|
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | That's the issue at hand. If the MNDNR 'functions within it's means' and the economy remains in the tank, there's compelling evidence that future stocking of existing muskie waters, new muskie waters, and the work necessary to even approach the subject is in jeopardy.
Absolute fact? I don't know. Treats and the guys over there are far better informed, I'd take ther word as close to the mark. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3508
Location: Elk River, Minnesota | Good conversation here...
I wonder how a "conservation license" or similar idea would go over with people... Similar to what Canada has that for less money, you could buy a license that cuts down on the number of fish you can keep per species.... If memory serves me correctly, MN does not have anything like that, although they do have non-resident limited-day licenses.
Looking at this with the thought that sled had in mind that it lowers cost, which might increase sales and somehow a flow of $$ to help fund things in an economy that is tough (in a nutshell the inverse relationship between cost and demand). The option to buy a full license would still be on the table for those who wish to do more catch and keep for the table fare. I often wonder if more diversity in licensing options would act as a benefit or would it hinder revenue, regulation, etc.
tough call...
Steve
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | oddball - 12/9/2011 8:11 AM
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 .
Fines for violators do not go back to the resource. Stamps cost more,money in administration than they make, especially in a very small interest group. A license fee increase of 5 dollars doesn't cost much of anything. All fishing license revenue goes to the resource. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Wisconsin is down 1.3% from last year, in which sales were down even more. If you aren't going to acknowledge actual numbers, then please drop out of the conversation, anecdotal evidence of you not finding a parking spot isn't good enough. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | VMS - 12/9/2011 9:56 AM
I wonder how a "conservation license" or similar idea would go over with people... Similar to what Canada has that for less money, you could buy a license that cuts down on the number of fish you can keep per species.... If memory serves me correctly, MN does not have anything like that, although they do have non-resident limited-day licenses.
Steve
MN does have a conservation license (for residents). Although I heard speculation that they would be eliminating that license option. Not sure if that is correct or not.
Aaron
Edited by AWH 12/9/2011 10:20 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16
Location: Arpin, WI | I did acknowlege actual numbers and asked for more specific numbers if you cant provide actual numbers please drop out of the conversation. rambling about combined percentages isint good enough.
I kinda sound like a jerk huh.
all I did was post an observation and you told me the numbers and jumped all over me. it was an observation not gospel
Edited by kelz 12/9/2011 10:23 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 10
| If the fishing is good it isn't because of you or me it's the DNR because it didn't fix itself. Not sure how anyone can say that the fishing hasn't improved since even the 90's. I'm sure we could fill up a whole book of remember whens and most of them would be remember when such and such lake didn't have a single fish or the Wisconsin River was so polluted your shorts would change colors when you went skiing.
So they do/did something with that money, maybe not as much or as cheaply as all of us wish, but I honestly don't know the budgets or costs and that information is needed to make a real opinion. If you know the numbers point out the wastes or the needs, otherwise your just saying I want to pay more because I can or I don't want to pay more because I don't want to pay more.
Maintenance is not free so a static price/income is not going to sustain a lifestyle or a fishery. That doesn’t mean raising fees is the only way, but it is a way. Telling others to give extra to maintain the fishery if it’s needed is just as much nonsense as giving extra to the government if it’s unneeded. I know I haven't furthered the conversation any because I can't I don't have the numbers and am honestly to lazy to look them up, but those that do please share or someone less lazy than me look them up and then form an opinion backed by something other than the lot was full of trailers or more money is better.
|
|
| |
|
| guest, if you can afford to be on the water 100 times a year i'm sure you can be a good person and buy your family members licenses. no? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 366
| guest - 12/9/2011 9:01 AM
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 :-(
First off if everyone really wanted to fish and did, then everyone would be able to afford it or it wouldn't cost a thing. The problem is that less and less people as a percentage of the population actually want to go fishing each year. Do you honestly think this is because of the price of a fishing license? Sorry, but I sincerely doubt it.
Maybe it is due to the fact that where you go, the resorts you can stay at, the price of boats (even rentals), the tackle to do it “properly”, are so much more expensive than they were when I was a kid and our family took our annual vacation to Minnesota every year. But any of those premium toys and expenses are still optional, last time I looked.
The price of licensing has gone up, but not even close to what the rest of the stuff has. A fishing license is still a bargain in terms of what it allows you to do with the resources that are available. I think that smart pricing as many states employ is necessary with any increase in price, as in cheaper prices for the 16-19 year olds, family rates, senior rates, limited use rates, etc. Raising the price on adults, the main resource users, is not that big of a deal.
