Current Status: The House Committee on Natural Resources approved SB 163 (H-3) on  Thursday, June 6. It now moves to the House floor.

Analysis: This bill provides many changes to activities that are exempted from applying for a wetland permit from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), including county and agricultural drain maintenance, certain agricultural and livestock activities, and road and utility maintenance. The bill improves flexibility in mitigation requirements and enhancing the use of wetland mitigation banking.

Rather than using the 500′ or 1,000′ buffer from a water body to determine what should constitute a contiguous regulated wetland, they have clarified that a wetland is not contiguous if there is not a direct physical contact and no surface water or interflowing groundwater connection, and requires the DEQ to make a determination at the applicant’s request. This could increase the workload of the DEQ without any increase in funding to accomplish the work.

MUCC Action: While MUCC has reviewed the substitute language for SB 163 (H-3), we understand that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has some concerns with some of the bill language but has not said whether this new regulatory program would allow Michigan to continue to operate under the federal assumption.  Our primary concern is that Michigan maintains the assumption of the federal wetland program. At this point, MUCC will reserve taking a position on this legislation until the EPA has reviewed the legislation for compliance with federal regulations.

Sponsor: Sen. Mike Green (R—Mayville)

MUCC Policy Resolution: AC140609: MICHIGAN WETLAND PROTECTION—MUCC oppose any initiatives to retain the federal government to provide sole oversight and regulation over wetlands in the state.

The post Senate Bill 163: Wetland Program Reform appeared first on Michigan United Conservation Clubs.

Analysis: Michigan is already a participant in the Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact, but under existing state law it cannot fully recognize other state’s enforcement actions. SB 16 will allow Michigan to be a full participant in the compact, helping to deter game law violations both in Michigan and other member states. For example, if a Michigan resident poaches an animal in another state, the DNR would suspend the resident’s Michigan license if the violation would have led to a suspension in the other state. Likewise, participating states will suspend the license of their residents who violate Michigan game laws.

Current Status: Signed into law as Public Act 37 of 2013.
Sponsor: Sen. Howard Walker (R – Traverse City)

MUCC Policy Resolution: AC280603: Work with the Natural Resources Commission, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, and the Michigan Legislature to join the Wildlife Violator Compact.

The post Senate Bill 16: Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact appeared first on Michigan United Conservation Clubs.

The direct payment model for conservation compliance wasn’t working because high corn prices were more than farmers would receive for keeping land out of production to provide wildlife habitat. Conservation compliance instead conditions federal subsidies for crop insurance, which farmers use to hedge against a sharp drop-off in crop prices between planting and harvesting, to conservation responsibilities like maintaining wetland habitat for wildlife.

Tying conservation requirements to crop insurance premium subsidies accomplishes multiple benefits. For one, the federal government (and taxpayers) save on the cost of paying farmers direct subsidies, which both the Senate and House eliminated from their versions of this year’s bills last week.

Next, for the crop insurance premium subsidies that farmers do receive from the government (the public) conservation compliance ensures that the public gets something specific in return – habitat for the public’s wildlife, in addition to making sure we all have food to eat.  This makes conservation compliance fiscally responsible in both reducing government expenditures and providing greater public benefit in return for the public’s investment in insurance premium subsidies.

The Senate Agriculture Committee, chaired by Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow (D), included conservation compliance in its version of the 2013 Farm Bill. However, the House’s version did not. The full Senate is expected to consider its version of the Farm Bill this week, with the House expected to take up their version in June.

The post Different Versions of Farm Bill Pass House and Senate Ag Committees appeared first on Michigan United Conservation Clubs.

The Qualified Forest Property program gives private forest landowners a break on their non-homestead property taxes if they have a forest managements plan and agree to follow it. These bills introduce many improvements into the program, but move the administration of it from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) and Conservation Districts.

Analysis:

SB 51 (HB 4320) will make improvements to the Qualified Forest Property program, including allow structure on these properties (though these structures will not be eligible for the tax exemption), and will transfer authority for the Qualified Forestry Program to MDARD from the DNR. This bill also increases the statewide cap of the program to 2.4 million acres, and reduces the size and amount of forest cover for a qualified parcel.

