New DNR Commisioner

[Stute Slap]

I think they should drastically raise license prices, like to $250 for a duck stamp, and $350 for a small game license. Money is what is needed to improve the situation, the prices are ridiculously low. People will pay it, it's nothing compared to the increase in shells/waders/etc. Most people spend more than that at the bar every weekend.

Have you been eating off of lead plates and cups this past year?

[Stute Slap]

Gimp - I'm not saying everyone buys expensive shit, but most people do as it's hard to avoid it these days.

My point is a $15 stamp is ridiculously cheap and the money goes to directly towards conservation. Funny how you guys want better hunting but of course want someone else to pay for it.

I stand by it a $250 duck stamp, be less people out there anyway. What would really be cool if they coded public hunting to which stamp you bought, $15 dollar stamp gets you shit spot with Joe Flipperhead. $250 stamp gets you on the good spot with other like minded people who are willing to pull their weight.

$250 isn't a lot of money, it wouldn't be for the rich only, people just don't to pay their fair share. Easier to complain about the old days, which even in the old days the stamp wasn't much less than $15!!!

[Mallard_maniac]

I believe your theory is a hardcore money loser. I get the concept but at $600 (Per your words: 250 for one stamp, plus 350 for sg and best case scenario the other stamp stays the same) you'll be hard pressed to find a majority of waterfowl hunters anywhere to pay that, not because they can't afford it but it's not worth it to most. There would be a few willing to do so but the vast majority would likely throw in the towel. Comparing license fees to expensive equipment that holds some level of equity isn't the same either. A trailer, a boat, a coat, or decoys can all be sold for return at the drop of a hat (albeit a loss). You're talking more $$$ than some non-res elk licenses for a duck? I've been to some of the best regions in North America hunting waterfowl, and wouldn't have paid $600+ to do it, despite being able to.

This would be even more of a deterent to the prospective waterfowlers of tomorrow. I cannot fathom trying to scrape up $600+ per year to hunt waterfowl in MN as a 18 or 20yo college kid. Wouldn't have happened. Infact quite the opposite, I likely stayed waterfowl hunting during my self-inflicted economic depression years because it was cheap and affordable.

If you're that eager to make a $600 per year (or more) contribution, make a donation. I mean unless it's all hot air and smoke you could literally be doing this now, today while keeping licenses reasonable for everyone? Kind of like having your cake and eating it too. But out-pricing our licenses would only hurt us in the very very short and long run both

[Takem1]

$250 is a lot of money when someone who lives pay check to pay check.

Sent from my SM-G930VL using Tapatalk

[gimpfinger]

You do understand that people paying top dollar on their gear are actually paying more because robb/pitt act. Seems to me that you think stamp money is the only money going in for habitat.

sent from deez nutz lay'n on yo chin

[Takem1]

You do understand that people paying top dollar on their gear are actually paying more because robb/pitt act. Seems to me that you think stamp money is the only money going in for habitat.

sent from deez nutz lay'n on yo chin

People seem to forget that tax.

Sent from my SM-G930VL using Tapatalk

[Stute Slap]

You do understand that people paying top dollar on their gear are actually paying more because robb/pitt act. Seems to me that you think stamp money is the only money going in for habitat.

sent from deez nutz lay'n on yo chin

I believe that's only guns and ammo

[Takem1]

[quote="gimpfinger"]You do understand that people paying top dollar on their gear are actually paying more because robb/pitt act. Seems to me that you think stamp money is the only money going in for habitat.

sent from deez nutz lay'n on yo chin

I believe that's only guns and ammo[/quote]Anything hunting I believe

Sent from my SM-G930VL using Tapatalk

[Stute Slap]

I believe your theory is a hardcore money loser. I get the concept but at $600 (Per your words: 250 for one stamp, plus 350 for sg and best case scenario the other stamp stays the same) you'll be hard pressed to find a majority of waterfowl hunters anywhere to pay that, not because they can't afford it but it's not worth it to most. There would be a few willing to do so but the vast majority would likely throw in the towel. Comparing license fees to expensive equipment that holds some level of equity isn't the same either. A trailer, a boat, a coat, or decoys can all be sold for return at the drop of a hat (albeit a loss). You're talking more $$$ than some non-res elk licenses for a duck? I've been to some of the best regions in North America hunting waterfowl, and wouldn't have paid $600+ to do it, despite being able to.

This would be even more of a deterent to the prospective waterfowlers of tomorrow. I cannot fathom trying to scrape up $600+ per year to hunt waterfowl in MN as a 18 or 20yo college kid. Wouldn't have happened. Infact quite the opposite, I likely stayed waterfowl hunting during my self-inflicted economic depression years because it was cheap and affordable.

If you're that eager to make a $600 per year (or more) contribution, make a donation. I mean unless it's all hot air and smoke you could literally be doing this now, today while keeping licenses reasonable for everyone? Kind of like having your cake and eating it too. But out-pricing our licenses would only hurt us in the very very short and long run both

Obviously, there would be a balancing point where revenue would increase without losing numbers (hunter participation is decreasing anyway) I don't know where that is, but I can tell you it's North of $15. I guess $600 is too much, but current prices are too low.

Equipment isn't very liquid, except at a steep loss.

I would also argue being successful at waterfowl hunting is rarely cheap and affordable, sometimes but not on the average. Best hunting is US for under $600? License is at least $100, gas, food, hotel/camping, scouting, shells, etc it's possible if you know someone there but just showing up be pretty tough and sure as hell doesn't sound like any fun pinching pennies to that extreme.

The deterrent to future waterfowlers currently is lack of access and lack of success, not license cost and yet there are less hunters every year.

It's food for thought, anyone who is rational understands the price of a duck stamp hasn't even kept up with inflation and should be increased.

I don't donate to anything. I hunt private land.

[Stute Slap]

[quote="gimpfinger"]You do understand that people paying top dollar on their gear are actually paying more because robb/pitt act. Seems to me that you think stamp money is the only money going in for habitat.

sent from deez nutz lay'n on yo chin

I believe that's only guns and ammo

Anything hunting I believe

Sent from my SM-G930VL using Tapatalk[/quote]


99% sure it's only guns and ammo