|
|
| ill pay whatever the cost is because I am on the water 100+ days a year. What about my mother or little sister that comes out with me once or maybe twice a summer? No way they're going to pay 50$ to do that. I think its fine how it is |
|
| |
|
Posts: 374
Location: Bemidji | Lake surveys past due, enforcement is spread thin, studies cant be completed.
Oh yeah and 50s on every spot. Huh? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | kelz - 12/8/2011 7:55 PM
I would have to say no on a higher fee. I had a lot of free time this summer and so did many other people and they decided to go fishing also from what i saw there is no decline in license sales. Would much rather the DNR learn how budget like everybody else has to do. I do however support joing a club and making a donation that goes directly to the cause
So you're going to go off of you and 5 friends who went fishing a lot versus real data that shows the declining trend in both fishing and hunting license sales?
So far this year Wisconsin is down 1.3 percent in license sales, not as big of a drop as last year. (I'd link you the article but it is archived and you have to pay for it)
Minnesota was down 30% from last year. Lowest sales have been in 12 years.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/05/17/fishing-lic...
For the most part the trends are the same around the nation. Some of the Gulf Coast states have seen an uptick in the trend, but that is likely due to the low sales in previous years during the oil spill.
Open your eyes man. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | how much money is needed to deliver the past-due surveys?
what do they deliver of value?
how do you define "thin"
how many do you need and what do they cost?
how do you measure their productivity and what has been lost? or will be gained if they are hired?
what "studies"??
give money
raise license fees
install a musky tax stamp
eliminate dark-house spearing
why?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. |
sounds like a problem ...
raising the pricing when your market is down that much??
that would be the last thing to do ... sounds like a recruiting campaign is needed. regaining former license holders will put money in the till. raising fees to the ones who stayed will 1. pee some off, 2. run some more away and 3. not bring back those who chose against it in the previous years.
i'd be careful with those numbers ...
what's Bud Grant doing these days?? somebody get him on TV ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | jonnysled - 12/8/2011 8:37 PM
how much money is needed to deliver the past-due surveys?
what do they deliver of value?
how do you define "thin"
how many do you need and what do they cost?
how do you measure their productivity and what has been lost? or will be gained if they are hired?
what "studies"??
give money
raise license fees
install a musky tax stamp
eliminate dark-house spearing
why?
Population monitoring- does lake X need supplemental stocking because very few age 0 fish were found, likely showing a poor recruitment year, or are there enough age 1 fish to cover a down year. Or, have there been several years in a row with poor recruitment? Do we need to adjust bag limits to keep more adults in the system? The list goes on and on and on.....
Checking anglers- Ensure people are abiding by the law.
Creel surveys- What are people catching? What sizes? Are anglers hammering one particular species? One size class?
Stocking- Some populations aren't sustained by recruitment. It costs money to raise fish and stock them.
What is lost by not doing these? You lose data points, you lose the ability to see what fisheries are doing in lakes. You lose the ability to see what anglers are catching, how many, what sizes. You lose harvest data. You lose catch and release data. This goes for all species. DNR biologists cover more than just muskies. Native fish, sportfish, non-sportfish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | jonnysled - 12/8/2011 8:50 PM
sounds like a problem ...
raising the pricing when your market is down that much??
that would be the last thing to do ... sounds like a recruiting campaign is needed. regaining former license holders will put money in the till. raising fees to the ones who stayed will 1. pee some off, 2. run some more away and 3. not bring back those who chose against it in the previous years.
i'd be careful with those numbers ...
what's Bud Grant doing these days?? somebody get him on TV ...
What if they left because of unsatisfactory fishing?
I'm not advocating a $50 fee hike like some have suggested here. I honestly though more people would support a $5 increase than a >$15 increase. $50 would drive a ton of people away. And you know I don't support a stamp. I didn't vote in this poll, but I'd support a $5 increase.
You've got what 3 or 4 kids? Lets say 4, include yourself and that is $20 extra dollars you spend on licenses. I think you've mentioned a few nieces or nephews, we'll say 3...that is $15 more dollars. So you're up to $35 extra dollars. At $50 those figures would be out of this world! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | so, all that important stuff just stopped getting done? and we need stamps, higher license fees and special club donations and no taking of any fish?? what does the current DNR do? i thought both States had them is there an optimum headcount per licensed angler/lake acre etc... known from history? and a relative number today vs. what it should be? i doubt they've been all of a sudden crippled and unable to do their jobs. in the real world you have to do 2 people's jobs to keep your own anymore ... why should we expect that to be any different in the public-sector?
come to Cruiserfest in Minocqua sometime for the big DNR Vacation Weekend. they come from throughout the State to set traps for tourists who come north for fun. the DNR agents trap people and write tickets during the day and then party at the Waters of Minocqua in the evening ... and we pay for it in our taxes. thankfully last year our Governor Scott Walker put a stop to the nonsense after the visitors stopped coming ...
