Beings that we are brought here by the common interest of hunting, I assume we prefer game animals to be given 'preferential' treatment. In large part due to the majority of the funding coming from recreation related to game animals. Imagine for a moment that enough people started putting money into the pot that they equalled the contribution of sportsmen. Would you support giving equal support of their issues? In addition, do you feel that too much preference is given to game animals, so much that they can impact other species? If so, do you think that this is right?
Game vs. Non-game animals?
- Thread starter 1_pointer
- Start date
Ithaca 37
New member
The best way to help non game species is to protect or improve habitat. That almost always benefits game species at the same time. There is a danger of non hunters taking over, but only if hunters allow it, so we just have to be vigilant and willing to pay most of the bill for wildlife management.
"Imagine for a moment that enough people started putting money into the pot that they equalled the contribution of sportsmen." That's very unlikely. The only fair way to handle it would be to give them equal consideration. That's why sportsmen have to make sure they are always the primary source of wildlife management funding.
No, I don't think too much preference is given to game animals. Most things done to help them are probably going to benefit non game also. Concentrating the majority of funding on game species is always going to have a negative effect on non game, naturally. But there are safeguards for non game species as well as game species (the Endangered Species Act), so I doubt things will get real bad for non game as long as the law is followed. That's where the environmental watch dogs come in.
"Imagine for a moment that enough people started putting money into the pot that they equalled the contribution of sportsmen." That's very unlikely. The only fair way to handle it would be to give them equal consideration. That's why sportsmen have to make sure they are always the primary source of wildlife management funding.
No, I don't think too much preference is given to game animals. Most things done to help them are probably going to benefit non game also. Concentrating the majority of funding on game species is always going to have a negative effect on non game, naturally. But there are safeguards for non game species as well as game species (the Endangered Species Act), so I doubt things will get real bad for non game as long as the law is followed. That's where the environmental watch dogs come in.
Thanks for the reply. You're getting a bit ahead though
...
"That's why sportsmen have to make sure they are always the primary source of wildlife management funding."--we'll get to this issue shortly. If anyone wants to do some 'pre-emptive' reading, check out Ted Kerasote's article in the most recent Bugle.
"That's why sportsmen have to make sure they are always the primary source of wildlife management funding."--we'll get to this issue shortly. If anyone wants to do some 'pre-emptive' reading, check out Ted Kerasote's article in the most recent Bugle.
Ten Bears
New member
Not all game habitat is good for the nongame animals that live there. Why should sportsmen pay for nongame habitat? Don't tell me because of the bigger picture either, sometimes you can't fit the big picture all into the same frame.
BigHornyRam
New member
Pointer,
I agree, but would also like to see guys like Ebon and Steele kick in a little bit as well. Is this unreasonable?
Paul
I agree, but would also like to see guys like Ebon and Steele kick in a little bit as well. Is this unreasonable?
Paul
dgibson
New member
I agree with it, and I think they should continue doing so. As long as we can say that sportsmen provide the vast majority (or virtually ALL, in my state's case) of wildlife management dollars, then we will have a strong voice in management decisions. Or at least it will be hard to take that away from us. If equal or more money is found from other venues, we start losing our authority and our interests fall by the wayside.
However, after that's said, my state's F&W department is starting to lose its shirt because license income isn't keeping up with management costs. It is rapidly becoming necessary to find some other means of funding, because hugger dollars are better than no dollars at all.
I'll just run down to the local magazine shop and pick up a copy of Bugle...thanks for the pointer.
However, after that's said, my state's F&W department is starting to lose its shirt because license income isn't keeping up with management costs. It is rapidly becoming necessary to find some other means of funding, because hugger dollars are better than no dollars at all.
I'll just run down to the local magazine shop and pick up a copy of Bugle...thanks for the pointer.
Ten Bears
New member
I think that managagement agencies need to think of, and even work toward some nongame issues, but they shouldn't be mandated to if their funding is from sportsmen. Some nongame will benefit from game habitat improvements, and some will not.
Paul I agree. I think even a small tax on something that everyone uses, I vote for gasoline or maybe some type of produce, should go to fund wildlife issues. Something as small as 0.01% would suffice for me, even if it is just a token gesture.
DG- Send $25 to Missoula and they'll send you the magazine. You have elk in KY, help them out!
