|
|
Posts: 941
Location: Freedom, WI | Representative Jim Steineke is looking for support of a bill to get a Muskie stamp in the State of Wisconsin. Along with a 54" size limit for Green Bay, two separate bills. A little grass roots help as in calling or emailing your Rep. and Senator to support this would be very very helpful. It does not take that many people to contact your legislators to get them to take notice on issues.
Here is a link to find your legislator if you do not know who they are. http://legis.wisconsin.gov/w3asp/waml/waml.aspx
Here is the stamp proposal:
Problem/Solution:
Problem:
1. The current methods of estimating muskellunge harvest are not precise
2. Available funding for the muskellunge is not adequately keeping up with demand.
Today's muskellunge anglers are primarily interested in catching larger, trophy-caliber fish while
the longevity of the species (a trophy is approximately 15 years old) mandates a better way to
estimate angler interest and harvest. Compounding the problem is not having enough appropriate
funding available to help with the revitalization of Wisconsin muskie tourism.
Solution:
1. Registration of harvested muskellunge would be beneficial for management purposes.
2. A muskellunge stamp would create a designated revenue base to enhance the fishery.
A registration program similar to that of the Canada goose would provide the accuracy and
precision required for better management of the species. The creation of a muskellunge stamp
similar to the trout stamp would increase revenue to help develop and maintain larger, more
beneficial long-term programs.
Solution Description
A Muskellunge stamp and 48-hour mandatory registration program:
Issuance: The Department of Natural Resources shall make available muskellunge stamps
and the reporting guidelines to any person holding or applying for a fishing license if the
person intends to fish for or possess a muskellunge in the state.
Stamp requirement: No person may fish for muskellunge in any state waters unless he or
she has a valid fishing license and muskellunge stamp.
Registration requirement: No person may possess a muskellunge taken by hook and line
from the state waters unless he or she registers the fish in the manner required by the
department.
Use of moneys from fees: The department shall deposit the receipts from the sale of all
muskellunge stamps issued under this subsection into the muskellunge conservation fund.
Muskellunge stocking, protection & habitat fund. Moneys generated from the stamp will
be used to help manage Wisconsin muskellunge fisheries, protect/improve/maintain
muskellunge habitat, and for administration of the muskellunge stamp program.
Cost: Muskellunge Stamp $10
|
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | "Use of moneys from fees: The department shall deposit the receipts from the sale of all
muskellunge stamps issued under this subsection into the muskellunge conservation fund.
Muskellunge stocking, protection & habitat fund. Moneys generated from the stamp will
be used to help manage Wisconsin muskellunge fisheries, protect/improve/maintain
muskellunge habitat, and for administration of the muskellunge stamp program.
Cost: Muskellunge Stamp $10"
Exactly what percentage of the $10 will be allocated to "administrative" costs ? Can we get guarantees that administrative costs won't exceed a specific ceiling ? While I'm all up for supporting and improving the resource, this smells like a pool of funds that will soon be subject to yet another government cash grab... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | can we ask them to tax our trailers or implement a state-wide launching tax/fee while we're at it? i just don't feel like i'm giving the government enough money these days. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| Yes please call your legislator and tell them that we already pay enough and that another tax (which is what this stamp is) is not acceptable. Not only is it unacceptable but it would lower the amount of musky anglers by a pretty good amount there by having less interest in musky fishing and it would actually hurt musky fishing.
The 54" GB limit, sure let's have the politicians do it since the conservation congress hasn't been able to do anything about it even though it's passed everytime it's been brought to a vote. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 941
Location: Freedom, WI | Considering 82% of the muskie anglers responding to this survey would buy a stamp it is a good indication you would not lose anglers. http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/board/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=68... .
If you feel that the small amount of money put into the muskie program at the discretion of the bosses at the DNR is fine compared to money dedicated to muskie, tell your legislators that also. |
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | Most people I have talked to believe that a muskie stamp for Wisconsin is long overdue. I realized $10 is an additional tax some of you may not be wanting to pay. However, before denouncing it so quickly, perhaps some consideration should be given to how beneficial the trout stamp has been for that fishery. It's the same basic model.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 202
Location: Rhinelander | Awesome, more government intervention. So when the crappie population gets worse and all the crappie fanatics want to improve the resource am I going to have to buy a crappie permit? Isn't the lake public property? Why should I pay for something that should be free. Its like launch fees at public landings, the key word being public!
Sorry, I am for improving the resource, but enough is enough. Its not just $10. Its $10 for me, my wife, my daughter, and 2 nephews who regularly fish with me. Thats $50 in unneeded TAX!
I am totally onboard with reelman, call your legislator and tell them enough is enough. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| h2os2t - 9/19/2011 10:47 AM
Considering 82% of the muskie anglers responding to this survey would buy a stamp it is a good indication you would not lose anglers. http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/board/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=68... .
