Walleye Stamp.. mandatory? other stamps? (just a thought)

[PierBridge]

I think we're nit-picking and a bit paranoid here guys.

And again its voluntary.

The stamp validation is $5. For $2 more, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) will mail the actual artistic collector’s stamp to your home....K?

The money goes directly to walleye stocking and other directly related activities.

So far only about a 1,000 of us have bought the Stamp if that helps you skeptical types...

[Walleye Guy]

I bought the walleye stamp or validation and it doesn't even show up as a line item on my license. I bought my license at Joe's in St. Paul and the clerk said it will only show up on my receipt.

Not that it really matters. I just think its an indication that the administartion of this stamp isn't very well thought out. $2 to mail a $5 stamp?? Hand them out to the retailers and let them give them to the customers when they purchase them. The stamp isn't a requirement so it has no street value. There is no risk of loss etc.

[Wish-I-Were-Fishn]

How 'bout I lifetime version tattooed into the forehead

[mn_bowhunter]

MN doesn't give out any stamps anymore. They validate the license when necessary and give you the option of purchasing the actual stamp. Think of what the purpose of the stamp is. All stamps sold are for management of the species or habitat, not to give out stamps. With ELS the DNR was able to trim the fat on production costs for stamps, and put that money into the resource instead of collectibles. Most stamps are advertised as extra $2 for stamp to be mailed.

[Walleye Guy]

You would at least think they would show the "walleye stamp" validation on your license.

[PierBridge]

They will next year if that helps any.

Good post mn_bowhunter!

[pegleg]

We will see if there is a next year on this stamp. Unless they make it mandatory to have a walleye stamp in order to fish walleyes, why even have it available if there are only 1,000 of us that bought one ($5,000 in revenue)less than 10 days prior to the opener? It looks like it will cost more to promote this stamp than what revenue is generated.

Knowing what I know today, I won't buy another one next year again unless it is mandatory.

[Camp Bob]

I don't think stocking is the problem If you do your homework you will find that most fisheries have had an over abundance of fry the past few years. They can only put in what the lakes will handle and they do know their job. It's up to the rest of us to take care of the lakes so they can handle more. Practicing catch and release, selective harvest of fish sizes helps to maintain a healthy balance. Also, spending our money on our lakefront property, septic, boat upkeep and taking responsibility for our impact on the environment will help to create better habitat and better fishing.

Maybe we should all throw in $5 to take a Sportsman's Conservation pledge instead of buy another stamp.

[itchmesir]

We will see if there is a next year on this stamp. Unless they make it mandatory to have a walleye stamp in order to fish walleyes, why even have it available if there are only 1,000 of us that bought one ($5,000 in revenue)less than 10 days prior to the opener? It looks like it will cost more to promote this stamp than what revenue is generated.

Knowing what I know today, I won't buy another one next year again unless it is mandatory.

yes.. but that 1000 people are out of how many that have bought their license early.. another factor is that obviously none of this is really advertised so its more of a word of mouth deal.. and "oh i see there is a walleye stamp" from thumbing through the regulations booklet

also i agree with the others.. they should have just made it a $7.00 stamp and they send you a stamp automatically.. since the walleye "stamp" is a voluntary move and holds no weight on any regulations itself

[itchmesir]

I don't think stocking is the problem If you do your homework you will find that most fisheries have had an over abundance of fry the past few years. They can only put in what the lakes will handle and they do know their job. It's up to the rest of us to take care of the lakes so they can handle more. Practicing catch and release, selective harvest of fish sizes helps to maintain a healthy balance. Also, spending our money on our lakefront property, septic, boat upkeep and taking responsibility for our impact on the environment will help to create better habitat and better fishing.

Maybe we should all throw in $5 to take a Sportsman's Conservation pledge instead of buy another stamp.

exactly.. stocking may not be a problem.. but building and maintaining habitat is.. and without proper funding you cannot build and maintain proper habitat without it biting you in the backside sooner or later.. or having to cut funding towards habitat restoration/building because there is no money for it.. these stamps are what collect this extra money to make restoration and building of livable habitat possible

[PierBridge]

I probably won't get the pictorial stamp next year. I'm not really a stamp guy and have no need for the actual stamp.