I too agree that 'hugger' dollars are better than no dollars. Imagine what could be accomplished if the amount of money spent by huggers was spent FOR wildlife instead of just lawsuits?
DG- Send $25 to Missoula and they'll send you the magazine. You have elk in KY, help them out!
Nut
New member
No more fuggin taxes is what works for me. Our taxes went up in this state and the license fees for hunting and fishing along with it. NO MORE TAXES.
I would promote that if a person did not have a hunting or fishing license that there would be a user fee to be granted access.
Of course we could always gouge the non-residents for each state.
I would promote that if a person did not have a hunting or fishing license that there would be a user fee to be granted access.
Of course we could always gouge the non-residents for each state.
Ten Bears
New member
I think all outdoor recreational users should be charged a conservation license fee ($4.50). Then if you hunt or fish you still by those licenses.
Ithaca 37
New member
Teaming With Wildlife (TWW) is a new "user-pays; user-benefits" initiative conceived by the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA) and endorsed by more than 2,400 conservation and outdoor industry groups. Modeled on the successful PR and DJ/WB programs, TWW would place a modest excise tax on many outdoor related products such as hiking boots, backpacks, tents, sleeping bags, binoculars, cameras, and even film. The goal is to raise $350 million annually, specifically for non-game, threatened and endangered species conservation; outdoor education; and general outdoor recreational programs not related to hunting and fishing. The proposed tax rates are very low, ranging from .25 percent to 5 percent and would raise retail prices very little.
http://ww2.basspro.com/media/outdoormag/janfeb98/ourout.htm
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=excise+tax+on+binoculars+hiking+boots
http://ww2.basspro.com/media/outdoormag/janfeb98/ourout.htm
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=excise+tax+on+binoculars+hiking+boots
Ten Bears
New member
How many times has TWW failed to pass? I think each state needs to start their own program first. If you had a conservation permit program in place, it would be a good measure of activity for funding distribution when TWW finally makes it.
Nut- Why no more taxes, especially if they're for wildlife? These could be just the ticket to help out the mule deer you plan to hunt someday.
I say no more 'pre-funds' for having kids.
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 09-08-2003 18:50: Message edited by: 1_pointer ]</font>
I say no more 'pre-funds' for having kids.
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 09-08-2003 18:50: Message edited by: 1_pointer ]</font>
Nut
New member
pointer.... gasoline taxes were raised already in this state to help make up for budget shortfalls. So with the lack of funding from the state to help in certain funding issues for the Division of Wildlife (DNR) the licenses went up 25%. I had no problem with the licenses going up if it stayed for the Division of Wildlife.
The state sales tax also was raised another 1% per dollar. Then there was other products that was not taxed that are taxed now. Then there is the state income tax that I pay along with federal and city. Then there are property taxes and etc and etc.
I will pay more in taxes this year than some people will have earned in wages.
But I have been working for 26 years so we can have all the individuals,businesses,corporations and etc on welfare. They depend on me first before the wildlife are concerned. Just ask the government about that, not me. I would have the wildlife among the priorities if left up to me.
Mule deer might be a fun hunt but not on the top of my priorities at this time. If it was I would join the Mule Deer Foundation first. But the whitetails will push em out probably anyways before I get to hunt them with all the taxes I already am paying.
What is a Pre-Fund? and what does children have to do with this thread except that they will bear the brunt of all the mismangemnet in government for years to come?
Oh (I think I realize what ya meant now)the child tax credit refund that was just sent out? That is my money...LOL I spent $200 of it on hunting related stuff so some of it went to P-R.
It is better that I get it than some university that my children won't get to attend because they dont meet the affirmative action guidelines and I dont make enough to send them or some corporation that wants to rape the land for profit(tax-free) and then leave the clean up for me to pay for also. I would be bitching more about the $150 that the US gave out to Iraqi people. I now pay welfare for more countries than I can count along with welfare for cjcj's illegals. (Just had to include them)
Now I feel better
The state sales tax also was raised another 1% per dollar. Then there was other products that was not taxed that are taxed now. Then there is the state income tax that I pay along with federal and city. Then there are property taxes and etc and etc.
I will pay more in taxes this year than some people will have earned in wages.