If you feel that the small amount of money put into the muskie program at the discretion of the bosses at the DNR is fine compared to money dedicated to muskie, tell your legislators that also.
That survey is very hard to read but it appears that the 82% that would buy a stamp are musky club members, not the general fishing public. Of course you are going to get a high % when you ask finatics of a certain group if they would still buy a stamp. Just like you would get a higher than normal % if you did a survey of people on this web-site.
IMHO musky fishing is better than it ever has been in WIsconsin. Remember the days of hoping to catch a legal musky in a year? Read "Time On The Water" and see how it was not so long ago. What would be done with the more money that this stamp would bring in? Do more useless surveys and research? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1141
Location: NorthCentral WI | Wow. We're talking about $10 here. With the expense of this sport, that's like a penny.
People like to b*tch about the WI-DNR as compared to the MN-DNR's musky program, yet they're not willing to donate $10 for the cause. Call a spade a spade... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Once again, absolutle lack of any awareness of reality has caused a really egregious statement to be posted..
'Do more useless surveys and research?'
Wow.
The management program that GOT us where we are today with the best muskie fishing in Wisconsin in a very long time requires the very thing you are attacking attached to the hip of a conservation ethic from folks like us. AND, the DNR is broke. Busted. The crews they field are tiny compared to pre-resession. Thank goodness Woodruff has the netting crew in the field they do; without the dedication and hard work of a very few people walleye and muskie stocking numbers this year in many WI waters would be horrible to zero.
I don't like the idea of Muskie stamps much. If the state needs more revenue for fisheries management (and they do), raising the license fee proportionately for everyone is the least objectionable path. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | sworrall - 9/19/2011 12:35 PM
Once again, absolutle lack of any awareness of reality has caused a really egregious statement to be posted..
'Do more useless surveys and research?'
Wow.
The management program that GOT us where we are today with the best muskie fishing in Wisconsin in a very long time requires the very thing you are attacking attached to the hip of a conservation ethic from folks like us. AND, the DNR is broke. Busted. The crews they field are tiny compared to pre-resession. Thank goodness Woodruff has the netting crew in the field they do; without the dedication and hard work of a very few people walleye and muskie stocking numbers this year in many WI waters would be horrible to zero.
I don't like the idea of Muskie stamps much. If the state needs more revenue for fisheries management (and they do), raising the license fee proportionately for everyone is the least objectionable path.
Agreed. Everyone is quick to blame the WDNR, yet when it comes down to needing funds no one is willing to pitch in.
Yes, it is a public resource. If there is no funding from the public then the public resource gets no help. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i'd be a whole lot more inclined to fund walleye improvement with additional fund-generation than a stamp for muskies ... the walleye fishery including habitat protection is an example of something that is "in-need" in Wisconsin.
otherwise i might just upsize my pike-fishing gear and bypass the additional cost of the stamp, yet be prepared in-case i catch an incedental musky. |
|
| |
|
| i don't support this idea because i don't support legislators dictating natural resource policy on an issue-by-issue basis. first of all, the legislature has plenty more important issues to focus on than whether or not to enact a muskie stamp. secondly, that knife cuts both ways and it's been used against muskie interests with bad effect too. i'd support the legislature instead passing a law to disband the Conservation Congress system and then empowering the DNR to manage based on the best scientific principles of resource conservation. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | lambeau - 9/19/2011 3:08 PM
i don't support this idea because i don't support legislators dictating natural resource policy on an issue-by-issue basis. first of all, the legislature has plenty more important issues to focus on than whether or not to enact a muskie stamp. secondly, that knife cuts both ways and it's been used against muskie interests with bad effect too. i'd support the legislature instead passing a law to disband the Conservation Congress system and then empowering the DNR to manage based on the best scientific principles of resource conservation.
yup |
|
| |
|
Posts: 720
| Pointerpride102 - 9/19/2011 2:54 PM
sworrall - 9/19/2011 12:35 PM
Once again, absolutle lack of any awareness of reality has caused a really egregious statement to be posted..
'Do more useless surveys and research?'
Wow.
The management program that GOT us where we are today with the best muskie fishing in Wisconsin in a very long time requires the very thing you are attacking attached to the hip of a conservation ethic from folks like us. AND, the DNR is broke. Busted. The crews they field are tiny compared to pre-resession. Thank goodness Woodruff has the netting crew in the field they do; without the dedication and hard work of a very few people walleye and muskie stocking numbers this year in many WI waters would be horrible to zero.
I don't like the idea of Muskie stamps much. If the state needs more revenue for fisheries management (and they do), raising the license fee proportionately for everyone is the least objectionable path.
Agreed. Everyone is quick to blame the WDNR, yet when it comes down to needing funds no one is willing to pitch in.
Well said guys.