But I sure will be getting the the stamp validation for $5 if it's offered.

[Sandmannd]

I propose this. Those that think the money is needed, then buy it. If you think it's not enough, send in a check for $20 or more. I believe it will be squandered like all other money so won't purchase one.

[Walleye Guy]

In the mail yesterday I received a Pheasant Stamp. Checked my receipt and I paid for the stamp but not the extra $2 to get the paper copy.

[dabaer]

I agree with sandmannd on this one. If your that worried about our fishing conditions, donate what you can.

[PostFrontal]

I bought the stamp because I am all for improved fisheries. They said it is to "be used only for stocking walleye in waters of the state and related activities."

My feeling is if it was made mandatory, they would cut the current funding, and not use this money as in addition to, but to keep the level of stocking the same. We'll have to wait and see.

We already see them trying to do it with the new Constitutional Amendment funds even though it is specifically states they can't.

My other concern is angler numbers are decreasing. The number of anglers age 16-44 dropped 10% from 2000-2007. I wouldn't think it would be the time to increase the cost of a license by adding a mandatory stamp while this is happening.

[jeffreyd]

I purchased our licenses online and purchased the stamps for both my son and myself. We received a physical stamp in the mail it was $5.00 each no extra for shipping. Also, remember that a ton of non residents use these boards for information. While the page 5 does say a resident can keep their limit if they are under 15, a non resident must add it to the total, for that reason we purchased two licenses. Here in AZ, we can urban fish, even tho i purchase a combo hunt fish license each year, if i want to fish urban, i have to purchase a second license and trout stamp. Talk about getting you double. We are excited and hope you all do great in the opener.

[itchmesir]

I bought the stamp because I am all for improved fisheries. They said it is to "be used only for stocking walleye in waters of the state and related activities."

My feeling is if it was made mandatory, they would cut the current funding, and not use this money as in addition to, but to keep the level of stocking the same. We'll have to wait and see.

We already see them trying to do it with the new Constitutional Amendment funds even though it is specifically states they can't.

My other concern is angler numbers are decreasing. The number of anglers age 16-44 dropped 10% from 2000-2007. I wouldn't think it would be the time to increase the cost of a license by adding a mandatory stamp while this is happening.

ok.. i think some people are misinterpreting my "mandatory".. i don't mean that every licensed angler should pay this trout stamp fee.. just those who target walleye.. just like they dont make everyone pay for a sturgeon tag or a trout stamp.. unless you are targeting those species or fishing designated waters..

[itchmesir]

I purchased our licenses online and purchased the stamps for both my son and myself. We received a physical stamp in the mail it was $5.00 each no extra for shipping. Also, remember that a ton of non residents use these boards for information. While the page 5 does say a resident can keep their limit if they are under 15, a non resident must add it to the total, for that reason we purchased two licenses. Here in AZ, we can urban fish, even tho i purchase a combo hunt fish license each year, if i want to fish urban, i have to purchase a second license and trout stamp. Talk about getting you double. We are excited and hope you all do great in the opener.

now that is indeed gettin f'ed in both ends

[BobT]

Personally, I think we give enough already. Why bother with a stamp? If they're going to impose a cost increase do it, save the cost of the stamp and apply it too. I've written to the DNR a few times suggesting they do away with the cost of the other stamps and they are finally starting to come around and only issuing stamps to those who want them. After all, what good is the actual stamp once you sign your name across the face? For example, last fall we didn't have to receive an actual pheasant stamp, just pay for it.

I also wonder how they could enforce a walleye stamp. They enforce trout stamps by designating certain waters as trout waters and all are required to have a stamp to fish those waters. Which lakes would be designated walleye lakes? About 3/4 of the lakes in MN I suppose. That means the only way they could possibly enforce it is to make everyone pay for it. Save the cost of the actual stamp, raise the license fee by $5.00, and they'll be money ahead and we'll give more.

