Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Gunsmith for a cleaning/once over? That’s like going to an ASE mechanic to check the air in your tires..
otter wrote:
How about you look up the background of the people on the committee. They are far from cronies. Most are involved in several conservation clubs or activities. Go ahead and audit things, you probably won’t like it when they suggest slashing walleye fingerling stocking because of the immense waste of it.Ha, I’d actually be for slashing the stocking programs, and pushing them into a stamp structure.
I see the WIA endorsement system as a model. Don’t charge everyone, for what only effects s few.
This license hike would have almost zero net effect on my wife and i. We looked at the cost of licenses in the early 2000’s and bought lifetime sportsmans licenses. Under the old price structure, our licenses paid for themselves in 15yrs, and that was before the last increase. So glad we looked at the numbers and made an educated decision.
Most of the Oversight committee members are great conservationists, and I applaud their service. That said, if you don’t think that committe can be stacked you’re a fool. Each of those members is looking out for their little special interest. Their concern is tied to their organizational body, not to the taxpayers.
otter wrote:
I guess if you don’t believe the Govenor or DNR leadership ask the citizens Game and Fish fund overwatch committee since their recommendations were pretty much the same.You mean the oversight committee loaded with appointees of the commissioner, who was appointed by the Governor? I doubt that a political appointee would load his appointments with like minded cronies :-0
http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/gamefishoversight/2011-boc-structure-diagram.pdf
It’s easy to spend other people’s money. Our folks in the field see their budgets getting tighter and tighter, while the bureaucracy continues to load the top end. If all is above board, an audit should be no issue.
WANNABEINOTC wrote:
I must be looking at those numbers all wrong. But charting the 2nd column for residents, it looks like resident fishing licenses have gone up 8 times year to year out of the past 11. And hunting was up 5 out of 10, so okay that has gone down some but 2015 is the second highest after 2004. (2008 and 2009 seem to have the same intel so I just went with that as no change).
And is the Hunting license all deer, small game, and stamps sold? So I’d count for 6 to 7 out of that number.
Year Hunting Fishing
2004 1,555,232 1,155,602
2005 1,379,563 ↓ 1,092,708 ↓
2006 1,367,077 ↓ 1,099,185 ↑
2007 1,347,097 ↓ 1,089,735 ↓
2008 1,419,790 ↑ 1,132,400 ↑
2009 1,419,790 1,132,400
2010 1,384,613 ↓ 994,632 ↓
2011 1,433,677 ↑ 997,489 ↑
2012 1,391,820 ↓ 1,108,083 ↑
2013 1,517,721 ↑ 1,291,628 ↑
2014 1,487,063 ↓ 1,296,695 ↑
2015 1,530,603 ↑ 1,313,603 ↑And is that number on the right, the revenue made by license sales?
Looking at other states, MI &MO for example, we’re doing pretty good (The DNR). That is they sell more license and have less revenue.My guess would be that they are calculating license holders, against population. Doing this you’ll likely see that as a percentage of the overall population the numbers are decreasing.
And you are correct about the far right column. That is the gross value of all licenses sold.
The problem (as I see it), is that people aren’t looking at the actual numbers, and are making decisions based on their “feels”. i.e. they “feels” like giving just a couple more dollars isn’t a big deal. When you start to look at the actuals, you’ll see that the money is pouring in, it’s the appetite of the bureaucracy that needs evaluation.
But hey, it’s just another $3 right?
SpoonbillSlayer wrote:
Is there a chart any where that says how many people hunted and fished in MN the past few years?Every year I’m told numbers are dropping, but every year the lakes and woods seem more crowed than ever. Especially fishing I guess. Seems like they just want an excuse to raise prices. Which a little raise, I don’t mind.
See links:
https://www.lakestatefishing.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=686387#forumpost686387Your numbers are significantly off Reinhard. Take a look at the link below for big picture budget breakdown.
http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/budget/fy14-15/budget_from.pdf
WhiteTips88 wrote:
I can honestly agree with almost every point that has been made so far. I can agree that managing lakes, WMAs, stocking, etc. cost money and lots of it. If I know that every dollar I spend is contributed directly to bettering my opportunities as a sportsman then by all means I will pay more as the outdoors is what I and I feel like a lot of us take solace in. However, as stated earlier; when the state as a whole is in a surplus, programs I do not agree with being funded, and sportsman being asked to foot the bill because our state cannot find it in their hearts to allocate some money to cover added outdoor expenses then I have a problem. I am not a byciclist but by all means build more bike trails, I don’t hike but make sure those are kept up to, as a fisherman and hunter I feel it would be selfish to restrict what anything outdoors someone else finds enjoyment in.On the same breath however, I would like to see vast improvements made in how we manage our resources. I am not a fish and game biologist but I have seen the way other states (namely North Dakota and Iowa) manage thier resources and sometimes I can’t help but laugh at Minnesota. We have a mess on our hands from white tails to walleye and I need to know that extra money will mean extra opportunity for me and everyone else that enjoys the outdoors.
You can’t make a 1:1 comparison of Iowa or ND, and Minnesota.
2015:
IA Fishing Licenses sold- 413,028
ND Fishing licenses sold- 222,024
MN Fishing licenses sold- 1,649,088
https://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/subpages/LicenseInfo/Fishing.htmIA Hunting Licenses sold-841,793
ND Hunting licenses sold-549,909
MN Hunting licenses sold-1,571,600
https://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/subpages/licenseinfo/Hunting.htmLand mass (sq Miles)
IA-56,272.81
ND-70,698.32
MN-86,935.83There is a significantly larger amount of hunters and fishers in MN than there are in either states.
BrianHoffies wrote:
Pretty simple really…..you wanna play (fish) you have to pay.While there is truth there, it’s really not that simple.
We’ve authorized a special funding mechanism via the lottery fund, and it hasn’t been enough. (1991)
Then we, voluntarily voted in a state Constitutional Amendment to supplant F&G funds. It’s still not enough. (2008)
We won’t even begin to discuss the 11% federal excise tax on most shooting sports products (Pittman Robertson Act), and 10% on tackle, 3% on boats/electronics (Dingell–Johnson Act) , that haven’t been enough.
Meanwhile we are throwing money hand over fist at exotic species containment, building bike trails to nowhere, and a myriad of other fools errands.
At what point do we seriously look at auditing the DNR, before just applying another funding mechanism?
lilminne218 wrote:
The 2014 year class is poor compared to other year classes.Bucksutherland: The MN-DNR has to abide by data practice laws. You can request information at anytime. Call the MN-DNR Aitkin office. They will send you the information you are looking for.
DPA requests don’t have a specified timeline for return. A political advocacy group i work with has a request still outstanding from the City of Minneapolis from 2014. I don’t know how long the DNR generally takes, but they DPA requests are seldom returned in a timely fashion.
Henry makes a very quality rifle overall. When you consider they are 100% American made, and the price point, they are tough to beat in their market segment. I just bought a 22lr from them over the holidays. As an employee of a different rifle manufacturer, that speaks volumes.
Call the manufacturer. They likely have a walkthru process to reset the lock.
I was out over the weekend, launched from Nymore. On the south end 13″ in most places, and 12″ to about 2 miles out where we fished.
Managed to ice a few eyes, but fish were overall neutral/negative.
Nope. This will just eliminate the insulation that’s slowing further ice development.
Did your testing of the bullets not reveal an issue?
Trying to wrap my head around how they made it past accuracy testing, and then failed afield.