As far as kids go, I don’t have any just yet (although many nieces and nephews), but there is no way I would baulk at buying them a license when they hit their teen years, if they’re into it and want to go out and fish. As far as I know, kids under 16 fish for free in just about every state I’ve been to. Can the same be said for getting your kid in for a season of little league or pee-wee football, or any other family fun activity that you could do instead of fishing? How does taking your kids to the movies every now and then compare to a few days on the water in terms of $/hr of family fun?
To be honest, many of my best memories from even my teenage years with my parents and grandparents were either on or near the water, most often in MN. I would pay $100 a year in a heartbeat to provide the possibility of creating those memories with my own children, when they come along.
Everyone wants better management from the DNR, and that’s understood, because the last thing most of us want is money going to waste on bureaucratic bs. That said, we also expect a heck of a lot more from our DNR these days than ever before. That doesn’t happen for free, despite what some people would like to believe.
Ryan
Edited by Fishwizard 12/9/2011 10:35 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Jackson
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.
kelz - 12/9/2011 9:46 AM
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 there means
watch the news on the "occupation" ... plenty of people would love to continue to raise your fees and taxes. a bunch of them within this community would too if they can get away with it.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 366
| jonnysled - 12/9/2011 11:00 AM
Jackson
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.
kelz - 12/9/2011 9:46 AM
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 there means
watch the news on the "occupation" ... plenty of people would love to continue to raise your fees and taxes. a bunch of them within this community would too if they can get away with it.
Giving more money to the Feds and seeing things get continually worse is absolute insanity. Giving money to the DNR through license purchases and seeing the opportunities and quality of fishing increase to what it has in my lifetime... Money well spent.
Do you think that the stuff that is going on in Congress and Washington is similar to that within your local DNR office?
|
|
| |
|
|
watch the news on the "occupation" ... plenty of people would love to continue to raise your fees and taxes. a bunch of them within this community would too if they can get away with it.
Sled-
Its hard to take you seriously when you push you conservative talk show agenda with no facts to back it up. Don't you have something better to do with your time than sit on here and argue all day? Like maybe attending a tea party or something... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 227
Location: Maple Grove | Recruitment is an issue as stated. I don't believe it is solely a down economy to blame on reduced license sales. I heard a story on MPR a few weeks back indicating reduced revenue to the MN DNR due to lack of new outdoorsmen and women. A big chunk of that was a lack of youth getting involved. An argument to the reason why was the continued urbanization of the state and lack of outdoors traditions being handed down to younger generations. If that trend continues it won't matter how much the license fees. If you continue to raise them to offset revenue losses you ultimately will create a sport solely for the elite. It also means there will be less competition from anglers on the water. However, I would guess there would be an increase in pressure from pleasure boats, ski boats, and jet skis.
I remember the story well as I tried to use it as evidence to my wife to let me bring my one year old on the ice this year. I'll see if I can track it down. Maybe it was referenced in Pointer's link. I haven't looked at that yet.
Joe Olstadt
Edited by WI_guy_turnedMudDuck 12/9/2011 11:42 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Duck I think you are right on. It is something my agency talks about quite a bit. We do a lot with Take Me Fishing and have also created some urban fisheries to help get kids out and catching fish. This goes with some of sled's ideas about a push to recruit new anglers or get some lost ones back. I think there is some sort of middle ground somewhere. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Joe The Plumber - 12/9/2011 11:17 AM
no facts to back it up.
an increase to revenue is being asked for via 1. increase in license fees and 2. some talking about adding a stamp as well.
who should be responsible for the "facts to back it up" Joe the Bulldozer? those aking for the money? or those being asked to pay? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 667
Location: Roscoe IL | Nope. I hate paying for the #*^@ thing now, but do it every year because it's the law. Between all of the bull$hit increased taxes I already have to pay, its insane to throw one more penny at a license fees. I got a license on my bumper too!
