The other day at the nursing home/retirement center where I work, I passed a group of the senior “girls” just finished with their morning exercise class.

Among the group was Nora Jane Schmidt, who called to me “Hey Steve, have you seen the picture of my big fish?”

Now Nora Jane is no stranger to the business end of a fishing rod. She grew up southeast of Buhler, Kansas and remembers fishing in the Arkansas River as a little girl. She and her sisters would fish for carp with cane poles and dough balls her mom made for them. She doesn’t remember ever catching much, but the seeds were sown for her love of fishing. For years after she was grown and gone, she and her sisters still took their mom to the river to chase carp every chance they got. Mom liked to catch carp because they fought so hard. Nora Jane and her late husband Elmer fished in Canada every year they were married and made innumerable trips to Lake Texoma and to local reservoirs over the years.

To celebrate recent retirements among her kids, a Schmidt family fishing trip was organized for the first week of May at Beaver Lake, tucked into the Ozark Mountains of northwest Arkansas. The Schmidts are a competitive crew and have a Schmidt family pheasant hunt each year on opening day of pheasant season where prizes are awarded for things like the most birds killed and the longest tail feather. With that as the standard, the family got trophies for the first fish caught, the most fish caught and of course the biggest fish caught on the trip.

Two guides and two boats were reserved for each day, and the first morning everyone met the guides at the dock at six A.M., divided up four to each boat and headed out. It was a full hour boat ride to where they fished that first morning, and Nora Jane remembers thinking as they sped across the lake “I didn’t pay all this money just for a boat ride!” When they arrived at the guides chosen spot, two rods per person were baited with live shad, the rods put into rod holders that lined the sides of each boat, and the wait began.
During the next couple hours Nora Jane caught a nice seven pound striped bass and thought “My, that’s a big fish.”

Around ten o’clock with only a couple more small fish caught by the group, a fish hammered the bait on one of Nora Jane’s rods. Their guide could tell immediately it was big and told everyone else in the boat to pull their lines to give her the entire boat to play the fish. With line zipping from the reel and the rod bent double until the tip nearly touched the water, she needed the guide’s help to even get the rod out of the holder so she could start reeling. She would gain line and pull the fish closer, then the reel would sing as the fish stripped line from it and headed for parts unknown. Back and forth they went as each tried to wear-down the other. Finally, twenty minutes later as she stood exhausted on the opposite back corner of the boat from where she first hooked the fish, the guide netted her monstrous twenty-five pound striped bass!

As the Schmidt family fishing trip came to an end, Nora Jane, the eighty-eight year old matriarch of the Schmidt family took home the trophies for both the biggest fish and for the most fish caught on the trip. We spend lots of time and energy attempting to get and keep today’s youth interested in the outdoors, and rightly so. But sometimes I fear we forget about our elders who instilled in us the love of fishing, hunting and the outdoors that we have today. Continue to Explore Kansas Outdoors!

Steve Gilliland, Inman, can be reached by email at [email protected].

Editor’s note: Distributed to faculty and staff of FHSU on Friday. Reprinted with permission.

I wish I could start by saying “I hope this note finds you well,” but I can’t because I know this note will find you concerned and anxious as a result of the possible furloughs. While I am also very concerned and anxious, I remain hopeful that our legislators will end the impasse by passing a budget that will keep the state’s economy moving forward.

You are the key to our state’s future; you are the key to moving Kansas forward. Each of you has an incredible impact on our university and on our state. Your dedication, compassion, commitment to each other, to our students, and to the Fort Hays State University family is second to none. I want each of you to know how much I acknowledge, admire and respect who you are and what you do.

RELATED: Additional information on furlough

No university president ever wishes to have to notify its family that there may be possible furloughs coming. But given the state of affairs in Kansas, I have no choice but to alert you to this possibility. I know many of you are committed to our mission and have made Fort Hays State your home. Many of you have both incomes derived from our university. Many of our students depend on the income derived from their summer work at our University to put food on the table and to meet their academic tuition obligations for the coming year. I am all too aware of this and thus, it is so disheartening to have to make the choices that have to be made.

