PDA

View Full Version : Hunting tags



Dave Gray
10-14-2009, 09:36 PM
I've never been a hunter and at this stage in my life I doubt I will ever be one. However I have always been an avid birder.

This last weekend's Mark Trail (I read all of the funny papers, it is true) mentioned that even if you don't hunt, buying a duck hunting tag is a good way to help your state refuges. I never thought about it before but this is true, at least in Oregon, where most of the funds for local refuges and parks, such as those at Sauvie's Island, are derived from selling hunting licenses.

So as counter intuitive as it seems, buying a tag even though you never mean to use it is a good way to help preserve wild life. From what I have read hunting is down nationally so funds, as in so many areas, are hard to come by.

Paul Girouard
10-14-2009, 10:00 PM
Ya most or some of the fees are used for wildlife type stuff.

State duck stamps / Fed duck stamps etc. I'm sure some state tap into the pot , not sure if they all do.

Washington has tried different ways to add "use fee's " parking passes , and the such.

The general public pitches bitch and they get rescinded, but without hunting licence and other "tags" they'd be less funds for wildlife enhancement programs / projects.

BrianW
10-14-2009, 11:03 PM
Hunters contribute millions...



Pittman-Robertson Act: Friend Of The Hunter & Hunted


It may be hard to believe today, but in the 1930s the sighting of even one whitetail deer was a notable event. Encroachment of humans on habitat and over-hunting without regulation had caused populations of many game species to plummet rapidly. Today, however, the nationwide deer population is nearly 20 million strong.

Contrary to the belief of recently spawned animal extremist groups, hunters and sportsmen have been and continue to be the primary players in the effort to protect the game which they hunt. Conservation tactics such as carefully regulated hunting, habitat acquisition and species transplants contributed to bring populations back to healthy levels.

While the tool for hunting is usually the gun or bow, the vehicle which actually transforms money into habitat, ecological study into proven conservation tactics, and the idea of harmony between nature and society into reality is the Pittman-Robertson Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act. Who fuels this vehicle? Sportsmen.

Sponsored by Senator Key Pittman of Nevada and Congressman A. Willis Robertson of Virginia and signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on Sept. 2, 1937, the Pittman-Robertson Act created a 10% excise tax on sporting arms and ammunition. A few years later the tax became 11%.

The tens of millions of dollars generated by Pittman-Robertson each year were mandated to go back into state and local organizations to increase game populations, expand habitat and train hunters. As the money kept piling up, a repeal bill was drawn to relieve sportsmen from the financial burden of the excise tax. However, because dramatic results could be seen nationwide, sportsmen insisted on keeping the tax in place.

The generated revenues from Pittman-Robertson were placed in a special trust under the control of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and were to be allotted to state wildlife conservation programs for wildlife restoration and to ensure the future of hunting sports. The trust was to be kept separate from the general fund, meaning the monies were not to be part of the accounted annual budget. Translated, this cuts red tape and produces positive results for wildlife when overseen by honest officials.

For years the Pittman-Robertson Act functioned soundly--generating $150 million in funds each year--and, more importantly, produced results. Numerous species including migratory birds (ducks and geese), elk, deer, antelope, wild turkey and many other species were rescued from the endangered list and are now not only surviving, but thriving. Pittman-Robertson was a rare legislative model for efficiency and a godsend for hunters and animals alike.

However, in recent years, notably during the Clinton Administration, evidence surfaced that the sportsman`s conservation trust funds were being mismanaged.

NRA board member and sportsman, U.S. Representative Don Young (R-Alaska), felt it was time to act.

Representative Young held hearings to question the authorities in charge in an effort to correct the system. Thereafter, he introduced the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000 which precisely re-defines what USFWS can spend the excise taxes on and in what manner the monies can be spent. The NRA backed bill passed the House 423-2 and became law on Nov. 1, 2000.

Today, Pittman-Robertson is back on track, supplying wildlife with vast amounts of habitat, resources and practical ecological study, while supplying hunters with game to hunt and eat, thus ensuring necessary funds never run dry. The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimates that through these special taxes and license fees, America`s sportsmen contribute $3.5 million each day to wildlife conservation.

Perhaps President Ronald Reagan stated it best at the Pittman-Robertson 50th Anniversary when he said: "Those who pay the freight are those who purchase firearms, ammunition, and, in recent years, archery equipment."

J P
10-15-2009, 12:49 AM
Hunters do contribute millions … and it has a tremendous influence on State and Federal wildlife “management”/game farming policy and practice. So often it seems money trumps science in this system.

If someone really wants to kick in, they can bid on a “Governor’s Tag”. (http://www.hcn.org/blogs/grange/big-horn-betrayal)

Phillip Allen
10-15-2009, 10:20 AM
Hunters do contribute millions … and it has a tremendous influence on State and Federal wildlife “management”/game farming policy and practice. So often it seems money trumps science in this system.