HB 4243 (SB 52) would amend the General Property Tax Act to revise the requirements for a transferee to file an affidavit upon the transfer of qualified forest property, in order to avoid an adjustment in the property’s taxable value, also known as the “pop up tax”.

HB 4244 (SB 53) modifies the calculation for recapture tax on lands experiencing a change in use. Lands with a change in use will have their recapture tax calculated by multiplying the current taxable value by the number of mills levied in that area and then multiplied by the number of years preceding the change in use (not to exceed 7). If no harvests have occurred since the change in use, multiply the product by 2 to determine the recapture tax. An amendment is planned to ensure that a landowner does not also have to pay as penalty the 2 mills that was provided as a fee to the Private Forestland Enhancement Fund.

SB 54 (HB 4321) modifies the allocation of the recapture tax funds. The treasurer shall credit the proceeds to the state’s general fund if collected before January 1, 2014. After December 31, 2013 the proceeds will be transferred to the established Private Forestland Enhancement Fund to further fund the Qualified Forestry Program.

SB 55 (HB 4322) amends the qualification for designation as qualified agricultural use lands. This bill adds a qualification that lands can be designated agricultural use lands if more than 50% of the parcel’s acreage is devoted to a combination of agricultural use and is exempt as qualified forestry property.

SB 56 (HB 4323) provides expanded authorities for MDARD and local conservation districts. MDARD is now authorized to include CDs in landowner assistance and can review district financial information. Additionally, guidelines for eligibility to receive a $50,000 grant from MDARD require CDs to execute consistent financial reporting to MDARD and outlines actions beyond the authority of an employed forester with the CD. Guidelines for CDs in partnership with MDARD and landowners allows them assistance capabilities but prohibits them from developing forest management plans.

SB 57 (HB 4324) adds authority to on-site evaluations as such that landowners are provided the ability to voluntarily assess the value of managing areas of the land not utilized for traditional or production agriculture practices for environmental, ecological and economic benefits. Secondarily, the bill includes members of the forest community to be appointed by the director to the environmental assurance advisory council. A private consulting forester, a member of the forest products industry and a member of the logging profession shall be able to serve 3-year terms as the discretion of the director.

SB 58 (HB 4325) provides that MDARD and MDNR shall work jointly to encourage the expansion of the forest products industry, retention of current industry companies, and the use of Michigan’s value-added forest products.

HB 4069 (SB 59) modifies eligibility requirements for commercial forest lands and exemptions for withdrawal. Current penalties for withdrawal shall be granted upon payment of a penalty (between $200 and $1,000). The department may withdraw lands if acquired by a federally recognized Indian tribe and such withdrawn lands are exempt from penalty. Landowners preventing open public access shall have lands withdrawn at the discretion of the Department unless the landowner corrects such action. The development of wind energy and meteorological buildings is allowed at the approval of the Department.

Current Status: Only House Bills 4069, 4243, and 4244 have passed both chambers and are making there way to the Governor’s desk. The Senate bills remain on the House floor.

Sponsor: The lead sponsor of the Senate package is Sen. Darwin Booher (R -Evart), along with Sen. Thomas Casperson (R – Escanaba), Sen. Michael Green (R-Mayville), Sen. Arlan Meekhof (R-Olive Twp), and Sen. John Moolenaar (R-Midland). On the House Bills, the sponsors include Representatives Frank Foster (H.B. 4069), Ed McBroom (H.B. 4243), and Bruce Rendon (H.B. 4244).

MUCC Action: MUCC indicated support for SB 52-55, 57-59 and the corresponding House Bills and remains neutral on SB 51 and 56. The Senate Committee on Natural Resources accepted certain amendments to SB 51 that would shorten the time frame that forest plans covered, so that landowners would remain active and engaged in managing their forests. We remain concerned about splitting this particular program away from those in DNR responsible for management of state forests and wildlife, and oversight of commercial forests.

MUCC Policy Resolution: AC250605  MUCC should work with the Legislature to create a  tax structure for privately managed forest land similar to that of agricultural land.

The post Senate and House Bills: Tax Break Reforms for Forest Management appeared first on Michigan United Conservation Clubs.

Analysis:  The Scientific Wildlife Management Package accomplishes a number of positive actions for conservation, hunting, fishing, trapping and fish and wildlife species in Michigan.