Yes, it is a public resource. If there is no funding from the public then the public resource gets no help.
Edited by Hunter4 9/19/2011 3:21 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | lambeau - 9/19/2011 3:08 PM
i don't support this idea because i don't support legislators dictating natural resource policy on an issue-by-issue basis. first of all, the legislature has plenty more important issues to focus on than whether or not to enact a muskie stamp. secondly, that knife cuts both ways and it's been used against muskie interests with bad effect too. i'd support the legislature instead passing a law to disband the Conservation Congress system and then empowering the DNR to manage based on the best scientific principles of resource conservation.
All well and good, but where does the money come from? Fishing license sales are down nation wide, as is the purchase of equipment, boats, gas etc.
I agree getting rid of the CC meetings would be great, as would empowering the DNR to manage based on their scientific knowledge. But management costs money. Gaining knowledge about the resources costs money. Money that isn't there right now.
I don't think the musky stamp is the best option. A hike in the fishing license fee would be a great start. What does a resident full season fishing license cost these days?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 941
Location: Freedom, WI | Lambeau - A stamp HAS to be done through the legislature(it is the money thing), the DNR or the CC can not do a stamp. That is why it was approached this way. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | $20 for the license, $10 for GL trout and salmon, $10 for inland trout. I'd be in favor if the money was used for its intended purpose and only that, and if the other option was discontinued stocking.
While they're at it they could charge a little more than the measly $12 for extra doe tags in one of the zones I hunt. By raising it to $20 they could pull in an extra $46,000.
Edited by Flambeauski 9/19/2011 3:49 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 676
Location: Wisconsin | Instead of a stamp, how about a Musky license plate?
How are you going to regulate a stamp? Its not like your fishing in a trout stream without a stamp, anyone on the water can just say they were pike fishing or something so they don't have to have the stamp. The guys who want to support the fishery will buy the stamp, but most won't a year or two down the road. |
|
| |
|
| All well and good, but where does the money come from?
A stamp HAS to be done through the legislature(it is the money thing), the DNR or the CC can not do a stamp. That is why it was approached this way. i don't think the hoped-for advantages (money dedicated to muskies) are worth the potential costs involved such as irritating many muskie fishermen and treading the primrose path of politicizing resource management. from my point of view we should be making proactive efforts to _prevent_ politicians from getting involved in department-level resource decisions, not encouraging it. i don't have a different suggestion, but i'm very uneasy about this one. IF you're going to proceed, then i would make sure it was a stamp only needed to harvest muskie and not one needed to fish for muskie. it will be less irritating to those who don't want to pay extra and it will still have the benefit of preventing harvest of "accidental" muskie catches. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Pointerpride102 - 9/19/2011 3:28 PM
All well and good, but where does the money come from? Fishing license sales are down nation wide, as is the purchase of equipment, boats, gas etc.
yah, so let's make it even more complicated, expensive and cumbersome for a family to spend money on license fees and add 10 bucks a head for a stamp. a deterent? or a money-generator??
fees, taxes and regulations on public-use ... let's ask them for limited hp on lakes maybe too??? what the heck, we all have kickers, right?! we could become illinois and have all state-regulated and run waters and parks where legislators tell us what we can and can't do.
on another site muskies are being compared to trout and unfortunately it seems that's what it's becoming.
we're asking people to regulate and tax us ... holy crap! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 994
Location: Minnesota: where it's tough to be a sportsfan! | I'd go as far as to suggest that this really isn't just a WI issue. DNR departments in many states are operating on shoestring budgets, feilding numbers of workers last seen in the 40's! It would be a good thing for the "Muskie Fisherpeople" to stand up with a proposal of what we feel would best suit both the resource and capitol issues. Something that could be a cookie-cutter from state to state. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | jonnysled - 9/19/2011 4:24 PM
Pointerpride102 - 9/19/2011 3:28 PM
All well and good, but where does the money come from? Fishing license sales are down nation wide, as is the purchase of equipment, boats, gas etc.
yah, so let's make it even more complicated, expensive and cumbersome for a family to spend money on license fees and add 10 bucks a head for a stamp. a deterent? or a money-generator??
fees, taxes and regulations on public-use ... let's ask them for limited hp on lakes maybe too??? what the heck, we all have kickers, right?! we could become illinois and have all state-regulated and run waters and parks where legislators tell us what we can and can't do.
on another site muskies are being compared to trout and unfortunately it seems that's what it's becoming.
we're asking people to regulate and tax us ... holy crap!
I was under the assumption the stamp would only be for the harvesting of a musky, not to simply fish for it. Too much gray area in enforcement to make simply for fishing for them.