I'd like to see the DNR leadership clean up their act first before asking for more people and money to lay on the already high tax burdon ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8835
| Sled,
Panic, that's why. You have to look at both sides of the equation. Fewer license sales = less revenue = less availble for building and maintaining the resource. What people fail to think about is that fewer license sales = fewer people fishing = reduced need to put money into the resource.
All of those things we fret about, like angler harvest or delayed mortality, are obviously less of a problem when there are fewer people using the resource. I suspect that we're at a point where a significant portion of the angling public just can't afford to travel around at will and fish whenever they want. In my opinion, bumping the licence fees, adding stamps, etc. is a bad idea during tough economic times, because the amount of anglers you are going to lose all together is going to be greater than the revenue you get from those wo are either wealthy enough or stubborn enough, or stupid enough that they are going to fish no matter what the cost.
Edited by esoxaddict 12/8/2011 10:17 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Al Gore leading this Agenda? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | The DNR has slowly been improving since Doyle left. No doubt about it. A ton of politics in WI DNR. I know biologists who couldn't do their work because they were restricted on mileage they could drive. So some stuff didn't get done. I don't work for the WDNR so I can't tell you what got done and what didn't. In my region, my manager would love another biologist, but we won't get one. So we all pitch in to pick up the slack.
I agree whole heatedly with your last statement. When you lose the backing from your fan base, you have to win it back before you start selling stock in the franchise. I'm hopeful Walker will survive the recall and turn the WDNR around. Watching what Doyle did to the WDNR, I vowed I would not work for the WDNR until it got cleaned up. I'm slowly seeing some signs of change since Walker got in. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8835
| Pointerpride102 - 12/8/2011 10:00 PM
[...]
What if they left because of unsatisfactory fishing?
Well, then they're never coming back, because the fishing in WI is better than it's been since I've been fishing, and the fishing in MN is as good as it's ever going to be. Not sure where they went, but if it's anywhere but Canada, they're going to be pretty disspointed. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 374
Location: Bemidji | Looked at the MN proposal (2011) and here's some specifics:
Resident angling went up $7
Nonresident angling went up $5.50
Darkhouse angling went up $1
You can read the below link:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/heritage/index.html
A musky stamp would not gain any steam in MN nor would eliminating Darkhouse angling. Both of which were never proposed by any Muskie/Pike organization.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I'm pretty sure Fisheries folks don't bother much with enforcement.
The DNR Secretary is appointed by the Governor and runs the DNR. Maybe call Mr. Walker and get him to get her on that. 
I actually think we have pretty good leadership there these days.
Netting crews, boom shocking crews, hatchery crews, all are down. Health insurance went way up, driving more employees out; yes, they make so little that an extra couple hundred breaks them. No filling of positions emptied by attrition, and way too many hard working folks held to LTE status to save money despite years of top shelf service to the public. It's a mess Sled, and not going to get better soon. Literally a couple bad days because of the short field crews, and several lakes don't get any walleye or muskie stocking and a hatchery may have to close because they have nothing to raise...or worse. I know the hours Keith worked last Spring, and there are very few folks who would do that work for that money short handed...at least not for very long.
It's a really bad recession at fault, and when business sucks, so does revenue, and the DNR ain't alone in their woes. States across the country are broke, and plenty of services have been cut or are suffering.
And I don't think the DNR in WI asked for license fee increases this year...at least I didn't see it if they did. I believe the question was if the public represented here would support a fee increase, and the answers are all tied up if you go to yes and no, and still coming in. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | esoxaddict - 12/8/2011 9:24 PM
Pointerpride102 - 12/8/2011 10:00 PM
[...]
What if they left because of unsatisfactory fishing?
Well, then they're never coming back, because the fishing in WI is better than it's been since I've been fishing, and the fishing in MN is as good as it's ever going to be. Not sure where they went, but if it's anywhere but Canada, they're going to be pretty disspointed.
