|
|
Posts: 49
| Good points by Jerry.....
Maybe we should have separated MN and WI ???........I think that MN has done a much better job over the years, and it shows....so maybe I wouldn't be so quick to say no to an increase up there, they sure have some great musky fisheries....and maybe my money would be better spent by those folks. ?
Alot of guys keep driving these days...just to go a little bit further for better and bigger fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 400
Location: North/Central WI | Pointerpride102 - 12/12/2011 3:44 PM
Amused - 12/12/2011 1:42 PM
Pointerpride102 - 12/12/2011 1:13 PM
Flambeauski - 12/12/2011 12:09 PM
"bottom line is the private sector could do it better for half the price and thus the DNR is wasting money."
That's funny! Hey Pointer, you gettin rich working for the DNR? Could someone in the private sector do your job at half your salary? Would that even be minimum wage?
Filthy!
I can't speak for MN, but our bid process requires us to select the lowest bid.
So your bid process requires you to select the lowest bid...but you question if the lowest bid is always better?
Sure, seen it happen where lower bids have been selected and work subpar compared to other guys worked with before who came in with a higher bid. Not rocket appliances there.
So if you the lowest bid isn't the "best"...why does your bid process require you to select it? Shouldn't a little more thought be put into the decision?
Edited by NateOz 12/12/2011 4:24 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 186
Location: West Chicago, IL | So find a more specific way to "pay to play". make the people who use the resource more pont up more $$. A general increase in a license fee is a bad idea for many reasons. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | NateOz - 12/12/2011 3:19 PM
Pointerpride102 - 12/12/2011 3:44 PM
Amused - 12/12/2011 1:42 PM
Pointerpride102 - 12/12/2011 1:13 PM
Flambeauski - 12/12/2011 12:09 PM
"bottom line is the private sector could do it better for half the price and thus the DNR is wasting money."
That's funny! Hey Pointer, you gettin rich working for the DNR? Could someone in the private sector do your job at half your salary? Would that even be minimum wage?
Filthy!
I can't speak for MN, but our bid process requires us to select the lowest bid.
So your bid process requires you to select the lowest bid...but you question if the lowest bid is always better?
Sure, seen it happen where lower bids have been selected and work subpar compared to other guys worked with before who came in with a higher bid. Not rocket appliances there.
So if you the lowest bid isn't the "best"...why does your bid process require you to select it? Shouldn't a little more thought be put into the decision?
See this thread. With all the government waste that is out there, could you imagine if we took the highest bid if there was a cheaper option? |
|
| |
|
| LOL. The questions get better, and the answers get weaker, and weaker.
I hope that someday we can get someone on here from DNR who knows what they are talking about. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Word - 12/12/2011 4:43 PM
LOL. The questions get better, and the answers get weaker, and weaker.
I hope that someday we can get someone on here from DNR who knows what they are talking about.
What has gotten weaker? What questions have been "better"? |
|
| |
|
|
Word;
You are obviously confusing accusations with questions.
MN fishery speaks for itself. What answers do you want?
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32906
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Perhaps we need to actually look in to where fishing license fees and excise taxes on fishing gear from the manufacturer go.
http://dnr.wi.gov/invest/conservation/money_spent.htm
http://dnr.wi.gov/invest/conservation/fwreports/fwbrochure08_09.pdf
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2011/05/20/dnr-hunting-and-fishing-li...
Only took me 5 minutes.
http://outdoornews.com/minnesota/news/article_c32e145c-7b1d-11e0-9d...
http://wjon.com/fishing-license-fees-go-directly-to-support-fisheri...
http://www.mnbound.com/rons-ramblings/2011/4/7/license-fee-increase...
Google it.
How's that material for an answer, NWM?
----
'I think that MN has done a much better job over the years, and it shows'
As uninformed a comment as has ever been posted here. Look to the 'it's the fish' debate that raged here for three years.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | Nicely done Steve. Thanks.
After reading alot of this, I have all of the answers I need right here.....
and more importantly, out there. |
|
| |
|
| Guest - 12/12/2011 3:52 PM
I'm not the one making claims on the internet that the DNR is spending to much on stocking because they are wasteful and the bid process is crooked.
Seems to me that my statements stand on thier own, and anybody who knows me knows the I have a pretty good handle on what goes on in the MNDNR.
I've been involved in stocking efforts from the egg collection up to the actual stocking of walleyes and muskies. I have a pretty good idea of what it takes to do it.
I've never had a feeling of wasted effort or money by the DNR in that process.
The MNDNR comes to our MI club annually and is very forthright in talking about expenses and future needs.
