Dennis Anderson: Talk's cheap without real action

Today will be the first of two half-days of annual meetings in St. Cloud at which the Department of Natural Resources will meet with its key constituents and constituent groups to discuss matters important to both. Or, more accurately, important to the governor and therefore the agency. To wit, this year, bioenergy will be the hot topic -- a word that appears on the DNR "roundtable" agenda at least 13 times.

Items not on the agenda, meanwhile, include:

• What happened to Mille Lacs walleyes, and what are their chances for rapid recovery?

• What can conference attendees do to ensure passage in the Legislature this year of the most important conservation measure ever proposed -- dedicated funding -- and to ensure the constitutional amendment idea also is approved by voters in November?

• How will proposed wind farms (particularly in western Minnesota) impact wildlife populations? And: How will wind farms affect hunter access, in that "no shooting" zones typically are established in a wide swath around them?

• The DNR had zero buy-in by Minnesota sportsmen and sportswomen of its long-range duck recovery plan. Is that it? Are we done? Should state duck hunters sell their stuff?

• What circumstances led to the falloff of the state's farmland deer population? And, will the reduced hunter harvest in that area last autumn lead to a larger whitetail population there in one year? Five? Ten?

• Were experimental deer hunts held in state parks in recent years successful -- specifically, those hunts in which a buck could be taken only after a hunter killed a doe, or in which only bucks of certain antler sizes could be killed? Will such hunts be expanded? Will they lead to broader Quality Deer Management (QDM) experiments in Minnesota?

• Is the DNR seeking a legislator to carry a bill in the coming session outlawing party hunting for bucks? If not, why not?

• In what ways does the current Minnesota conservation system, politically driven as it is, and as sensitive to commercial interests as it is (e.g. agriculture, development) actually inhibit, rather than promote, the aggressive protection and enhancement of fish, wildlife and other natural resources?

• Finally, in what ways -- or, more accurately, in how many ways -- are constituents invited to the DNR roundtable willing pawns in a complex charade intended to suggest conservation, even hold out hope for conservation, but never quite accomplish it on a meaningful scale?

Bioenergy provides the perfect topic to accomplish that goal this weekend. An amorphous subject that suggests a future of maybe-some-good, maybe-some-bad, this year's roundtable headliner doubtless will be framed as "the next big thing" to consider in Minnesota, and one which, while possibly disastrous to every living thing in the state, probably will turn out OK!

Or whatever!

I've got your bioenergy story right here: Thus far, the state's dabbling in the field has produced an oversupply of ethanol and one of the biggest taxpayer rip-offs in Minnesota history.

Which wouldn't be so bad (understanding people that we are) if our friendly water-sucking ethanol plants weren't depleting aquifers and with them wetlands while encouraging farmers to rip up good set-aside acres to plant still more chemical-laden corn.

All -- at every possible level -- at taxpayer expense.

But don't expect that part of the bioenergy story to be broached this weekend in St. Cloud. If it were, attendees might perk up a bit in their seats, rather than assume the sonorous slouch that will accompany a predictably endless string of Power Point presentations, the big one this year ponderously titled, "Bioenergy: Opportunities and challenges for Minnesota Natural Resources."

Why doesn't Minnesota enjoy the natural resources stewardship it and its citizens deserve? Because its conservation delivery system is broken.

The DNR is part of the problem, as its all-too-brief annual roundtables that focus too often on topics that are about 20 degrees off kilter remind us.

The bigger problem -- look in the mirror, folks -- is the agency's constituents, many of whom will be in St. Cloud this weekend.

Comprised substantially of wildlife and environmental group advocates, this bunch must settle each January for small talk about some Really Important Topics.

But settle they will, and seemingly happily.

Now these many meetings later, they know little will come of it anyway.

Dennis Anderson • danderson@startribune.com