# BillS SEEK BIG INCREASES IN HUNTING, FISHING FEES



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

Number of licensed hunters down 33% from peak in 1992 to 2005; number of licensed anglers down 29% from peak in 1988 to 2005. Can it be that the MDNR ISN'T GIVING THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT ? hUNTERS AND ANGLERS SPEND THOUSANDS TO HUNT AND FISH IN OTHER STATES AND PROVINCES, NOT TO MENTION GAME FARMS
2 state lawmakers have written bills that seek significant phased-in price increases in the states hunting and fishing licenses. Some licenses would go up 2 or 3 times as much, or more.


----------



## jrsoup (Mar 2, 2007)

Can you think of anything that actually goes down in price?


----------



## Reel_Screamer86 (Mar 22, 2007)

This is a long over due change, we all had to know it was coming...


----------



## MuskyDan (Dec 27, 2001)

this is the worst idea ever!!


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

OVER IN OUR NEIGHBOR WISCONSIN DEER CARCASSES DONATED BY HUNTERS AND THOSE SHOT BY "SHARPSHOOTERS" THAT DO NOT TEST POSITIVE FOR CWD GO TO FOOD PANTRIES TO "HELP FEED THE HUNGRY"
WHEN CATTLE HERDS HERE IN MICHIGAN ARE FOUND TO HAVE AN ANIMAL OR TWO INFECTED W/BOVINE TB THE HERD IS CONDEMNED AND THE ANIMALS ARE SENT TO A FEDERALLY INSPECTED SLAUGHTERHOUSE. ANIMALS SHOWING NO VISIBLE LESIONS OF BOVINE TB ARE PASSED FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION W/OUT RESTRICTION. ANIMALS W/GENERALIZED (MULTIPLE) LESIONS ARE CONDEMNED. ANIMALS W/A CIRCUMSCRIBED LESION OR TWO CAN BE PASSED FOR COOKING, HOT DOGS, BALOGNA.
OUR GOVERNOR AND OUR DNR URGE US HUNTERS TO "HELP FEED THE HUNGRY", TO DONATE VENISON, AND TO DONATE FOR PROCESSING. TO PROVIDE GAME MEAT FOR FAMILIES IN NEED,44% OF FAMILY MEMBERS IN HOUSEHOLDS THAT RECIEVE FOOD ARE LITTLE CHILDREN, TO PUT MEAT ON THE TABLE FOR THOSE WHO NEED IT MOST. 
HELP THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FEED THE HUNGRY !!
LETS SEE IF THEY PUT THEIR MONEY WHERE THEIR MOUTH IS !!
A TB infected game farm in montmorency county, where 5 deer out of a total of 334 animals were infected w/bovine TB was depopulated and the carcasses dumped in a landfill. 329 deer could have been processed into 11,515 pounds of ground venison, which if it had been donated to "feed the hungry"", provided 46,060 quarter pounders for those hungry little children ALMOST BRINGS A LUMP IN THE THROAT AND TEARS TO THESE OLD EYES


----------



## fairfax1 (Jun 12, 2003)

I realize you started this thread....about the proposed bill to increase lisence fees. 

OK. It's your thread.

But if you would, please share how your last post ....about disposing of deer carcasses....fits with the license increase theme?

Did this thread take a quick right turn when I wasn't looking?


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

BILLS SEEK BIG INCREASES IN HUNTING,FISHING FEES
Number of licensed hunters down 33% from peak in 1992; number of licensed anglers down 29% from peak in 1988. Can it be that the MDNR isnt giving the people what they want ? Hunters and anglers spend thousands to hunt and fish in other states and provinces, not to mention game farms.


----------



## fairfax1 (Jun 12, 2003)

A poster above notes: _"Can it be that the MDNR isnt giving the people what they want ? Hunters and anglers spend thousands to hunt and fish in other states and provinces, not to mention game farms."_

I'm not a professional defender of the DNR. But, think they have been placed in the role of very convenient whipping boy....sorta like the IRS.

The quote above ...I didn't put the whole quote in.....is in the context of declining hunting/fishing licenses over a period of years. The poster attempts to link that with the MDNR not _'giving __'em what they want'_....and therefore the increase in fees that are the intent of bills entered in the House & Senate are unwarranted. 

I think that is misguiede on several fronts.
The decline may well be linked to issues of a changing population demographic; alternative forms of entertainment for youngsters; decline in deer populations on northern public hunting grounds; restricted access to private land in the SLP; costs (other than fees) associated with hunting or fishing. To link the decline solely to the DNR not catering to hunt/fish interests is over simplifying a social trend.

