Missouri Department of Conservation

1. Missouri Department of Conservation An Overview of Missouri’s “Design for Conservation”

2. Why New Funding?1967 • Expenditure curve would soon cross the revenue curve • License sales were not increasing • Increasing public demand for Department services • Inflation was reducing the value of the dollar • Employee turnover had reached 12.5% • Lack of public land • Lack of funding for non-game wildlife

3. BLUE RIBBON PANEL1968-70 • An independent study group was formed to assess the health of the agency (Starker Leopold, Irving Fox, Charles Callison) • Reported that the organization and staffing were excellent, but…

4. BLUE RIBBON PANEL1968-70 …Department should broaden its programs to more fully include management of all wildlife, including non-game species, provide for outdoor recreation outside the traditional realm of hunting and fishing, and provide for a full range of natural values on Department lands.

5. BLUE RIBBON PANEL1968-70 Regarding Funding: “A substantial increase in funds will be required to finance the kind of program we envisage for the Department.”

6. CHALLENGE & RESPONSE • Anticipating citizen reaction to the Blue Ribbon Panel report, the Department prepared a bulletin entitled Challenge and Response • Key Point: An additional $21 million annually would be needed to accomplish the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Panel.

7. CITIZENS COMMITTEE FOR CONSERVATION • A Citizens Committee for Conservation (CCC) was formed and immediately called on the Department to study ways of funding the proposed program recommendations. • A soft drink tax was proposed and the CCC began the initiative petition process. • The CCC asked the Department to elaborate on the Challenge and Response document.

8. DESIGN FOR CONSERVATION1971 • Design for Conservation was a long-range strategic plan for expanding the state’s wildlife conservation programs and providing more wildlife associated recreational opportunities for all Missourians.

9. DESIGN FOR CONSERVATION1971 • Land acquisition for recreation and forestry, and protect critical habitat for rare and endangered species. • Increase public services in wildlife and forestry conservation. • Increase research into forestry and all species of wildlife, and broaden management. • Provide more recreational opportunities.

10. DESIGN FOR CONSERVATIONPetition Drive1971-72 • Petition in the form of a constitutional amendment – one cent tax on each 16 ounces of carbonated soft drink. • Opposed by soft drink industry and brewers • Failed to make the ballot – technical error – no enacting clause.

11. DESIGN FOR CONSERVATIONNew Petition Drive1974-75 • CCC started anew • Public opinion poll suggested a sales tax may be the better approach • New strategy – one-eighth cent sales tax • New petition drive July 1975 • 208,000 signatures gathered, measure is certified for the ballot

12. DESIGN FOR CONSERVATION1976 • November 2, 1976 – Amendment 1 passed by approximately 30,000 votes • Urban areas carried the vote, rural areas generally opposed the measure

13. ELEMENTS OF SUCCESS • Campaign cost approximately $100,000 • MDC reputation was good – past good performance of staff was key • Key endorsements were secured • Good media relations

14. OPPOSITION • Opposition to ear-marked taxed • Opposition to land acquisition by government; concern about loss of county tax revenues

15. TOWN HALL MEETINGSPost-Election Other Citizen Priorities • Land acquisition was biggest demand – need more public land • Expanded conservation education • Establish nature centers • Increase law enforcement

16. REVENUE CONTRAST 1976 – Pre Tax Budget - $17,341,208 Permits $11,541,433 (67%) Fed. Aid 4,211,972 (24%) Sales, rentals, leases 1,138,238 (7%) Miscellaneous 449,654 (2%) 1978 – Post Tax Budget - $48,031,601

17. MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION Benefits of the 1/8 Cent Sales Tax Accomplishments Total Sales Tax Collected 25 years $1.4 Billion

18. Pre-Design 296,825 acres PILT $0 0 nature centers 154 Conservation Agents Currently 774,156 Acres PILT $9 million + 4 nature centers 200 Conservation Agents ACCOMPLISHMENTS

19. ACCOMPLISHMENTS • Nature Centers – a fifth center being planned - Discovery Center – K.C. - State of the Art • Fish and Wildlife Restoration • Habitat Protection e.g., wetlands, prairies, floodplain • Natural Areas Program – 180 areas/56,000 acres • Lost Valley Fish Hatchery • Expanded State Nursery – 5 million seedlings annually

20. ACCOMPLISHMENTS • Shooting Ranges and Training Centers • Hunter Education - >500,000 graduates • Boat and Fishing Accesses • New Private Land Services Division • Stream Teams – 2000 Teams/35,000 volunteers

21. ACCOMPLISHMENTS • Urban Aquatic and Fishing Programs • Conservationist Magazine – free to 500,000 Missourians • Many, Many Partnerships • And so much more!!!

22. OTHER BENEFITSEconomic Benefits • $2,122,600,000 Fish and Wildlife Related Expenditures • 54,800 Jobs Supported • $89,600,000 State Sales From Expenditures (approximates 1/8 cent sales tax revenue) Using 1996 Nat’l. Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation

23. OTHER BENEFITS • Ability to do long-range planning – not limited to a one year, budget driven view of the future • Flexible/Opportunistic/Spontaneous • High quality staff – they want to work for MDC • Forced accountability – Public expectations are high

24. MAINTAINING SUPPORT • Public Service – Responsive and Accountable • Public Involvement – Frequent and Varied • Minimize Politics – Maximize Science • Strategic Planning – Legitimate and Active • Visible Outreach and Education • Publicize Successes • Promote Partnerships