A recent state audit has found the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) did not adequately plan and document logging activities in wildlife management areas (WMAs), creating uncertainty about the agency’s compliance with state law. The findings, released in a report from the Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor, intensify a long-standing debate over the balance between timber harvesting and wildlife conservation on the state’s public lands, a controversy that has previously drawn federal scrutiny and intervention.
The 80-page report from the legislative auditor points to systemic issues within the DNR, including a lack of clear plans, poor documentation, and conflicting internal goals. This has led to a situation where, according to the audit, it is unclear if the DNR has met its statutory requirements for managing these lands. These findings come on the heels of a federal audit earlier in the year which, while not finding any broken laws, did validate concerns from whistleblowers that logging priorities were at times in conflict with the conservation purposes for which these lands were acquired.
State Audit Reveals Systemic Flaws
The investigation by the Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor revealed significant shortcomings in the DNR’s management of logging on wildlife lands. The auditors, Judy Randall and Katherine Theisen, wrote in their report that the agency’s actions have been hampered by “a lack of plans, poor documentation, unclear guidance, and conflicting goals”. This has created a lack of clarity around whether the DNR is following the laws designed to protect and manage these habitats. The audit’s findings are based on a review of DNR practices and a survey of the agency’s own field staff. The survey, which included staff whose WMAs had timber harvests between January 2022 and April 2024, asked whether the logging improved wildlife habitat. Some of the responses indicated that the pressure to meet timber quotas, measured in cords, was the primary driver of harvesting decisions, rather than the goal of wildlife management.
Federal Scrutiny and Financial Irregularities
Prior to the state-level audit, the DNR’s logging practices were the subject of a federal review by the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Office of Inspector General (OIG). This audit, which was part of a regular six-year review, cleared the DNR of any contract violations related to the use of federal funds for logging on WMAs. However, the OIG’s report did give credence to the complaints of whistleblowers and conservation advocates, acknowledging that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) had “valid concerns regarding potentially competing priorities within the department”. The federal report also uncovered a financial issue, noting that the DNR had improperly charged approximately $109,000 in unfunded state pension liabilities to federal conservation grants during the 2022 and 2023 fiscal years. The OIG stated that this is a broader national issue being addressed by the USFWS.
A Years-Long Controversy
The controversy over logging in Minnesota’s WMAs is not a new issue. It first gained significant attention in the summer of 2019, when a group of 28 DNR field employees sent a letter to DNR Commissioner Sarah Strommen. In the letter, the employees argued that the DNR’s logging program was actively harming wildlife habitat on hunting lands and that it was “scientifically dishonest” for the agency to claim otherwise. This internal dissent escalated the scrutiny of the DNR’s forestry practices, eventually leading to the USFWS taking the significant step of temporarily halting the flow of $22 million in grant money to Minnesota. The funds were eventually released after the DNR and USFWS reached an agreement to ensure that all logging on wildlife lands would be suitable for wildlife purposes.
Competing Priorities: Timber vs. Wildlife
At the heart of the issue is the tension between the DNR’s responsibility to manage for wildlife habitat and the pressure to meet timber harvesting targets. Retired DNR biologist Gretchen Mehmel, one of the whistleblowers, stated that the federal audit validates what she and others have been saying for years. “When wildlife staff are pressured to meet timber targets instead of ecological objectives, the mission gets lost and so do habitats,” Mehmel said. This sentiment was echoed in the findings of the OIG report, which stated that some DNR Fish and Wildlife Division staff felt they did not have the ability to deny harvests on WMAs and felt pressured to meet cordage targets, regardless of the impact to wildlife habitat. The advocacy group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) stated that the OIG’s report confirms that the DNR’s logging activities “may not have supported — and in some cases likely contradicted — the conservation purposes of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration (WSFR) Program”.
The DNR’s Response and Future Plans
In response to the federal audit, the DNR issued a statement saying it was “gratified but not surprised” by the finding of no contract violations. The agency also stated that it has been working with the USFWS to resolve concerns about timber harvest activities, and that those issues were addressed in the fall of 2023. The DNR also highlighted its “Forest Coordination Continuous Improvement Action Plan (CIAP),” which was launched in early 2024 to address the concerns of its staff. The agency acknowledged that the CIAP process has “improved our collective understanding that forest coordination experiences on the ground were not always aligned with what our policies intend”. The DNR has committed to making the necessary improvements to address this gap.
The Importance of Federal Conservation Funds
The wildlife management areas at the center of this controversy are acquired and maintained using funds from the federal Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program. This program, often referred to as Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson funding, is a cornerstone of conservation funding in the United States. It is funded by excise taxes on the sale of hunting and fishing equipment, such as guns, ammunition, and boating and fishing gear. These funds are then apportioned to states based on factors like the number of hunting and fishing licenses sold and the state’s geographical size. During the current federal fiscal year, the DNR was eligible for over $40 million from this program. The proper use of these funds for wildlife conservation is a key requirement of the program, which is why the concerns raised by DNR staff and the subsequent audits have been taken so seriously.
