Audio Plotting a future course for the Upper Mississippi Wildlife Refuge (story audio) Photos Mississippi River Meeting Don Hultman More from MPR Strong opposition to Mississippi River plan at Winona hearing (06/01/2005) Changes in store for the Upper Mississippi River (05/30/2005) The decline and fall of the Mississippi River (07/01/2004) Resources U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Upper Mississippi Tools E-mail this page Print this page Sponsor

Regulations may be tightened along the Mississippi River's National Wildlife and Fish Refuge, to further protect the habitat, (MPR file photo)

Over the next few weeks the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will gather comments on its comprehensive conservation plan for the Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge. It's the first new plan since 1987. The refuge cuts through four states and spans more than 300,000 acres. The proposed changes have some users groups bristling.

Rochester, Minn. — U.S. Fish and Wildlife officials stopped first at Stoddard, Wisconsin, to seek comment. The attendees presented a sea of camouflage hats and long beards, with a few suits popping up here and there.

Don Hultman, the refuge manager, is the engine driving the conservation revision process. It's gone through five rewrites. Version A had no change to existing management. Version E is Hultman's preferred recommendation.

It's a balance between habitat needs and people's desires. Interested parties include the Army Corps of Engineers, hunters, kayakers, and diving ducks, to name a few.

The plan has 41 objectives, including the reduction of sedimentation and invasive species, the purchase of additional bluff land, and research on the turtle population.

Hultman has listened to the comments of 3,000 people.

"There was a lot of concern with what was in Alternative D, and some of the other alternatives," he says.

Hultman jokes that he may not make it through a version F.

People are angry that the Fish and Wildlife Service plans to cut into some hunting and fishing spots. For example, Big Lake in Wabasha County would be closed to duck hunters. The plan also would ban gas engines and airboats in some areas.

Another major change will be the addition of six slow, no-wake and eight new electric motor areas. There will be some new hunting locations. But some people, like Tim Morgan, never wanted any change at all.

"People time after time said they wanted 'Plan A.' But you wanted to negotiate, so you set up these workshops and you negotiated everything away. I don't want to negotiate away," said Morgan. "I don't want to be pitted against the people who want to watch birds, and I don't want to be pitted against the people who want to recreational boat. But that's what you've done. You've done a very effective job of pitting one user group against another to accomplish things."

Morgan says he's concerned these restrictions, plus new trails and observation decks, are the beginning of the end.

Hultman says he believes in a democratic process. But he says he has a national charge, and he has to consider the people who haven't attended a meeting -- as well as the ducks, turtles and other wildlife needing better habitat protection.

"So it's a real balancing act for our own judgment when we read all the comments and listen to people, and then what do we do with that," Hultman says.

Hultman stresses that close to 75 percent of the area will remain open to hunting and fishing.

Fish and Wildlife Service biologist Eric Nelson says the closures are meant to create more and diverse resting areas for migrating birds.

"The habitat has been declining pretty heavily for the last 30 years," Nelson says. "We're trying to reverse that as well."

Nelson says what ducks need are good food and an area where they won't be disturbed. Eventually, he says that will mean more birds to hunt.

Meetings like this one will continue through March 6, 2006. And the Fish and Wildlife Service expect many more angry hunters and anglers.

Other organizations are also commenting on the plan, like state natural resource officials and the Mississippi River Basin Alliance. Mark Beorkrem of the Alliance says people who hunt and fish the river year round have a very different perspective on it than the biologists who've been studying it.

"Between the biologists and the public, there's a huge gap in education," he said.

Beorkrem says the Fish and Wildlife Service learned a lot about habitat and usage from a recent Army Corps of Engineers navigation study. But officials haven't kept the public informed, and he says that's led to outrage.

"I think they looked at where the usage issues were, where the most critical resources were at, that were most threatened by usage, and where they could get the most bang for the buck by imposing on the public and close an area," said Beorkrem. "I think to some degree, the public has to acknowledge that the fish and wildlife biologists are a lot more knowledgeable than they were 15 years ago."

Even if the current proposal is approved, the Fish and Wildlife Service may not be able to implement all of the changes. Funding to both national and state wildlife agencies has been cut in the last five years.

Hultman says that some of what he wants, like additional staff, is a wish list. After the comment period concludes, agency officials in Washington will review the recommendations. Hultman hopes for a decision by the end of 2006.