SB 288 and HB 4552 provide free licenses to members of the military. They also share the legislature’s current exclusive authority to designate a game animal with the Natural Resources Commission, which is mandated to use sound science in its wildlife management decisions. The legislature retains the exclusive authority to remove a game species. SB 288 and HB 4552 also grant the Natural Resources Commission the exclusive authority to make fisheries regulations, as it currently has for game species.

The Senate-passed substitute for SB 288 eliminates the original $1 million appropriation and excludes mourning doves from the NRC’s authority under the bill, since they were removed from the game list by referendum in 2006.

SB 289 and HB 4553 establish a right in Michigan to hunt, fish and trap and adds the protection of the rights to hunt, fish and trap as a purpose of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act.

Current Status: Signed into law as PA 21 & 22 of 2013.

MUCC Action: Supports the Scientific Wildlife Management Package. Joined with other conservation groups in organizing Camo at the Capitol, where citizens lobbied for passage of the bill. MUCC members and affiliates called legislators and Governor in support bill. 

Sponsors:  Sen. Tom Casperson (R – Escanaba), Rep. Jon Bumstead (R – Newago)

Co-Sponsors: Senators David Hildenbrand, Darwin Booher, Arlan Meekhof, Representativs Phil Potvin, Peter Pettalia, Ken Goike, Dan Lauwers, Joseph Graves, Terry L. Brown, Greg MacMaster, Paul Clemente, Tom Hooker, Dale W. Zorn, Rick Outman, Ken Yonker, Bruce R. Rendon, Roger Victory, Kenneth Kurtz, Amanda Price, Nancy Jenkins, Ben Glardon, Bradford C. Jacobsen, Rob VerHeulen, Bill Rogers, Cindy Denby, Tom McMillin, Kevin Cotter, Lisa Posthumus Lyons, Ed McBroom, Mike Shirkey, Kevin Daley, Ray Franz, Mike Callton, Klint Kesto,Joel Johnson, Gail Haines, Peter MacGregor, Kurt Heise, John Kivela, Al Pscholka, Eileen Kowall,Bill LaVoy, Charles M. Brunner, Joe Haveman

MUCC Policy Resolution(s):

AC310696 Seek to declare fish and wildlife of utmost importance and vest all authority in the Natural Resources Commission, remove fish and wildlife habitat management from political interference and give Natural Resources Commission adequate authority to carry on all essential phases of a broad conservation program. Assure the commission form of decisionmaking, public access and participation is present in natural resource decisions.

The post SB 288 & 289: Scientific Wildlife Management appeared first on Michigan United Conservation Clubs.

Analysis:  In a recent case – Addison Twp. v. Barnhartt – the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that a shooting range was not protected under the SSRA because it conducted commercial activities, even though no such exclusion exists in the statute. The COA made this ruling based upon its interpretation of the word “sport,” even though”sport shooting range” was already defined in the statute.

The Michigan Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments on the case, in which Michigan United Conservation Clubs had filed a “friend of the court” brief. If the COA’s ruling was allowed to stand, it could jeopardize protections for Michigan’s 400-plus shooting ranges.

HB 4580 clarifies that commercial activities do not disqualify a shooting range from protection under the act.

Current Status: Introduced on April 17, 2013. Referred to Committee on Local Government.

MUCC action: Filed amicus brief in Michigan Supreme Court case, supports legislation.

Sponsor: Rep. Mike Shirkey (R-Jackson)

The post HB 4580: Protect Michigan Shooting Ranges appeared first on Michigan United Conservation Clubs.

Analysis:  SB 229 is one of many legislative responses to this problem, and would allow the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund (Trust Fund) to be used for dredging in local harbors. There is, however, serious debate about whether dredging is an appropriate and constitutional use of the Trust Fund.

The Michigan Constitution protects the Trust Fund from misuse of funds, and it allows expenditures only for land acquisition or “development of public recreation facilities.” The original idea behind the Trust Fund was to take royalty money from non-renewable mineral extractions and put that money towards recreational acquisitions and developments that would exist for future generations. Maintenance projects have never been an allowable use for Trust Fund dollars because they do not last for future generations. Many Trust Fund followers would argue the idea of development in the fund is to provide the money to allow for the initial infrastructure of a recreational facility.