If the Legislature does not pass a budget by 11:59 p.m. on Saturday, June 6, Fort Hays State, just like every other state agency, will have to cease normal operations and designate just a skeleton crew to continue the mandated close-of-year reports and to meet our contractual obligations. If we are furloughed, beginning 12:01 a.m. Sunday, we may not transact business on behalf of our University. Depending on the day-to-day needs, each of us will be on a day-to-day call-back notice.

Notices will go out later today providing details about the furloughs and telling you where to look for changes in the status of the situation.

News like this is not easy to deliver. I am so sorry to have to be writing this note. Regardless of the outcome of the next days’ legislative activities, I want to continue to thank you for what you do, and I want to remind you how critically important you are to the future of Fort Hays State University. I am so grateful for all your support.

The bonds of family survive in times of trouble and anguish. A family sticks together for better and for worse. Together, our family will survive the ups and downs that are thrown our way.

You all know I have great faith in you. I also believe the best is yet to be and I believe in miracles. Let’s pray together for one now.

Thank you for everything,

Mirta M. Martin, Ph.D., president, Fort Hays State University

In all the hubbub of the overtime Kansas legislative session, the obvious solution to crippling state financial problems gets little traction. In fact, the governor threatens a veto if it would pass.

Why not undo the tax policy that created the problem? Steep income tax cuts directly caused a massive revenue loss–$700 million in one year. Before embarking on the infamous fiscal experiment in 2012, Kansas had a stable tax system that most people considered fair. If tax policy had been left alone, our state sales tax rate would now be 5.7 percent instead of 6.15 percent, and the state could easily pay expenses with adequate reserves left at the end of the year. Our state highway fund would be healthy, our bond rating up, and the legislative session long over.

Kansans hold contradictory notions. If given a choice, we prefer not to pay taxes. Yet we value good services—smooth roads, high-quality education, a social safety net—things that cost money. We are not unusual in that outlook. It’s normal. Human nature.

Our governor and lawmakers must find a reasonable, fiscally-responsible balance between those competing desires. That’s their key task in every legislative session. For example, going on a spending spree without regard to available resources takes the state out of balance and upsets the citizenry. Likewise, a tax-cutting binge that fails to account for the costs of basic services and bills that must be paid also unhinges the system.

In Kansas, we currently suffer from the latter irresponsible affliction. Income tax cuts that disproportionally benefit the wealthiest Kansans have destabilized state finances.

What happens when income tax rates are cut, and many businesses are entirely exempted from paying? Revenue goes down! That should not come as a surprise, but it appears to have stunned the governor and many Kansas lawmakers. For two years they have tried to tell us everything is fine while they used up the state’s savings account and raided the highway fund to cover up the now-massive budget problem that the income tax cuts have created.

But it’s no surprise any more. Reality has arrived. The state budget imbalance has become so serious that either taxes have to go up sharply or spending on education and other state programs must drop to an unacceptably damaging level.

What to do? Lawmakers don’t know. As this column is written they are mired in day 105 of what was supposed to be a 90-day legislative session. The governor and legislative leaders have dithered and weakly allowed the budget process to drift into chaos. Many proposals have been flying. More tax on cigarettes and gasoline. Higher property tax. Raise the sales tax rate to one of the highest in the nation. Eliminate the sales tax exemption on Girl Scout cookies. One proposal would even have the government tax its own purchases, though exactly how that could realistically raise money is unclear.

Instead of doing the obvious thing, lawmakers have been whacking away at programs and trying to add taxes that hit average working Kansans the hardest.

Raising regressive taxes to cover up a past mistake isn’t going to be popular. Most Kansans would rather not pay any taxes, but are willing to pay for quality services if the system is fair. Kansans know by now that forking over higher sales and property taxes or enduring service cuts to pay for a failed policy experiment doesn’t pass muster.