Some people base their fishing experience on a few bad days. While you and everyone else may have come great success, they might not have any success. It happens a lot more than you might think. I'm not saying that is the case, just throwing it out there for conversation. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | a groundswell of resistance got the Governor involved last year ... it had gone on for years, but 3-4 years it was beyond ridiculous and thankfully they put a stop to it but by the time he cancelled the agents, most visitors had either cancelled their trip or made plans not to attend. it will be a long time before they return to the area the way it once was. unfortunately it is the DNR so local businesses and residents here still have a bad taste in their mouths for what they have done to run off visitors over the past 5 years. Our town has been significantly impacted by the over-regulation done by the DNR (snowmobiling). before anyone goes "there" ... it wasn't all about getting drunks, it was about getting anyone and everyone they possibly could by setting traps for them with an average citation of $350.00 (welcome north!). it wasn't enforcement but harassment. so, using DNR "needs" as a reason to charge visitors even more money to fish won't fly without a fight i would think.
if anything fishing needs to become less expensive and less restrictive than it is now. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | You miss the part where I said I doubt Fisheries do much enforcement? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | sworrall - 12/8/2011 9:57 PM
You miss the part where I said I doubt Fisheries do much enforcement?
While I agree with your sentiment, the issue lies in the general public seeing DNR and lumping them all together. Doesn't matter if it is law enforcement, wildlife biologist, fisheries biologist. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I get that, Keith catches that all the time as a creel agent and when operating nets and boom shocking; it's happening right now in this conversation. We were not talking about bad enforcement policies although we could ( and appear to be) if that's relevant, we're talking about whether folks here would support an increase in fees on fishing licenses.
I would, but I am admittedly swayed by having a son who works at the Woodruff Hatchery. I think we also need a new PR campaign for the State. So does MN, IMO. But that costs money too.
Sled, I've heard about what you posted, and kinda thought it was BS that was going on. Still do, but I heard that was in the past. Guess it does beg the question though, what's the difference between that and a cadre of State troopers with one on an overpass with a radar gun on a weekend busting everyone they can for 8 over? (Welcome to HWY 41 South)
Any and all facets of the DNR operating budget, public image, etc. need to be addressed, and I understand our current Secretary has been busy. That said, I believe our fisheries crew could use some help.
I know we are short wardens these days, too. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8835
| That's nothing new Sled. I watched the same thing happen on Silver Lake back in the 70's. The local residents were getting fed up with the "invasion" of FIBS every weekend. One summer they decided to solve the problem. Two patrol boats on the lake, stopping anyone and everyone for anything and everything. They wrote tickets for everything you could imagine, and basically harassed everyone right off the lake and right out of town. The marina went from 60 paid slips one year down to 18 the next. They even arrested a 14 year old kid for lighting ladyfingers, under the supervision of his parents, on the 4th of July. And it worked - the next few seasons there was half as much traffic on the lake.
Now, Steve is right - that wasn't the fisheries folks. That was the local game warden and the local police dept. But the end result was the same - huge numbers of people said "screw this place!" and never came back. And it also greated a HUGE disdain for the DNR. I was young, and I didn't know any better. But I grew up being told that the DNR were a bunch of idiots, morons, and other unmentionables. And when it came to anything the DNR said we weren't allowed to do? We did it, with a vengeance. Unfortunately, that included completely ignoring size and creel limits. We were all harvesting fish and eating them just because the DNR said we couldn't. Come to think of it, we tormented the local law enforcement quite a bit too, but that's a story for another day... They may have run most of us out of town, but the rest of us who stayed did more damage than we would have if they had just left us alone.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Sled...you go to bed early? By the way, did you check out the ice situation? Sue wants to head to Minocqua Saturday. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 572
Location: Maplewood, MN | I would not support a license price increase. Raising the license fee with diminishing anglers will only attract less people. Also, younger anglers (16-19) will be scared off and not want to buy a license. From a personal stand point, its really hard taking out my college friends fishing to see if they like it telling them you have to pay $17 just to try it out. I know that price is small, but to new anglers, price is a difference. Also, I agree on the statement of what is so bad about our fisheries. We already have a VERY successful stocking program and the metro MN area has fantastic fishing for the location and pressure. If we raise it once, it will raise again. However, I support a non-mandatory stamp for muskies, much like walleyes. This is because those who actually target them will put the money toward the stamp. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | duplicate ... sorry
Edited by jonnysled 12/9/2011 7:59 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | ice situation is looking good steve ... at least the chain absorbed all of the snow and was glazed before the cold came in. give me a call if you are headed to MQA ... david and i plan to be on the ice.
