Those of you following the saga of the locked antlers might be interested in the latest e-mail exchange involving the DNRE.
On Friday evening William Burns of Bath, dismayed by my first column on the subject, sent the following e-mail to DNRE spokeswoman Mary Dettloff:
“Dear Mary Dettloff, I just read John Schneider’s column where he described the situation of Corey Davis, of Eaton Rapids, who was denied the antlers of the two deer he found on (private) property. Normally, as a state retiree, I would side with the DNRE, but in this case your department and their policies are 100 percent wrong. As John said in his column: ‘Davis did what he thought was the right thing,’ and although I am not a hunter, my opinion is that the DNRE did the wrong thing. State employees do not need more public censure. Your department and the policies they followed in this instance are WRONG. Period …”
Dettloff wrote back to Burns: “Thank you for your note. I do not censure anyone. My department has a long history of not being fairly represented by Mr. Schneider. In this case, when presented with certain facts, he chose not to print them. Such as the location of the deer and the fact that the officer followed department protocol to the letter.”
From me to Mary Dettloff: “Mary: For you to tell a citizen lodging a legitimate criticism of a state agency that the DNRE “has a long history of not being fairly represented” by me is both outrageous, and unprofessional. What, specifically, do you mean by that? In fact, that ‘history,’ under the current administration, has been one of incomplete and contradictory information from your agency.
“Let’s take the antler case ... First you tell me that the carcasses — and antlers — will be incinerated. Then, when I ask you when that will take place, and if I can witness it, you reply with what has to be the most bizarre response I’ve ever received from a government spokesperson: ‘I’m receiving your e-mails, and will not be honoring the request.’ Since when did spokespeople become the ones to ‘honor’ requests from reporters?
“Then, you tell me your supervisor, Mindy Koch, was ‘confirming that the deer have been destroyed.’
“Then Koch tells me the decision as to whether I might witness the incineration (which, apparently had not taken place, after all) belongs NOT to the DNRE, but to MSU. Then Koch tells me, contrary to what you told me, that the antlers had been removed from the carcasses.
“In case anybody doubts this scenario - and, indeed, it strains credulity - I have the e-mails. How could anybody presented with that chain of events NOT conclude that either the DNRE’s “communications” process is in shambles, or somebody is trying to hide something?
“Finally, I did, indeed, point out in my column that the deer might have crossed property lines (I assume that’s what you’re referring to in your reply to Mr. Burns), and that the CO’s followed protocol in dispatching the deer, instead of tranquilizing it.
“Please let me know if, and when, the antlers are transferred to MSU. LSJ readers, understandably skeptical, are eager for me to see this situation all the way through. Thanks.”
