cold and the snows of the past 10 or so days would have kept deer hunters at home in front of the hearth. And in some cases that explanation appears to be true, though apparently not in the case of every one of Ohio’s 88 counties.

Let’s look at the current to-date deer kill figures from a couple of different angles, shall we.

A few of Ohio’s 88 counties saw deer kill increases of fewer than 10 animals each between the December 26th and January 2nd reporting periods. Among them (with their January 2nd reporting period number followed by their December 26th reporting period figure in parentheses) were: Shelby County – 896 (889, for a gain of seven animals); Henry County – 698 (695, for a gain of three animals); Huron County – 2,219 (2,210, for a gain of nine animals); Marion County - 819 (811, for a gain of eight animals); Morrow County – 1,400 (1,391, for a gain of nine animals); Clinton County -730 (728, for a gain of two animals); and Gallia County – 2,353 (2,344, for a gain of nine animals).

One county – Fayette – failed to record a single additional deer killed between the December 26th and January 2nd reporting periods: 318 animals for each week-ending reporting period.

Even so, a few counties bucked the cold/snow-hampering weather conditions. Consequently, they each saw their respective deer kills produce modest gains. Among them (with their January 2nd reporting period number followed by their December 26th reporting period figure in parentheses) were: Ashtabula County – 4,568 (4,532, for a gain of 36 animals); Coshocton County – 5,823 (5,756, for a gain of 67 animals); Guernsey County – 4,097 (4,040, for a gain of 57 animals); Lake County – 769 (739, for a gain of 30 animals); Licking County – 4,384 (4,319, for a gain of 65 animals); and Tuscarawas County – 5,054 (4,988, for a gain of 66 animals).

Going into the present to-date tally as of January 2, there are five counties with deer kills of at least four thousand animals each. These counties (with their respective 2016-2017 to-date season numbers in parentheses) are: Ashtabula – 4,568 (4,394); Coschocton – 5,823 (5,110); Guernsey – 4,097 (3,945); Licking – 4,384 (4,264); Muskingum – 4,639 (4,355); and Tuscarawas – 5,064 (4,326).

Ohio still has four counties with to-date deer kills of fewer than 500 animals each. These counties (with their respective 2016-2017 to-date season numbers in parentheses) are: Fayette – 318 (286); Madison – 473 (433); Ottawa – 422 (400); Van Wert – 473 (431).

How the next weekly to-date deer kill reporting period – which ends January 9th – will shake out is unknown, of course. Yet given that the first two days of the statewide four-day muzzle-loading deer-hunting season is forecast to feature sub-freezing and even sub-zero temperatures it is entirely possible - and probably likely - that at least some hunters will skip the activity. Such a decrease in participation would certainly lend itself to a decreased deer kill for the season.

This season begins Saturday (January 6th) and ends the following Tuesday (January 9th.) Last year the four-day muzzle-loading season saw a total statewide kill of 15,483 deer. In 2016 that figure was 12,503 animals, and in 2015 the like-statistic was 13,724 animals.

- Jeffrey L. Frischkorn

JFrischk@Ameritech.net

Ohio's EPA championing no/low interest loans to help state's water quality issues

Ohio’s environmental guardian agency doled out nearly $1 billion in 2017 to help finance drinking water and above ground water-protection projects.

The $936 million dollars was the largest ever such figure in the history of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency’s 28-year-old revolving loan program. This program was – and still is – designed to assist local governments via loans below market/bank rates.

Below‐market interest rates provide significant cost savings compared to a market interest  rates. As such, the $936 million resulted in a combined savings to these local entities, said the Ohio EPA’s director, Craig W. Butler.

“It’s important for Ohioans to know that Ohio EPA is helping communities and business with compliance, technical and financial assistance,” Butler said. “We were able to make this nearly billion dollar investment in water quality improvements because these funds are carefully managed.”

Butler said that as part of his agency’s on-going effort his staff frequently pow-wow’s with local officials such as city administrators, mayors and county commissioners.

“We do so in an effort to better understand their community needs and build positive working relationships between state and local governments,” Butler said.

Adding that such work helps bolster the infrastructure of local waste-water treatment, Butler said that these kinds of projects ultimately drive improvements to both the Lake Erie and Ohio River watersheds.

Among the projects getting the green light through this revolving loan fund were:

· $65 million was directed toward improving Ohio’s public water systems.

· $10 million was issued for projects that restore wetlands and counter the loss of Ohio’s natural water resources.

  

· $36 million was provided in principal-forgiveness financing at zero percent interest (meaning borrowers are not required to repay the loans).

· $13 million was distributed across 51 counties for home sewage treatment system (septic) replacement and upgrades.

· Seventeen loans were issued for large projects of $10 million or greater including combined sewer overflow projects in Cuyahoga, Hamilton, Franklin, Lorain, Lucas, and Summit counties along with large wastewater treatment plant improvements in Miami and Henry counties.

· $258 million was awarded for projects to separate combined sewer overflows in the Lake Erie watershed.

Butler said as well that while the $936 million figure sounds impressive the Ohio EPA is hoping to issue $1.7 billion in its revolving loan program, based upon application status and how far along is an applicant’s planning.

Among the first goals for 2018, the Ohio EPA is making $50 million available at a zero percent interest rate for regionalization projects.

Butler explained that regionalization is defined “as at least two independent entities working together to share the responsibility of providing services to their residential, commercial, and industrial customers by physically connecting their sewage collection systems or by using a centralized waste water treatment system.”

Likewise, said Butler, his agency made $100 million available at zero-percent interest in each of the past three years for infrastructure improvements to help curtail the algae blooms in Lake Erie.

About $50 million is being committed for such projects in 2018, the Ohio EPA says.

- Jeffrey L. Frischkorn
JFrischk@Ameritech.net