didn't miss the part ... might be best if the fisheries management group were separated by name from "DNR" ... i think a new add campaign for them would be a good thing including recruitment and a message saying what happens when people don't support fishing and hunting through license sales and after they say what happens it's always best to deliver what they say they'll do too. |
|
| |
|
| Just something to think about. My dad always told me when I was little that someday hunting and fishing would only be a rich mans sport. I'm not against licence fees or raising them modestly but you have to remember that everyone should have the right and ability to enjoy these things. The way the economy is going its tough for some people. Raising a family and all is totally expensive now days. I enjoy fishing but don't go as often as I would like because I just plain can't afford it. I'm not trying to start any arguments or anything like that. If the Mods feel this is out of line, please delete it. Thank you  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 131
| I don't know if theres any good way to promote and maintain any of are wildlife programs with todays economy . I dont want to good guy about the economy but there are alot of people out there still struggleing just to feed there familys let alone support any increases on anything . This is totally off the wall thinking but here goes. Could corporate sponsership of the fisheries department work . Could a advertisment of catch and bring home a limit of sun fish for mom to cook up for supper be bad . Catch and keep license pricing with a cheaper catch and release license option . I personaly like the stamp option for lets say trolling and casting , that way you cover walleyes , bass , pike and muskies . All fishing equipment confiscated from violaters rods , reels, tackle boxs ect be donated to a get a kid to fish program . Maybe a on line store were anybody can bid on confiscated equipment. The fines for violators needs to be increased for sure, thats a no brainer . |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | MuskieFever - 12/9/2011 12:11 AM
I would not support a license price increase. Raising the license fee with diminishing anglers will only attract less people. Also, younger anglers (16-19) will be scared off and not want to buy a license. From a personal stand point, its really hard taking out my college friends fishing to see if they like it telling them you have to pay $17 just to try it out. I know that price is small, but to new anglers, price is a difference. Also, I agree on the statement of what is so bad about our fisheries. We already have a VERY successful stocking program and the metro MN area has fantastic fishing for the location and pressure. If we raise it once, it will raise again. However, I support a non-mandatory stamp for muskies, much like walleyes. This is because those who actually target them will put the money toward the stamp.
You know implementing a stamp would cost money right? What if the very successful stocking program you mentioned was cut back due to lack of funds? A small license fee increase would generate way more revenue than a stamp, that is a fact. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 131
| I don't know if theres any good way to promote and maintain any of are wildlife programs with todays economy . I dont want to good guy about the economy but there are alot of people out there still struggleing just to feed there familys let alone support any increases on anything . This is totally off the wall thinking but here goes. Could corporate sponsership of the fisheries department work . Could a advertisment of catch and bring home a limit of sun fish for mom to cook up for supper be bad . Catch and keep license pricing with a cheaper catch and release license option . I personaly like the stamp option for lets say trolling and casting , that way you cover walleyes , bass , pike and muskies . All fishing equipment confiscated from violaters rods , reels, tackle boxs ect be donated to a get a kid to fish program . Maybe a on line store were anybody can bid on confiscated equipment. The fines for violators needs to be increased for sure, thats a no brainer . |
|
| |
|
Posts: 582
| I am not sure why anyone would want to increase a fee or tax. Do you really think we don't pay enough now? if you really want to pay more, nothing is going to stop you from writing a check to your local gov't agency or fishery. Please do so if you want to pay more. Otherwise, when you look at the fee's we already pay in Wisc, you would be surprised at just how much you actually pay and you don't even realize it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16
Location: Arpin, WI | Pointerpride102 - 12/8/2011 9:36 PM
kelz - 12/8/2011 7:55 PM
I would have to say no on a higher fee. I had a lot of free time this summer and so did many other people and they decided to go fishing also from what i saw there is no decline in license sales. Would much rather the DNR learn how budget like everybody else has to do. I do however support joing a club and making a donation that goes directly to the cause
So you're going to go off of you and 5 friends who went fishing a lot versus real data that shows the declining trend in both fishing and hunting license sales?
So far this year Wisconsin is down 1.3 percent in license sales, not as big of a drop as last year. (I'd link you the article but it is archived and you have to pay for it )
Minnesota was down 30% from last year. Lowest sales have been in 12 years.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/05/17/fishing-lic...
For the most part the trends are the same around the nation. Some of the Gulf Coast states have seen an uptick in the trend, but that is likely due to the low sales in previous years during the oil spill.
Open your eyes man.
Well since I dont have access to the archived stats I was going off what I noticed the last few years and that is when I go out for the day on a monday, tuesday, ect.. by myself not five friends and pull into the boat ramp and have a hard time finding room to park because its full (of rigs I dont know) when normaly in years past its empty.
1.3 percent drop in license sales wow and that would justify an 30 percent (equivalant of a 5 dollar) increace on every individual who still buys a license in your eyes. also that figure was for hunting and fishing license who's to say hunting sales were not down and fishing sales up.
Dont get me wrong I love the great fishing we have in this state and want to see it stay that way im just so sick of seeing all forms of government fix things by throwing more money at the problem and not functioning within thier means
Edited by kelz 12/9/2011 9:51 AM
|
|
| |