Dredging, while extremely important for harbor usage by watercraft, is not the development of a “recreation facility,” but is used in the maintenance of that facility. It is a very similar concept to re-paving a parking lot, or re-chipping a trail. If a new harbor was being build, that would be the development of the initial infrastructure of a recreational facility and it would be very likely Trust Fund dollars could be spend on such a project.

Another issue is the sheer cost of dredging projects, which range from hundreds of thousands into the millions of dollars. Last year, the Trust Fund was only able to fund about half of the development applications that came in from local governments. As a policy, the Trust Fund Board puts a $300,000 cap on development grants for that very reason. Even just a few dredging projects every year could mean millions fewer dollars available for local governments.

There are also a number of funds available – such as the Michigan Waterways Fund and the federal Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund – which are designed to assist with dredging. Conversely, there are not many options available to local governments to assist with public recreational development and acquisitions.

Current Status: Passed from Senate Outdoor Recreation & Tourism committee on March 14, 2013. Awaiting full Senate action.

MUCC action: MUCC opposes

Sponsor: Senator John Moolenaar (R-Midland)

The post Senate Bill 229 – Use of Trust Fund for Dredging appeared first on Michigan United Conservation Clubs.

Summary: Removes Department of Natural Resources authority to section off and create Biodiversity Stewardship Areas (BSAs) on state or private land under the Living Legacies program.

Analysis: Starting in 2006, the DNR’s Living Legacies program was designed to protect and manage Michigan’s areas of unique biological diversity. To do that, the program called for the creation of a statewide network of Biodiversity Stewardship Areas (BSAs). BSAs were described as representing “the best opportunities to manage for our diverse biological heritage (or biodiversity) through long-term conservation of Michigan’s ecosystems. Each BSA will include one or more types of ecosystems, and may spread across multiple ownerships.” MUCC was one of a number of partners in this program, and was present at a few of the beginning planning and partner meetings.

In practice, the program turned out to be much larger than had been expected in the program’s concept, and was being interpreted differently by partners and department staff. Instead of a cluster of smaller BSAs, the early plans began designating large areas, some around State Game Areas, that could have potentially stopped or altered human access and use in these areas, or supplanted existing land management plans.

Senate Bill 78 prohibits the DNR, without legislative action, from designating or classifying land specifically for the purposes of maintaining biological diversity.  The bill also ensures the “accessibility, productivity, and use” of the state’s natural resources in the definition of Conservation of Biological Diversity.

Biodiversity is a needed and important part of natural resource management. Biodiversity provides for healthy forests and habitat and creates unique ecosystems that make Michigan the natural resources envy of the country. However, BSAs are not the only mechanism for achieving biological diversity, and, despite the rhetoric surrounding this issue, Senate Bill 78 does not stop the state’s ability to manage our resources with biodiversity in mind. Michigan currently has a diverse array of laws and policies that help protect the biodiversity of our forests, plants and wildlife – from natural and wilderness areas to the state’s annual compartment review process. Biodiversity of our forests and wildlife species should be considered along with the state’s other management plans that work in concert with state game areas, wildlife, and forest and timber management.

Current Status: Passed Senate Natural Resources Committee. Before full Senate.

Sponsor: Sen. Tom Casperson (R – Escanaba)

MUCC Action: Supported the amended S-1 version that passed from the Senate Natural Resources Committee.

The post Senate Bill 78 – Biodiversity Stewardship Areas (BSAs) appeared first on Michigan United Conservation Clubs.

Analysis: In New York, after the Newtown, Connecticut tragedy, a newspaper reporter obtained the names and home addresses of registered gun owners through a Freedom of Information Act request and published the information in the newspaper, subjecting law-abiding gun owners and their families to harassment from gun control advocates. SB 49 would protect Michigan legally-registered gun owners from a similar fate.

Current Status: Introduced on January 16, 2013, passed out of  Senate Judiciary Committee on January 23, 2013

Sponsor: Sen. Thomas Casperson (R – Escanaba)

MUCC Action: Submitted written testimony in support of SB 49 during Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.
>Click here to read MUCC’s testimony

MUCC Policy Resolution: AC650675: Support right to keep and bear arms.

The post Senate Bill 49: Exempt Identities of Registered Gun Owners from FOIA Requests appeared first on Michigan United Conservation Clubs.