Driftless Trout Anglers

Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
William Schlafer  
#1 Posted : Monday, January 16, 2017 7:28:54 PM(UTC)
William Schlafer
Rank: Super Fly

Joined: 7/24/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,788
Location: Sussex Wisconsin

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 12 time(s) in 10 post(s)
Here's An interesting article from the Cap Times about who should shoulder the cost of maintaining our natural resources.


-Bill
“You'll never look back on your life and wish you had spent more time in the office." -- Brian Trautman, Captain SV Delos
weiliwen  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, January 17, 2017 8:32:53 PM(UTC)
weiliwen
Rank: Caddis Fly

Joined: 4/16/2014(UTC)
Posts: 212
Man
United States
Location: Lincolnshire, Illinois

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 8 time(s) in 8 post(s)
As an out-of-stater, I am more than happy to pay to help with Wisconsin's amazing wildlife heritage, sport and non-sport.

IMHO, all Wisconsonians (Wisconsinites? Wiskers?), should shoulder a bit of the burden, as this is part of your birthright.

I don't think this should fall solely, or even mostly, on the shoulder of hunters and fishers. The folks whose home I paid to stay this weekend in Westby don't fish, but they benefited from the resources, via my injection of funds into the local economy, for example. They also get to see bald eagles fly over their property, deer and coyotes, etc walk on their land and nearby. They benefit by having Wisconsin be such a wonderful, wild place.
Bob Williams, "Weiliwen"
William Schlafer  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, January 18, 2017 9:12:43 AM(UTC)
William Schlafer
Rank: Super Fly

Joined: 7/24/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,788
Location: Sussex Wisconsin

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 12 time(s) in 10 post(s)
weiliwen wrote:
I don't think this should fall solely, or even mostly, on the shoulder of hunters and fishers. The folks whose home I paid to stay this weekend in Westby don't fish, but they benefited from the resources, via my injection of funds into the local economy, for example.



Would you believe that according to TU, recreational angling adds $1 Billion dollars to the Driftless Area economy?

A Viroqua motel I stay in has told me Trout fishermen make up 25 percent of their business.


-Bill
“You'll never look back on your life and wish you had spent more time in the office." -- Brian Trautman, Captain SV Delos
Guillermo  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, January 18, 2017 9:23:30 AM(UTC)
Guillermo
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 6/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 314
Location: Wisconsin

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 6 time(s) in 6 post(s)
I'll pony up and pay an increase if it means we can keep protecting our great state.
ChadS  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, January 18, 2017 11:19:06 AM(UTC)
ChadS
Rank: Midge

Joined: 10/5/2016(UTC)
Posts: 25
Location: Minnesota

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
While some stamps are required to fish, it would be nice if there were some voluntary stamps that included other species or categories like a musky stamp, small mouth stamp, panfish stamp. Then funds from those stamps could be dedicated to the specific species or category. It seems like people are more willing to providing funding when they know it will go toward their specific interest.

I am not a big duck hunter, but I buy a stamp because I know it will help with wetlands.
weiliwen  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, January 18, 2017 11:22:04 AM(UTC)
weiliwen
Rank: Caddis Fly

Joined: 4/16/2014(UTC)
Posts: 212
Man
United States
Location: Lincolnshire, Illinois

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 8 time(s) in 8 post(s)
ChadS wrote:
While some stamps are required to fish, it would be nice if there were some voluntary stamps that included other species or categories like a musky stamp, small mouth stamp, panfish stamp. Then funds from those stamps could be dedicated to the specific species or category. It seems like people are more willing to providing funding when they know it will go toward their specific interest.

I am not a big duck hunter, but I buy a stamp because I know it will help with wetlands.


Not a bad idea! If one could ensure that the revenue would exceed the cost of production, it sounds do-able. I can imagine folks starting to collect them, as they do with duck stamps.
Bob Williams, "Weiliwen"
s.t.fanatic  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, January 18, 2017 1:41:05 PM(UTC)
s.t.fanatic
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 3/24/2010(UTC)
Posts: 620
Location: Altura

weiliwen wrote:
ChadS wrote:
While some stamps are required to fish, it would be nice if there were some voluntary stamps that included other species or categories like a musky stamp, small mouth stamp, panfish stamp. Then funds from those stamps could be dedicated to the specific species or category. It seems like people are more willing to providing funding when they know it will go toward their specific interest.

I am not a big duck hunter, but I buy a stamp because I know it will help with wetlands.


Not a bad idea! If one could ensure that the revenue would exceed the cost of production, it sounds do-able. I can imagine folks starting to collect them, as they do with duck stamps.


Wouldnt need to produce anything. Minnesota charges and additional $2 if you want the actual stamp otherwise its just and endorcement.

I wish there was and actual trout fishing license and not just a stamp. I fish warm water less than 5 times a year and it wouldnt bother me if i didnt at all.
BTJ  
#8 Posted : Thursday, January 19, 2017 9:10:27 AM(UTC)
BTJ
Rank: Midge

Joined: 4/21/2015(UTC)
Posts: 15
Location: Madison, WI

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Probably they will need to increase license fees. A patrons license at 165 is steal for all you can fish/trap/hunt, I'm fine with an increase. The bear permit points are even more of a steal, $3, pretty much free. The wolf one used to be $10 and I paid it without batting an eye. I prefer control the Dnr to be with hunting and fishing, so I'm happy to pay more.

however, recent MJS reporting on wisconsins pipelines indicates $60 million in oil flows through wi daily in our pipelines. At a time when most other lines have been rejected or significantly delayed, wi is at serious bargaining position with the companies. A tax of .02% on that oil would cover the Dnr shortfall. Such a tax is not likely with the current legislature but it's an idea for sure. Wi gets very little for assuming great risk. Guess we need to get some Hollywood folks here to cause a scene. Wi is much more scenic than the dakotas.
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2017, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.421 seconds.