Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If you want access to members only forums on HSO, you will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member. ?

$5 Walleye Stamp


robbo17

Recommended Posts

theres been a couple posts about buying it in a store cuase catching/cost per lb. theory. has anyone seen how some of these fish are handled? i have, sorry i dont catch and/or help clean i dont eat. NEVER willi eat fish out or buy in a store. this just convinced me to go buy 2 stamps. one for me one for my wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I fish walleye and I think that before we try to add another MONEY MAKER to the DNR they should reduce the limit for walleye if its really that big of an issue. Less fish takin will not hurt true walleye fisherman as a food stand point as 5 to 6 fish takin per year is the most I've seen in this post.6 fish takin over a year span and its worth HOW MUCH? I think thats the trouble with todays world. I have no idea how much a pound I spend for walleye but in the end I know its too much and its alot cheaper to go to the store and buy it. I know I go for the fun of it but there's still a limit to what I'll spend,I still would like a meal without spending a fortune on it. And what about those who fish for a meal? why should they have to pay an Industrial price for there fish? I don't understand the DNR in todays "Day and age", so to speak. They have New trucks that roll down the road every day. I see it. I drive a 2000 F-150. they got nice motors on there boats that seem no older than 3-4 years old. I got a 15 year old motor (that I call new to me because it is NEW TO ME). I'm sure there's alot of room for more money in the DNR just as I could use more money in my household but adding another stamp or TAX or anything like that should not be an option or if nothing else it should be a last resort. Drive a JUNKER and LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS....NO I WOULD NOT BUY THIS STAMP. I Posted a while ago about walleye numbers in the state and there was very little response to that post. It basically said "out of 14 million harvestable walleyes only about 4 million are harvested each year". I really don't think we need more walleyes we just need to learn how to catch them. There for, we DO NOT NEED more money to stock them. DNR do your Job with the money you have and target the lakes you need to target for stocking. STOP ASKING FOR MORE MONEY. I could go on as to what I think about the deer liecense price and where that money goes. I guess now the DNR some how spends money on the deer that are grown off of mine and my fellow Minnesotans feilds???? I havent seen a check yet for my feilds up keep, have you? I also could show you where the DNR owns land that is only accessable through roads that can only be traveled by foot or by large 4x4's when roads that where built from DNR money that access this same land are gated off because of bordering land owners complaining........... Im sorry for the rant but Im not sorry for the words I've used. Its all true. ask me and I'll email you with why I'm so darn tired with our DNR.I'm done,LOL eek

I understand that you have some underlying frustrations toward the DNR for some reason, I get that, but relax this is only voluntary.

On your first point about lowering limits, you answered your own question. If people are only taking 5 or 6 per year on average, what is lowering limits going to accomplish?

Another thing is that people seem to be equating the money spent on a license with how many fish they keep a year. First of all, you are not guaranteed any fish with the purchase of a fishing license. You are however guaranteed a year of fishing PRIVILEGE.

It is up to you to find and catch fish. I'm not sure what a fishing license even costs now because I always buy a sportsmans combo for my wife and I plus pheasant stamp and other things when I buy a new license, but I know that if I fished hard even every-other weekend I would bring home more than enough fish to cover what a single person fishing license costs. Just a couple fishing trips a year nets my friends and I a good size fish fry, most of those fish being stocked walleyes.

As far as your comments about the DNR employees having decent equipment to work with. Use your 15 year old motor and junker truck every day instead of once a month and see how long it lasts. I don't see anything that DNR employees have as excessive by any means.

BTW, Chasineyes the DNR posts their biennial budget right on their HSOforum, complete with pie graphs and everything for all to see. I don't think anyone would begrudge any employee for having health and retirement benefits. Don't you have these where you work?

First - yes I do have an underlaying frustration its called MOE MONEY,MOE MONEY,MOE MONEY.

Second - lowering limits will help the DNR by not having to stock so many fish there for not spend MOE MONEY,MOE MONEY,MOE MONEY..

third - I know just as well as others that buying a license for fishing does not guarantee my catching fish. BUT fishing is not a PRIVILEGE. This country was founded on our natural resources not the "DEPARTMENT" of our natural resources.We hire them to regulate the bad eggs and see that our natural resources are not deplaeated. Not to turn it into BIG BIZ.

fourth - You nailed home my point by saying that if you "fished hard even every other weekend you could catch more than enough for you and your family. WHY does the DNR need more money if you can already produce those kinds of results?

fifth - Decent equipment to me is not brand new. Look at all the DNR rigs driving around. There not only decent there NEW. Im not against them having DECENT rides, they just need to use a little common sense.(AND I'm willing to bet my boat (15 years old) gets used about as much as alot of those DNR boats.)Same with my TRUCK.

sixth - You bet I have health insurance and benefits as well should the DNR employee's. I thought thats why I bought a fishing license????????

I know about the budget reports the DNR posts on line. They do not however post the actual income amounts of all the funds generated state wide . They only post what money they actually get form each fund. They dont state the actuall TOTAL bi-annual Income from outdoor related license and other so called OUTDOOR money makers. The actual percentage of money that the DNR recieves every year from hunting license,fishing license, snowmobile license, Ice house license, trout stamp, boat license, bait licenses, Duck stamps, state lottery, grants,fed funding and many others does not total the amount of total income from each of these every year.

Bottom line if the DNR wants more money they can fight to take a bigger chunk from the money that all us fisherman and hunters think they have avalibale to them in the first place.When we buy most of the things listed above we have it in our minds that this money is going to support the thing where buying the license for. Stupid us I guess!! They dont need more money they need one of two things. A BIGGER BACK BONE to take the money they already should be getting that every one thinks the DNR is getting or SPEND LESS..

I also think that alot of the funds GIVIN to the DNR could be used much, much more wisely...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this a few times, the idea of a walleye stamp was not brought forward by the DNR. It was an idea from Senator Chaudry from Fridley. The DNR had nothing to do with it. He also came up with the conservation license. Since that license will cost less and bring in less money, the Senator thought up the walleye stamp to replace the lost revenue.

BTW a friend of mine works for the DNR and those new vehicles you speak of are worn out after 5 years. Many have over 100,000 miles, many of which are done while hauling very heavy loads day in and day out. The boats have hundreds if not close to 1000 hours each year. Also carrying heavy loads. At my work they have done a lot of studies on their own fleet usage and have found that after a certain mileage the cost to replace a vehicle is cheaper than repairing it. I'm sure the DNR has done the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also carrying heavy loads. At my work they have done a lot of studies on their own fleet usage and have found that after a certain mileage the cost to replace a vehicle is cheaper than repairing it. I'm sure the DNR has done the same thing.

In a former life I drove a dump truck for a couple highway construction company's, at one I was told that the trucks are rebuilt every winter, that is was a lot cheaper than buying new one's. In my own experience, I owned a special needs transportation company in a former life, my vehicles were maintained and fixed properly when there was a problem, 200,000 miles was normal for me and a few other company's I know of. If the folk's driving the vehicle's respect their equipment they last a long time. 100,000 miles is nothing with the quality of today's truck's and cars if they aren't beat to death, and the saving's on fuel is huge. grin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing dump trucks to pickups/SUV's isnt even worth comparing! How much is a commercial dump truck going for these days? I drive a squad car and trust me 30,000 miles on a squad is about the same as 100,000 on your everyday car you use at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Skee, I'm sure the miles on a squad car are a lot harder miles then the average driver. I don't think it's neglect by the driver, but rather that they have to get where they are going in a hurry and the car is the last thing on their mind. They also have to accellerate fast a lot of times and I'm sure many more things I don't know that would be hard on a car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.