Minnesota has 2.5 million acres of undeveloped land in 20 northern counties that are held in trust to raise money for education. It’s managed by the state DNR and there is more than $700 million in the fund.
But some legislators think the state land trust could be worth more if the DNR didn’t manage it, says a story in the Duluth News Tribune.
A bill to move control of the trust to another state agency has passed on committee in the state House.
The trust kicked out $55 million to K-12 in the past two-year budget cycle, or $26 per student.
Those pushing for new management say the DNR has an inherent conflict of interest, because it traditionally cares about conservation, preservation and recreation, rather than maximizing income.
State Rep. Denise Dittrich, a DFLer from Champlin, wants more emphasis on logging, mining, land sales and trades and other development of trust land, the story said.
But it’s complicated, the story notes:
Bob Krepps, director of the St. Louis County Department of Lands and Minerals, has served on the Legislature’s Permanent School Fund Advisory Committee for the past four years. Krepps said that, on paper, it appears DNR critics are correct — that the agency’s multiple responsibilities for natural resources preclude it from giving undivided attention to maximizing revenue to the trust.
But Krepps said it also makes no sense to have another entity managing the 2.5 million acres locked in the middle of DNR forest lands.
“We’ve already got state and county (forestry) trucks passing each other on the same road, and federal, now we’re going to add another color truck to the mix?” Krepps said.
So far, Gov. Mark Dayton has backed the DNR as the manager of trust land. But Dittrich says the state school boards association and the state’s teachers union are on board with the plan that would get more money for schools.
DNR land management
Oh boy, here comes the GOP looking to strip bare our natural resources to see how much money there might be in it.
Now, let’s be clear – the DNR ain’t perfect. And they could probably do a smarter job of raising money from these resources. If my arithmetic is right, they’re generating some $22 per acre across all these lands in question, and I figure they could do better.
The DNR, according to their web site, manages a grand total of some 5.5 million acres, of which the 2.5 million acres here is nearly half.
For starters, not all these lands are candidates to produce cash money.
But more importantly, the DNR also see some of their responsibilities in the same light that many Minnesotans do:
– preserve the resources
– mitigate a long term pattern of fragmentation of large contiguos parcels
– consider wildlife as a valuable resource & maintain lands to keep those populations healthy
– consider the impact of maintenance on water resources and wetlands
– maintain an outdoor recreation environment that Minnesotans want
It’s true these values can conflict with a simple goal of raising money. That’s exactly as Minnesotans would have it, I believe.
They also engage in long-term, strategic planning to pursue these and other values. The GOP has no long-term plan for these resources, other than to milk them for all the money they believe they could produce. Maybe pass on the proceeds as tax cuts for the wealthy.
These people should not be in charge of these public resources, and I can’t think of a worse gang to influence how they are managed.
Land management
It would seem that some members GOP are looking for a solution to a problem that does not exist. I would say the return on investment is quite high here. If the lands are exploited for maximum gain, the return will diminish, ie. if you cut all the trees this year, what will you have next year? If we sell all the mineral rights this year?
What? should we charge people to look at a deforested, dug up chunck of ground? Not a good tourism move,
It would seem a bit ironic for this criticism to come from a group that can’t manage their own affairs…..
just my opinion