But everyone keeps demanding they want more, more, more out of the WDNR. There is no money to do so. Fishing and hunting license price increases are needed around the country. Skip the stamp and raise the price 10 bucks on a license. Hunting or fishing. Or go in $5 increments each year or every other year. The status quo in Wisconsin isn't working, the DNR is broke. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 720
| Mike this may be a really stupid question: Do states DNR get a lot or any money for their budgets from the federal goverment? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | try telling those that keep muskies they have to spend an extra 10 bucks ... what did you think it was pointer??
it's the first foot onto the slippery slope of taxing public-use ... in 10 years we can all reminisce about where it all started. we asked to be taxed and regulated and then the add-ons were even easier to come by and folks started to forget where the funding went to. send this republican congressman a message to change parties or get himself in-line with the people who voted him in. it's ridiculous and i hope his constituents are letting him know it.
i've caught pike and walleyes on depthraiders, double 10's and weagles so i'm good ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 580
| jonnysled - 9/19/2011 4:24 PM
yah, so let's make it even more complicated, expensive and cumbersome for a family to spend money on license fees and add 10 bucks a head for a stamp. a deterent? or a money-generator??
on another site muskies are being compared to trout and unfortunately it seems that's what it's becoming.
we're asking people to regulate and tax us ... holy crap!
How is purchasing a muskie stamp so complicated? Maybe to non-english speakers, I guess. But seems pretty simple to me. If you want to fish for muskies, buy the stamp. How are you being confused by that concept? Trout anglers and great lakes anglers seem to understand OK for their stamps. (?) Has it been a deterrent to them?
As for the principle, it's also really simple. Muskies are expensive to manage, especially given current budgetary constraints. In that regard, we don't have enough money right now. I'll repeat that. We don't have enough money right now. Think about it for a second. We don't have enough money right now.
So asking those specific members of the public (muskie anglers), who intend to utilize this specific public resource (muskies), to pay a whopping $10 to help ensure the resource continues to get the management it needs despite the shortage of general funds...well, it makes 100% complete and total sense, especially since there is already a working model, given the great success of the trout stamp program.
Mike, there is already precedent for this coming through the legislature (trout stamp in 1977), and technically I believe that it has to do so. So, by not supporting the idea solely because of how the process allows it to happen...well, with all due respect, I think you're getting hung up on a technicality.
Sled, you say that we're asking to be regulated and taxed as though that is always a bad thing. But it isn't. You seem completely ignorant of the fact that sensible regulation and funding (yes, through taxes, license fees, etc.) not only explains the very existence of muskies in approximately 200 stocked muskie waters throughout this state, but also is directly responsible for the entire concept and existence of "muskellunge management" in the state. You seem happy with where it is at. Do you think it's all happened at zero cost? Do you think it can continue without proper funding?
I'd encourage everyone thinking about this topic to do a little bit of research and take a look at what's been accomplished through the trout stamp program (also a $10 stamp) and think about the potential application to muskie management. Stocking, research, enhancements, habitat restoration, etc. It's pretty exciting actually, what could potentially be accomplished.
I think a muskie stamp is long overdue.
And it's $10...for crying out loud. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | jonnysled - 9/19/2011 8:47 PM
try telling those that keep muskies they have to spend an extra 10 bucks ... what did you think it was pointer??
it's the first foot onto the slippery slope of taxing public-use ... in 10 years we can all reminisce about where it all started. we asked to be taxed and regulated and then the add-ons were even easier to come by and folks started to forget where the funding went to. send this republican congressman a message to change parties or get himself in-line with the people who voted him in. it's ridiculous and i hope his constituents are letting him know it.
i've caught pike and walleyes on depthraiders, double 10's and weagles so i'm good ...
Like I said in my original post which agreed with Steve's thought that the stamp is not the best idea....
You site looking at funding walleye habitat improvement etc. in one of your posts....how do you propose funding that? I'm not disagreeing with you, just curious as to how you propose to fund it.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | CC, tribal spears and size limits ....
show that you can do the stuff that is free before you come asking for more money ...
more taxes and more regulation = bad thing???
yes
in my family it's about $60 bucks ... on top of the license.
|
|
| |
|
| Where will it all end?? A sportsmans license used to be reasonable and cover everything. Now its getting to the point alot of people can't afford it anymore. It doesn't even cover everything anymore. Theres launch fees also. My dad always told me one day hunting and fishing will only be for the rich. Its got a good start. I'm not saying a stamp is a bad idea. Out of that $10 how much would go for improving musky fishing. Maybe $1 out of every $10. Get the government involved and you won't even get $1 or much of a bang for your $10. Just my opinion. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | jonnysled - 9/19/2011 9:23 PM
CC, tribal spears and size limits ....
show that you can do the stuff that is free before you come asking for more money ...
more taxes and more regulation = bad thing???
yes
in my family it's about $60 bucks ... on top of the license.
CC hearings, likely not going away.
Tribal spearing, never going away.
Size limits, see CC hearings.
What are you personally going to do to change the status quo? |
|
| |
