Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MichiganWaterfowl.com' started by DecoySlayer, Mar 17, 2018.
well said, ducky!
I'll tell you this...very, very few hunters in this state understood our former funding process, nor did they realize the significance of changing the funding sources the way they did in the 90's. But the impact was devastating to the DNR, and all of us who use our outdoor resources. This licensing change was YEARS in the works, and although nothing is perfect, this certainly has stabilized our funding...at least for now.
Real problem with funding is the continued, over the last 25 years, reductions in general fund contributions. Now more pay as you play but, license are pay for most. The state has found a way to exclude large amounts of tax dollars into the Dnr budgets. Look at it this way ,how much money does healthy salmon populations bring to a fishing port? I would say a lot, therefore the state or local governments should be putting in general funds to pay for it. Everyone benefits not just license holders.
I don't disagree. But the state, and the federal government, are slowly but surely moving towards "user fee" arrangements in response to complaints from people who say their tax money should not be used for things they don't use. I'm afraid we're all going to see more, not less, "pay to play" funding processes in the next few decades.
I don't disagree either. However all businesses benefit in an area where wildlife or fisheries users go. Hard to put a dollar figure of the benefits but, they still are there. If that was the case why should one pay for school taxes if you don't have kids. Everyone still benefits even if it's only secondary in nature or even if your not the prime user. Things just make life generally better for all citizens.
Which has actually been debated for decades here in Michigan's legislature. Again, I'm not for or against "user fees". Just stating where things are headed
Really? Well maybe you need to pick up your huntn game. Such horseshat! LMAO
I hunt the same marshes Highball28 does, and have to say between the youth hunt and the teal hunt, opening days are not what they used to be. Where we used to see 500 woodies on opening day, now you're lucky to see 50.
This is not against either hunt, I've taken my daughter on the youth hunt and carried as well for geese and / or teal if the dates lined up.
I'll go one step further...since we instituted an early goose season in what, like '94, the opening days aren't what they used to be. For example, at Maple River, which is close to my house, back in the late 80's early 90's we would go in there with a canoe the week before the duck opener and see literally thousands of woodies, teal, mallards, and yes, a couple dozen or so geese. It was incredible to see the ducks that staged in there. Then came the early goose season, and guys going in there in September and bombing those damn geese. Well a vast majority of the ducks now leave the area as well. Just the facts....
i have been saying the same thing for years about the d****d bow hunters ruining the gun opener for deer. i used to count shots during the opening hour, and often heard 300+. now it is like 30-50.
yes, there used to be more birds on duck openers, but we still basically limit out, and one can already have 30+ waterfowl days under their belt before opening day. a no-brainer trade!
I agree far fewer local birds on duck opener for the reasons already stated. The question is are they just relocated or many young brown ducks shot for teal. Deeper northern lakes never get many teal before the greenwings show in october. Lots of shooting before the regular duck openers.
Who cares about opener? The best huntingnisnt until Halloween-late November anyways.
Out of all the people I've heard bellyache about people shooting non-teal in the early season, I bet less than a quarter of them have actually called the RAP line about it. I'd start with that issue if you want to complain about something...
Apparently some have crystal balls that agree with them. Most call them like they see them. All depends where you hunt.
Some of you are not alone in your opposition to the early teal season. For instance, Minnesota did not elect to participate in the 3 year experiment for the same reasons that many of you state.
hmrx: You are the one that acting like you have fragile crystal balls. You claim to "call them like you see them".
If you have truly are observed people violating during the the early teal season, have you called the RAP Hotline and turned them it?
If you have not observed this, you are just blustering on the internet.