If someone really wants to kick in, they can bid on a “Governor’s Tag”. (http://www.hcn.org/blogs/grange/big-horn-betrayal)

and your message is...?

J P
10-15-2009, 05:47 PM
and your message is...?

Message? I’m agreeing that hunters contribute millions. I do just what Dave is writing about; I buy licenses and tags knowing I might not even try to fill them.

And I'm being a little cynical about how some of our money is used (RE. the Governor's Tag link. Whoever was in charge of that fiasco needs to find a new line of work.)

Phillip Allen
10-15-2009, 05:56 PM
I was concerned by your comment "money trumps science". It suggests,by acknowledging the money from sportsmen, that they have achieved something counter to good science...

J P
10-15-2009, 06:52 PM
I was concerned by your comment "money trumps science". It suggests,by acknowledging the money from sportsmen, that they have achieved something counter to good science...

Sportsman contribute money, conservation organizations contribute money, individuals and stock growers all contribute money in various ways, and they all influence (or try to) policies favorable to their interests. And they often succeed where application of good science might prescribe a different policy. "Money talks" is really all I'm trying to say. Point is, wildlife and habitat management isn't always just science based; there's economic, social and political influences as well. The situation with the current wolf hunts in Idaho and Montana is an example of that.



The Governor’s tags are interesting. I haven’t seen much info on them other than what’s offered in the public auctions. They do generate a lot of revenue. A Montana sheep tag can bring in over $200,000.

“Since 1939, the Governor of Wyoming has been provided, by statute, with 20 complimentary hunting licenses each year that can be given away as the governor sees fit. Along with the five sheep permits, the governor also has five moose permits and 10 permits that can be for elk, deer or antelope. In the past, such tags have gone to friends of the governor, political cronies, maybe the owner of a business being wooed by the state, some celebrity or another, as well as local civic groups for their fund-raisers - in short, the usual suspects.”
http://www.huntingreport.com/hunting_article_details.cfm?id=376

Phillip Allen
10-15-2009, 07:20 PM
I am very much against any politician using wild game to promote tourism (that is...the killing/selling of game)

hunting is the sole provence of hunters and people directly involved...it is not a "natural" recource to be used to inhance revenue

elevated license fees for out of state hunters is supposed to prevent them from robbing the locals of their opurtuinities to hunt...locals first!

there is much more to say and I'm too lazy to type it...(besides, I'm having to reach around the cat to type)

BrianW
10-15-2009, 07:29 PM
This could get good! ;)

I pretty much disagree with Phillip.

I may have to remove him from my Facebook.

First I need to start one, he'll need to join, then I'll drop the Hammer of Thor.

Phillip Allen
10-15-2009, 07:31 PM
you approve of hunting tourism? (we may need to discuss this from opposite sides of a nice camp fire)

BrianW
10-15-2009, 07:32 PM
you approve of hunting tourism?

We do a lot of that up here.

Phillip Allen
10-15-2009, 07:36 PM
We do a lot of that up here.

money from sportsmen is generally a good thing...be you carefuil you don't turn to wildlife prostituition though...you may wake up one day to find the prostitution outweighs the conservation

bobbys
10-16-2009, 12:20 AM
I've never been a hunter and at this stage in my life I doubt I will ever be one. However I have always been an avid birder.

This last weekend's Mark Trail (I read all of the funny papers, it is true) mentioned that even if you don't hunt, buying a duck hunting tag is a good way to help your state refuges. I never thought about it before but this is true, at least in Oregon, where most of the funds for local refuges and parks, such as those at Sauvie's Island, are derived from selling hunting licenses.

So as counter intuitive as it seems, buying a tag even though you never mean to use it is a good way to help preserve wild life. From what I have read hunting is down nationally so funds, as in so many areas, are hard to come by..

Im proud of you for backin up the tawk!!!

Phillip Allen
10-16-2009, 04:47 AM
I still buy the license though I haven't hunted much since about 1980. I do, however, like to go out into the woods with my rifle and take a nap while the deer thunder past

huisjen
10-16-2009, 07:00 AM
I've rarely had a positive interaction with the warden service. I'm not buying a tag just so these goons can pasture their deer on my land and write me a ticket for not having a PFD when becalmed in an inherently buoyant tub toy within swimming distance of shore. I'd rather cut their funding.

Dan

Phillip Allen
10-16-2009, 07:05 AM
I've rarely had a positive interaction with the warden service. I'm not buying a tag just so these goons can pasture their deer on my land and write me a ticket for not having a PFD when becalmed in an inherently buoyant tub toy within swimming distance of shore. I'd rather cut their funding.

Dan

well, I can sympathise with that...it's the nanny state taking care of us against our wishes...it's really a seperate issue