My guiding belief.....and here I reference some of the other "fee" threads that have been and are now running on othe forum pages of M-S...., my guiding belief is that we hunters NEED to pay more than our fair share to continue enjoying this hobby; AND, we have _underpaid_ for a considerable number of years. As one perceptive poster stated we have enjoyed a "steal deal" bargain. And too many of us now are whining and complaining that the nearly free ride could end.


----------



## Frantz (Dec 9, 2003)

I am not against an increase, I am however against a drastic increase. Are Michiganders spoiled in their hunting and fishing? I do not think so, there are those who do, most make a whole lot more than I do in a year and most make more than those who are retired and living on a fixed income. But that strays from the point. The point is that regardless, fees do need to increase at a disproportional rate as compared to our salary increases as do all government fees.

The point people are not getting, or seeing is that hunting and fishing fees are not the only ones that should increase. Other access and use fees should increase at the same rate and ALL, I repeat ALL who use these resources should be paying to support it, not just the hunters, fishers and campers of this state. What about the hikers, mushroom hunters and nature watchers, along with all others who love our great outdoors? Why are we not seeing them pay for these services which hep them?


----------



## Frantz (Dec 9, 2003)

PS, on another note, in regards to your theory of whining by those who have enjoyed a free ride? That is a load of crap no matter how you shovel it.

The DNR does not do a thing to manage or support he herd on our private property or those surrounding us. They do their LEO thing when called and that portion of their job is funded and supported by the hundreds of licenses our family has purchased over the years. I believe they do an incredible job all the way around, but when I total up all the taxes I pay for my property, plus license fees, I tend to wonder where the free part comes in?


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

329 deer carcasses w/hides that could be made into buckskin, some 11,000 pounds of ground venison that could have been salvaged to Help Feed the HUNGRY! All dumped !! By an agency that professes to make the best use of our natural resources ! THE MICHIGAN SPORTSMEN AGAINST HUNGER pays for the processing of deer culled from airports, parks, hunting preserves, and many more facilities. Every cent of your contributions are used for the processing of wild game animals for distribution to charity
http://www.sportsmenagainsthunger.org/contributions.htm


----------



## sadocf1 (Mar 10, 2002)

Then we have FHFH; FARMERS AND HUNTERS FEEDING THE HUNGRY (THE VENISON FEEDING MINISTRY) http://www.fhfh.org/cgi-bin/aff_mi.asp
This charitable organization could have made better use of the 329 deer carcasses
Actually, the MDNR gave the hunters and fishermen too much of what hunters and fishermen wanted, more and extended open seasons and increased bag limits which in the considered opinion of this old fart who has hunted and fished in northern Michigan for the past 76 years has resulted in less game to be hunted and fewer fish to fish for. There are other considerations to be sure, but us hunters and fishers are not w/out at least some of the blame and should stand up like men and admit it
When I started DEER HUNTING (1936) the open season was 2 weeks, bucks only,limit of 1, hunting from a tree or raised platform was a no-no, baiting was unheard of, we had no 4-wheel drive pickups or ORV's, no snowmobiles
none uf the warm insulated clothing of today, no heated shacks w radio's, telephones or stacks of girlie magazines. We hunted on foot, kept walking to stay warm


----------



## MuskyDan (Dec 27, 2001)

fairfax1 said:


> A poster above notes: _"Can it be that the MDNR isnt giving the people what they want ? Hunters and anglers spend thousands to hunt and fish in other states and provinces, not to mention game farms."_
> 
> I'm not a professional defender of the DNR. But, think they have been placed in the role of very convenient whipping boy....sorta like the IRS.
> 
> ...


In one paragraph you mention several shortfalls of the DNR and in the next you praise the price increase. You're speaking out both sides of your neck. Based on the logic I've seen we should lower the prices and let the DNR work within the means that our surrounding states do!!

What I find significant about the TB post is that the DNR didn't process the 300 odd deer for feeding the hungry and then turn around and ask the hungry to spend 75 bucks on a combo tag!!!


----------



## NEMichsportsman (Jul 3, 2001)

This isn't the forum to debate the topic.

I also hope there is no insult taken by the fine folks from the DNR that regularily contribute to this forum.

I am sure even the most out spoken critics are referring to some nameless bureaucrat in Management.

Keep up the great work at the lab and thanks!!!!!!!


----------