Duane Goossen is a Senior Fellow at the Kansas Center for Economic Growth and formerly served 12 years as Kansas Budget Director.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the television and film mediums and how they tell stories. The past couple years has seen a shift in the public consciousness about what television (and related services, i.e. Netflix) is and what it can do.

Gone are the days of nothing but sitcoms and gameshows. When we as a pop culture-consuming society want a strong story with deep character development, we turn to something like “House of Cards,” or “Game of Thrones” or “Breaking Bad.” The time factor is by far the most obvious advantage that television has over film. If one season spans somewhere around 12-15 hours of content, creators can take a slow-burn approach to unearthing characters while at the same time delivering the same dosage of excitement or tension that can be found on the big screen. On the other hand, film has become the event medium. It’s the place we get our “oohs” and “awes” at before heading back home and resuming our Netflix marathon.

I bring this up to illustrate, “San Andreas’” utter inability to create something that isn’t destruction or made out of wet cardboard. Yes, the destruction is cool, even if the physics underlying physics are occasionally laughably bad. However, we’re given the exact same characters and the exact same dramatic arc that we’ve seen a thousand times.

“San Andreas” couldn’t be so naive as to believe it’s the first disaster movie to use the “divorced parents have to reunite to rescue their child” schtick. “San Andreas” didn’t even pull off a good execution of that overused plot springboard. It’s full of holes and what pieces are solid easily buckle under the over-the-top power of the film’s true intent — cool earthquake shots.

All that said, the special effects are wooden and choppy in places. These types of films have come to be called “destruction porn,” for very good reason. The story setup and execution are afterthoughts. The entire experience is just an excuse to see widespread mayhem and destruction from the comfort of our theatre chairs — which is troubling enough by itself.

“San Andreas” has absolutely nothing new to offer. It’s a poorly made peep show that caters to the part of the human experience that loves seeing stuff destroyed. Granted, it’s hard to come up with something new when the time parameter is so limited, compared to a season or seasons of a television show, but surely, we can do better than this.

3 of 6 stars

Travel through northwestern Kansas and you’ll see plenty of variability in the winter wheat crop.

Rooks County farmer Stephen Bigge, believes wheat planted on the family farm during the third week in September looks good. Some of the crop seeded October 10 or later probably won’t yield as well and an early November freeze hammered some of the newly emerging crop.

“We won’t harvest a bumper crop; however there’s some really good wheat in this county,” Bigge says. “On the other hand, some wheat fields will not even be cut.”

As of May 20, the wheat fields sported a deep green color. Much of the crop stood knee high.

While most of the wheat looks good viewed from the roads, walking into the crop often reveals a different story.

Some of the fields didn’t develop the stand needed to get the quantity of tillers to complete the crop, Bigge says. The later planted wheat looks good, but the stand is thin.

Bigge planted the wheat crop in good moisture last fall. But then the weather turned dry and his wheat crop received little moisture until mid-April.

The last 30 days of moisture has been plentiful and timely. Fields have received from two inches to nearly eight inches.

“We’re thankful for the moisture that’s fallen, Bigge says. “We’re a lot greener out here than we have been the last several years.”

The northwestern Kansas farmer has conducted stand counts in the fields. He’s recorded yield estimates between 45 and 55 bushels.

“I believe this year’s crop is going to surprise some of our farmers once they pull into the fields for harvest,” Bigge says. “I’m crossing my fingers the (favorable) weather holds. A harvest like that would be tremendous this year.”

Bigge believes harvest will come early this year. If the temperatures warm into the 80s and low 90s, he figures to start cutting wheat June 10.

Some of the early wheat he planted was a short-season variety. As of the third week in May, the heads already contain a half to three-quarter sized berry. With warmer weather, it will not take long to finish the kernels out.

“I believe the potential for a good harvest is out there,” Bigge says pointing to his crop.

Still as any Kansas wheat farmer will tell you, “never count your crop until it’s in the bin.”