If I'm a catch and release guy only and pay my launch fees, pay my taxes and all the other inflated costs to play this game. Why in the hell should I have to pay even more in a down market? I say drop the price for a release license, and see what that does for sales. I'll bet they go way the hell up! A 16 to 23 year old spending money on a fishing license? I just don't see it, when at that age the only thing most boys think about is Women and Women. Drop the fee for catch and release only license and I bet they would at the very least entertain buying a license. Thats where the growth is IMOP.. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 572
Location: Maplewood, MN | jonnysled - 12/9/2011 7:56 AM
duplicate ... sorry
Just stating my opinion...Easy shooter. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | ToothyCritter - 12/9/2011 12:10 PM
Nope. I hate paying for the #*^@ thing now, but do it every year because it's the law. Between all of the bull$hit increased taxes I already have to pay, its insane to throw one more penny at a license fees. I got a license on my bumper too!
If I'm a catch and release guy only and pay my launch fees, pay my taxes and all the other inflated costs to play this game. Why in the hell should I have to pay even more in a down market? I say drop the price for a release license, and see what that does for sales. I'll bet they go way the hell up! A 16 to 23 year old spending money on a fishing license? I just don't see it, when at that age the only thing most boys think about is Women and Women. Drop the fee for catch and release only license and I bet they would at the very least entertain buying a license. Thats where the growth is IMOP..
And how much of your taxes, launch fees and other inflated costs go to sustaining the fisheries you enjoy?
Have you ever advocated for stocking or increasing musky size limits? |
|
| |
|
| Is it a fee increase for the sake of a fee increase or would the money be used for muskie stocking, habitat restoration/preservation, etc? If it is just an increase and nothing would go toward muskie porgrams then no. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 10
| I miss the good ole days when..
When boat launches paved themselves or maybe it was everybodies tax money even those who did not use it.
When fisherman regulated their own catches to ensure quality fishing for everyone.
When business would use resourses in a responsibile way with nobody needing to check on them.
That's the fairy tale world the non fee people lived in I guess. There is plenty of bad spending by the government, but that's not the question.
If needed to support the level of fishing we have now would you be willing to pay $5-15 more for your license? The question should then be followed by why do they need this increased revenue? What services can we drop? It there other ways we can raise the revenue? Those are the questions and answers that could actually give some useful information or a real opinion. If I hear one more person complain about a $25-$50 fee for a recreational activity when the economy is down I'm convinced I know who purchased those low down payment homes. I catch and eat $50 worth of walleyes in three days. I know that doesn't matter if catch and release. If there is waste in the DNR point it out, but if you are just plain cheap or bad with your money admit that and don't blame a fee. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | 2T Critter - 12/9/2011 1:05 PM
Is it a fee increase for the sake of a fee increase or would the money be used for muskie stocking, habitat restoration/preservation, etc? If it is just an increase and nothing would go toward muskie porgrams then no.
Do you have any idea where your license dollars go? |
|
| |
|
| Before the DNR raises any fees they should have to do what the private sector has been forced to do in recent years is do more with less. With any government agency there is always waste or redundant efforts. I would think there is a whole bunch of dead weight at the top/Madison that could be trimmed before any fees would need to be raised. If you think there is no government waste you're kidding yourself. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 667
Location: Roscoe IL | PP
"And how much of your taxes, launch fees and other inflated costs go to sustaining the fisheries you enjoy?"
No clue, but still fees have in fact increased. Is this my fault that a protion of those increases has not been directed to that and should now have to pay even more? I just dont agree, I'm certainly not cheap. Just looking at it from a business persepctive.
"Have you ever advocated for stocking or increasing musky size limits?"
Yes, through MI and several other events I have donated my extra time to. I love it and use these events to educate my two sons.
If everyone thinks raising the price is going to generate more revenue, ask Netflix how that went over...
Edited by ToothyCritter 12/9/2011 2:29 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 162
Location: Bemidji, MN | The government sucks, we all hate taxes, the money isn't spent correctly, yadda yadda yadda......
Bottom line is that it costs more not to maintain a sustainable fishery than it used to. It cost more to buy a shocking boat, it costs more to buy a trap-net, it costs more to buy a gallon of gas to get all that stuff to the lake. I honestly find it hard to believe that someone would fight off an $5 increase in fishing license fees for an entire year, if that is what it takes to maintain our current fisheries. For most of us, that won't even pay for the first bait we throw on opening day. For some of us, that won't even buy us enough gas to get the boat to the other side of the lake. Yes, the inner workings of the state government need to be fixed, but that is not the issue here, its sustainable fisheries, and what they cost.