If you want to keep flinging baseless statements about how wasteful and useless the MNDNR is than you should put some effort into getting some experience or facts that can back up what you say.
JS
So you've"never had a feeling". Now I am ready to support that fee increase! Bring it on!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Since my computer had herpies for the last week I never saw this one until today. I don't have time to read the whole thing but I will give my $.02 concerning the MN licenses and the fee increase and why it's needed in MN.
The resident license fee in MN hasn't gone up in over 10 years. In fact since the conservation license was introduced, more money was lost (I think someone was talking about a conservation license, we've had it for years). The only other change was that there was a nonres license increase that offset the no license needed for portable fish houses (pet peeve here).
Anyway, the MN DNR's fish and game fund has been going down for many years now due to everything else going up in price. Paper, gas, rent, etc have all gone up over the last 10 years and the license fee has stayed the same. The DNR has done a lot to mitigate these cost increases by doing things like turning over it's fleet to more cars with a few more capable trucks for example. At the end of the day the cost to provide the current level of fishing will out pace the income generated from license and federal dollars. In the past if there was a project that needed money the DNR could often times get that money out of the general fund. That money is now gone so they're on their own.
So what we really have to ask ourselves is do we want $18 fishing or $23 fishing? If you say $18 fishing then get ready for stocking cuts and forget about ANY new lakes. Personally I think you're either making things better or worse because NOTHING ever stays the same.
Our DNR came out with a pretty comprehensive plan to increase license fees last year. It took into consideration people who were full time, part time and once and a while anglers and made price point licenses for them. So for that kid/college buddy who just wants to get out for the weekend, they killed the 1 day license and made a 2 day license. For the grandpa that wants to take the kids out fishing during the summer on his cabin they had a 90 day license which was less then the year round one. To make it short, the MN DNR did their homework and made "products" that would fit more peoples needs and budgets and at the end of the day people still good guyed and got it shot down so we were left with an across the board hike that got buried. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN | The MN yearly fishing license costs $17. Lets see:
- I spend at least 4 times that just in gas for a day trip to Mille Lacs.
- It costs me about 5x times that to fill the boat with gas.
- Most Muskie lures cost more than that.
I actually buy the combination sportsman/wife license for $38.50. And for that I get:
- A year fishing license for myself.
- A year fishing license for my wife.
- A small game license for myself.
That is way to cheap.
I am all for a license fee increase. I'm thinking ten dollars for the individual and fifteen dollars for the combination license sound about right.
You don't get something for nothing. Well, those on welfare do.....................
Edited by Herb_b 12/13/2011 11:54 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 127
| I would rather keep my money out of the control of government. I would prefer to choose where my money is allocated, and if I was so inclined to pay more to support fisheries, I would donate to causes that support stocking, education, ect.
If we'd be willing to pay more for a licsense to support fisheries, why not donate that to private organizations that support those innitiatives?
That being said, if there was a true need to raise prices to maintain the status quo, then I would gladly comply.
Edited by RStien321 12/13/2011 12:53 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | I'd be OK with a modest increase. As I purchase my license in Wisconsin and have read (thanks Steve) that all of the fees can only be used to support the resource so I'd pony up another $10 or $15 to help. The thing that gets my goat is I don't see any direct effect on the waters I fish. Stocking support is essential as the walleye population is plummeting, yet they haven't done anything in years. Though I'm sure it would be an administrative nightmare, it would be nice to be able to direct your "additional dollars" to a specific body of water.
Edited by dfkiii 12/13/2011 12:51 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 30
| In WI, not unless the money was earmarked for Nat Resources or DNR use only, and I mean all of it, not just the increase.
I think the non res in Michigan is pretty reasonable.
I pay out over $100 for boat launch fees in SE WI a year. The price is getting steep. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 366
| I agree with many of the big bloated mismanaged sentiments about most of which the government “provides” especially at the federal level, but as far as the DNR goes I think they’re a bit off base. I can’t speak on what’s going on in WI DNR management, but I’d say MN does an outstanding job. No price increases in 10 years, to the funds that they’ve been working with, well that is quite incredible with the current condition of the fisheries.
You want privatization of our fisheries; because you think it is too expensive? Seriously? Take all the state owned fisheries and make them privately owned and managed. How much do you think it would cost you to fish them after that, if you’d even be allowed to purchase some sort of access to the private lakes? Do you think $20-$30 is going to allow you to launch where ever you want like you can now? Do you think the quality of lakes statewide would be the same or possibly even increase?
Honestly, it seems as though this discussion can’t really go anywhere at this point, because most people have their mind made up going into the argument.
Ryan
|
|
| |