Our license fees went up this year as it was, we already pay additional tax dollars for every outdoor supply we buy, and we've approved a sales tax increase. How much is enough? Add up the total monies we spend in an average year on fishing, hunting, and the outdoors and it can be a rather significant part of our annual budget. Enough is enough I say. Those that want to give more, be my guest but don't force it on the rest of us. I doubt the DNR would refuse to take it.

That's probably a large part of why participation is dropping. It's becoming a rich man's sport.

[High Velocity]

If they were to make the eye' stamp mandatory, IMO it should be mandatory to have the stamp only while fishing lakes that have received stocking or other financially intensive help from the DNR to support the fish population (i.e. Leech Lake). Up in northern MN there are hundreds of lakes full of walleyes that have never received a stocked fish, I don't think we should have to pay extra to fish them.

Steve

I believe Leech was used for years as a lake that has given towards stocking(stripping spawn)from Walleyes as well as it's famed Muskies. Look on the DNR lakefinder and check out the lakes that have had some stocking done up here in N.MN either walleyes or another species. The lakes I have questions about are ones that have historic and ongoing winterkill and to some extent species which are not native to body of water being stocked.

Think about it if they ever do make it a mandatory stamp they can get MORE money from those that bought the lifetime license(I personally do not have one) - Quite the possible slippery slope. If any specie should ever get another mandatory stamp attached to it go to the Muskie!(yes, I do fish for them) If more money is needed raise license by 1.00 for all and have that money solely allocated for stocking. When was the last license increase?

[Capt. Don*]

I think the DNR has gotten a little too creative with their additional this and that. I spend $45 just to sport fish in this state, primarily on northern Lake Superior, an additional $10 trout stamp, where nothing is stocked or maintained. I spear from a darkhouse a few times at early ice, an additional $18 license, I think that is more than enough for one angler.

The DNR has done a wonderful job of marketing, people actually believe these additional stamps, licenses, fees are a worthwhile expense. What is this extra money going to do that hasn't been being done already? This walleye stamp money, "going directly to walleye stocking or other directly related activities", that is a pretty vague statement and I wonder where the money that used to go to those things is going if the stamp money starts rolling in.

It won't be long and we won't need to worry about mandatory stamps or additional fees, the DNR might just come up with a solution similar to transportation and the gas tax, no longer tax by the gallon, but rather by the miles driven and we will be paying per fish caught, or better yet per hour spent fishing.

Enough already!

[Phred52]

TELL ME itchmesir... WHAT has our 'DNR' done with the monies that the regular licence fees bring in???? Conventions...A new 'workout room for the non-sportsman commissioner!! I've seen that our illustrious DNR now is sending letters to some 120,000 "unfishing" Minnesotans to encourage them to "TRY" fishing. MORE people sucking up the resources that the DNR already can't keep up with!!! NO!!! I don't believe in the stamp system, this one or ANY other! And, I'll fight til my dying breath, tooth and nail to make our 'earn as you learn DNR' make their mistakes on somebody elses checkbook. GOOD LUCK to all this opener!! Phred52

[johnmn]

Why be so negative towards the DNR, if the DNR wasn't around we wouldn't have any fish to fish for. I don't believe in the stamp method either, but if the DNR needs more money for stocking fish than every fisherman should pay. They should raise the fishing license, but if they do this they need to let everyone know where the money is going and we would need to see a improvement of the catch rate. If we don't see a improvement in catch rate at least some proof the money is helping and if it isn't than they need reduce the license. After all they are the professionals.

[Hula_Grub]

I kill 4 walleyes a year. I'm buying the stamp...

[Phred52]

I'm not being negative towards the DNR, The things I pointed out are on record. It's called 'mis-use of funds'. Most recent, 2 of the DNR senior employees lost their jobs in the case of 'funding the convention scandal' and the 'work-out' room was for Ventura's appointment to commissioner who 'didn't want to have to travel to work out'! It's not negative, it's the facts! And again, If the monies that the state sportsmen (and women) are paying in licence fees are being spent where they're supposed to be spent, why do they believe they need an additional stamp for the stocking programs?? What do the 'big shots' want to MIS-Appropriate those monies too?? It'll come out in the future...after it's too late. Just keep fighting to pay in, they'll milk ya dry! Hula-grub, Just do what you feel you gotta do!!! Phred52