Ask yourself this. How many 50" muskies did you catch this year? Seems like a simple, pretty common question, where we talk about MULTIPLE 50's in a season. Now back up 20 years, and ask yourself the same question. It was pretty much unheard of. It was more like DID you catch a 50" musky in your lifetime? Point is the DNR here in MN, and WI did something right, and if it costs me less than the price of a bucktail to keep it going like this, I am all for it.
The biggest problem we have right now, is that we don't have a problem. Musky fishing is at probably its all time best. The groups like muskies inc and others were all started because, back then, we HAD a problem. Don't be short sighted, or history will repeat.
As far as kids getting into the sport, I'm not a parent, but those of you who are, try this.... Unplug the little b@$tards from the ipod, take the cell phone away, and make them go outside after school like my parents did. Kids are alot more adaptable than us old people, and will find their way to outdoor recreation if given the chance.
I also believe that throwing your money into a "musky only program" Is throwing your money down the mouth of a dead fish. You have to support the fishery as a system, or you are not going to maintain a healthy musky population. But I suppose that you could also run it like the put-and-take trout streams. Grow them up to 50" in the hatchery, then throw them in the lake for everyone to catch and put on the wall. Hey, maybe one would survive until next year!
Edited by J Nail 12/9/2011 2:59 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 51
Location: chisago city,mn. | Why should we pay more for money not knowing where it is going.Google Legacy Fund Audit. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Very little, if any of your launch fees go to fisheries. Where did the launches come from?
Your lures, tackle etc do help support fisheries. But most of fisheries funding comes from license sales.
Netflix has competitors. Who is going to stock fish, when a state can't afford to produce more due to costs? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | J Nail - 12/9/2011 2:51 PM
How many 50" muskies did you catch this year? Seems like a simple, pretty common question, where we talk about MULTIPLE 50's in a season. Now back up 20 years, and ask yourself the same question. It was pretty much unheard of. It was more like DID you catch a 50" musky in your lifetime? Point is the DNR here in MN, and WI did something right, and if it costs me less than the price of a bucktail to keep it going like this, I am all for it.
there's the answer i was looking for on page 2
"multiple 50's in a season" ...
and need money to get it ... is it that easy? and did the DNR say they could deliver? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | greenejeans - 12/9/2011 1:54 PM
Why should we pay more for money not knowing where it is going.Google Legacy Fund Audit.
There is a very large difference between general funds and federal restricted dollars. It is clear, that very few anglers actually know where there fishing and hunting license dollars go. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 667
Location: Roscoe IL | "As far as kids getting into the sport, I'm not a parent, but those of you who are, try this.... Unplug the little b@$tards from the ipod, take the cell phone away, and make them go outside after school like my parents did. Kids are alot more adaptable than us old people, and will find their way to outdoor recreation if given the chance"
Now thats funny ans so true! Ask a 13 year old kid what they want for their birthday, and it's an Ipod or a $140 pair of Air Jordans or a new cell... Mine didn't even mention a new Muskie rod, and that didn't surprise me. My oldest son is turing 13 tomorrow, and the little b@stard is impossible to get off the Playstation when it's cold out. Lots of yelling and I'm the @sshole in the house! I can certainly releate to that comment and agree, and I fight this everyday by spending big bucks on sports fees and driving to Basketball and football practices after work during the week all week, then spending weekends at games. Then there's the team fundraisers every few weeks on top of all that. These kids are the future and it make sense to target them now for growth and development or our fisheries.
Touchy topic when asking hard working folks to spend more, when the income is already stretched so thin for the 99% right..
Good topic! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | jonnysled - 12/9/2011 2:01 PM
J Nail - 12/9/2011 2:51 PM
How many 50" muskies did you catch this year? Seems like a simple, pretty common question, where we talk about MULTIPLE 50's in a season. Now back up 20 years, and ask yourself the same question. It was pretty much unheard of. It was more like DID you catch a 50" musky in your lifetime? Point is the DNR here in MN, and WI did something right, and if it costs me less than the price of a bucktail to keep it going like this, I am all for it.
there's the answer i was looking for on page 2
"multiple 50's in a season" ...
and need money to get it ... is it that easy? and did the DNR say they could deliver?
Did you read his whole paragraph? Your post suggests otherwise. The point is the fisheries are that good where people can talk about catching multiple 50s in a season. You yourself have stated that there isn't much wrong with the fisheries now. Shouldn't the goal be to maintain that? How much did it cost you to fill your boat gas tank in 2005? Could you afford to run that same boat for the same amount of money today? |
|
| |