Three years ago, Bigge parked the machines next to a field and prepared to begin harvest the next morning.

“It hailed us out that night before we could begin,” he says. “You just have to wait, hope for the best and pray.”

Until then Bigge will do what farmers have done for decades, keep an eye on the sky, the weather app on their smart phones and an ear to the radio. And while harvest may be just around the corner, he cannot wait for it to begin.

John Schlageck, a Hoxie native, is a leading commentator on agriculture and rural Kansas.

Us Statehouse insiders, who don’t start to tan until the Fourth of July and are fascinated by little political gimmicks that most regular people don’t notice are…well, fascinated again.

This time, it is Gov. Sam Brownback’s new tax plan, the one that raises more than $400 million in taxes for the state budget without inconveniencing those 330,000 Kansans who make their livings by owning certain types of businesses.

That lucky 330,000 make their livings by receiving “non-wage” income from Limited Liability Corporations, subchapter S corporations or are owner-operators of their businesses, which since 2012 have been exempt from Kansas income taxes. They like it like that.

But with the budget deficit staring lawmakers in the face, and a governor who has been…a dab irrelevant in the tax-raising business this year, Brownback has come up with a plan that—good or bad—is politically fascinating.

Because this is being written before we know whether the plan is adopted or not, let’s just look at its themes.

The concept, stripped to its bones, is to raise the sales tax by half a cent on everything you can buy at retail in Kansas, plus 50 cents a pack for cigarettes—and eliminate Kansas individual income tax on about 388,000 low-income Kansans.

Political junkies can read the House and Senate reelection campaign ads already: “XXX voted to eliminate income taxes on low-income Kansans.” Does it get any better than that for a reelection campaign? Lower taxes on the poor? Almost, but doesn’t quite, bring a lump to your throat.

Or… “XXX voted to make poor people continue to pay state income taxes,” or “wouldn’t cut taxes for the poor.” Is there a candidate who wants that headline on a postcard along with a nice photo of the candidate and his/her name and party affiliation? Didn’t think so.

Now, that Brownback plan also raises the sales tax by half a cent, from 6.15% to 6.65%, but that’s not going to be noticed much by middle- and higher-income taxpayers because it’s not much of an increase, and the wealthier of Kansans spend a lower percentage of their money on food and diapers for the baby. There is no sales tax on stocks and bonds.

Now, those low-income folks who spend most of their money on food and necessities may notice that half-percent increase; the governor can say “you’re saving on that pesky income tax, so it probably equals out.”

Statisticians, or those with calculators and a little time, figure the low-income tax cut costs the state $19 million in lost revenue in the upcoming fiscal year, an average of about $48 for each of those 388,000 Kansans who won’t owe income taxes if the plan is OK’d. That $48 covers the half-cent sales tax increase (which raises about $234 million in total) for about $9,600 in purchases.

Not sure whether those who qualify for the income tax elimination which exempts from taxation the first $5,000 of income of single filers, $10,500 of single-head-of-household filers and $12,500 for joint filers, spend less than $9,600 on food and stuff which carries a sales tax. Some might, some might not.

Politically…do you vote to cut income taxes for the relatively poor, while boosting their sales taxes, along with everyone else’s? Do you use the income tax cut as a diversion so the sales tax can be raised to protect the tax exemptions for those LLC folks? Or, do you spend time explaining to the relatively poor—and no, we don’t know their party affiliations, House and Senate districts, just the counties in which they live—that they are just a diversion so those LLC folk don’t get bothered with taxes especially in the spring when they might be shopping for new boats or negotiating for lawn service?

The whole tax plan can be stretched so many ways; whether it is good public policy or not almost fades away for some politics watchers awaiting it to be used for campaigning.

And, yes, we’re thinking someone ought to get up a support group for those folks…

Syndicated by Hawver News Co. of Topeka, Martin Hawver is publisher of Hawver’s Capitol Report. To learn more about this nonpartisan statewide political news service, visit www.hawvernews.com.