But I have been working for 26 years so we can have all the individuals,businesses,corporations and etc on welfare. They depend on me first before the wildlife are concerned. Just ask the government about that, not me. I would have the wildlife among the priorities if left up to me.
Mule deer might be a fun hunt but not on the top of my priorities at this time. If it was I would join the Mule Deer Foundation first. But the whitetails will push em out probably anyways before I get to hunt them with all the taxes I already am paying.
What is a Pre-Fund? and what does children have to do with this thread except that they will bear the brunt of all the mismangemnet in government for years to come?
Oh (I think I realize what ya meant now)the child tax credit refund that was just sent out? That is my money...LOL I spent $200 of it on hunting related stuff so some of it went to P-R.
Now I feel better
Doug
New member
Yep more taxes is just what we need. That way the goverment can squander even more of the money that I earn. You guys in western states have no idea of the amount of state taxes that we pay in Pa. Gasoline tax, property tax twice a year, 6 percent sales tax on just about everything, state income tax, occupational priviledge tax, per capita tax, garbage tax, solid fuels tax, property transfer tax, local income tax.......and it just keeps going. The school teachers here make on average over 50k per year and are now on strike because they want a new contract with 8k annual raises. I'm damn near packing up and moving West to get out under this crushing tax burden I now have. Read my lips.....no new taxes!
Doug
Doug
dgibson
New member
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Of course we could always gouge the non-residents for each state.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Now what kind of crappy state would do a thing like that?
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I had no problem with the licenses going up if it stayed for the Division of Wildlife.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>AMEN, and that is a very large piece of the management money puzzle. We (so far) have narrowly avoided an action from our lame duck governor that would have appropriated a large chunk of F&W funds this year.
What the hell's an occupational privilege tax?
If TWW passes, it should be a clause therein that TWW has to give a certain percentage to game species. We supported the entire operation for many years; it's time for the "users" to give a little back. Plus it would serve as a reminder to the huggers and abstainers of what's important--ALL wildlife, not just the West Arizona Frilly-Livered Tutu Bird.
What the hell's an occupational privilege tax?
If TWW passes, it should be a clause therein that TWW has to give a certain percentage to game species. We supported the entire operation for many years; it's time for the "users" to give a little back. Plus it would serve as a reminder to the huggers and abstainers of what's important--ALL wildlife, not just the West Arizona Frilly-Livered Tutu Bird.
Ten Bears
New member
DOUG, in Idaho we pay most of those taxes as well, even 6% sales tax, unless your in the city Coeur d' Alene were you get to an extra 0.5% city sales tax. Oh ya, don't forget the restaraunt tax you pay with each meal. Many teachers here make less then $25,000 a year, and I have never made more then $50,000 a year at any of my jippo jobs. Idaho is a right to work state. That means you have the right to work for low pay, or seek employment elsewhere, and that is probably the biggest tax we pay here. I pay out 33% of my income in taxes, another 3% of my annual income goes to property tax, and then there are all the taxes I pay when I buy something ATV sticker, boat sticker, gas, sales, restaraunt, DJ, PR.....
I'll feel better later.
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 09-09-2003 09:34: Message edited by: Ten Bears ]</font>
<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 09-09-2003 09:34: Message edited by: Ten Bears ]</font>
Doug, I'm from IN orginally, so I know about the taxes 'back there'. It's not much easier here. Right now the gas tax in Utah is $0.42/gal or dollar not sure.
Nut- My proposal was for a tax that went to wildlife, game and non-game animals alike. I don't understand why any hunter would be against such a tax. Whitetails will only push them out of some areas, they've been here for over 10K years and will be here for awhile. Thanks for helping out sending some of 'my' money to P-R!
I doubt your kids will have trouble getting into a University, as I'm unaware of any gov. funded schools with afirmative action. Plus, there's always loans so the kids can go to school. That's how I had to do it! If they want to go, they can it's just up to them.
Nut- My proposal was for a tax that went to wildlife, game and non-game animals alike. I don't understand why any hunter would be against such a tax. Whitetails will only push them out of some areas, they've been here for over 10K years and will be here for awhile. Thanks for helping out sending some of 'my' money to P-R!
BigHornyRam
New member
Come on guy's,
What's one more itty bitty tax?
Paul
What's one more itty bitty tax?
Paul
Similar threads
