Federal Duck Stamp Increase

[koonie]

Maybe and extra 15 won't hurt you and I but it will no doubt deter some people. Then if the small game license and state waterfowl stamp go up(which will surely happen) it really starts to add up. Plus not everyone spends thousands of dollars on waterfowl hunting and just because they don't and aren't serious waterfowl hunters doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to go waterfowl hunting.

My whole point from earlier was just food for thought. Concerned about the future of hunting. Not trying to start an arguement(I know you weren't either). Just saying.

[Gordie]

15 bucks is less than a box of shells .

I realize it might be a lot of money for some and everyone has the right to hunt waterfowl but if you want to hunt you will have to pay for the stamp. I dont want to see a loss in hunters and I really dont want to lose the the habitat that the money is supose to fund.

[gundy89]

I dunno...$15 isn't going to break the bank when you consider the hundreds if not thousands of dollars duck hunters invest in their equipment every year. If that's the last straw for somebody...I reckon they really weren't that interested in duck hunting in the first place.

For the guy that spends hundreds and thousands, $15 wont' matter. However, there a a lot of people like me that go out on opener and maybe one other time. For me, a $30 federal stamp will mostly likely mean that I won't be putting the waders on this year. I'll take the weekend and chase some walleyes, muskies, grouse , or deer.

[carpshooterdeluxe]

I've got no problem with a fee increase but I'd like to see where the money is going. Make sure it's not just being thrown away. As much as I hate to say it a lot of the money we spend with outdoor associations never makes it to the wildlife. It gets sucked off to the administration of said association long before it can benefit a critter. We keep giving because we think we are helping out.

This is something I don't really understand. How much money does it take to run a refuge. Most signs are already up showing no hunting and most of the road structures are already in place. The land is already owned and they don't pay taxes. They might have to shut down an interpretive center or something but the vital part (the land) is still there. We might not have the ability to gain ground on preserving lands but we shouldn't be going backwards.

Spend a day volunteering at a refuge. You'll be exhausted. There is always willows to cut, grass to burn, invasive weeds to spray, trees to cut, roads to maintain, mowing, etc. It takes a lot of work to maintain the type of habitat required to produce and rest waterfowl and other migrating birds.

Personally, I wish that a federal duck stamp was required to do any type of hunting, big game, upland, etc. on any Federal WPA. These properties were bought with duck stamp money, but how many other species benefit? Maybe if this was a requirement, we wouldn't even be having the conversation about increasing stamp prices, because the revenues would already be higher.

[paceman]

"For the guy that spends hundreds and thousands, $15 wont' matter. However, there a a lot of people like me that go out on opener and maybe one other time. For me, a $30 federal stamp will mostly likely mean that I won't be putting the waders on this year. I'll take the weekend and chase some walleyes, muskies, grouse , or deer."

+1

[Take 'Em]

It needs to be raised. Long overdue!!

[PierBridge]

Speaking of Duck stamps.......I just picked mine up at the local post office..

[ChuckN]

I don't know the statistics on the duck stamp prices, but been a long time since the stamp price increased. It's time for an increase to save more wetlands. I'm in favor.

[morefishplease]

I am not in favor of the increase. Will I pay it...sure, I love to duck hunt but in all honesty geez get with it people that are saying they would gladly pay whatever. Hey if thats the way you feel make a private donation to DU or MWA. Just my

[EJ_Mac]

Quote:

I'm curious as to how you think they would go about enforcing it. It is pretty obvious when one is duck hunting. I would think it would be tough to classify who is a bird watcher and who is just enjoying the outdoors.

One possible way...In WA state, anyone using a state wildlife area has to have a decal. You get it free when you buy a hunting license. If it's not on your car and a CO sees you without it, you'll get a ticket (I think it's only like $60, if memory serves).

There could be an attachment to the actual duck stamp that hangs from the rear view mirror, with similar rules. Of course, it's only be enforceable on refuges.

I agree - I think bird watchers, hikers, ATVers, snowmobilers, and anyone using public lands should be pitching in to support them. If the law doesn't say you have to, you should be doing it on your own, anyway. Just my opinion.

As far as the price of the stamp, it hasn't changed since 1991, so an increase is way overdue. If $30 seems like too much, think of all the years we only had to pay $15 when it should have been more.

I think something like 95% of all stamp fees go towards buying more land specifically for waterfowl or upkeeping the lands already in the agency's possession. I don't know how DU or other private groups compare to that, but I'd be surprised if it was as much.

[carpshooterdeluxe]

I am not in favor of the increase. Will I pay it...sure, I love to duck hunt but in all honesty geez get with it people that are saying they would gladly pay whatever. Hey if thats the way you feel make a private donation to DU or MWA. Just my

I just don't get the argument that a $15 or $25 or $50 stamp is too expensive; yet nobody balks at dropping $40 for a meal with the wife, $60 to fill up the fishing boat, or spending $400 on a pair of packers/vikings tickets. The money you pay for a federal stamp = more ducks. Those who complain about license prices and stamp prices have the right to do so, but they should not have the right to complain about the lack of ducks or hunting opportunities then. Without the revenue from the stamps, there would be a lot less ducks and a lot less places to hunt.

[rogrod]

I think an increase should be considered and I think that anyone using a WPA or National Wildlife refuge should have the stamp. I don't duck hunt much but buy the stamps every year. I use those lands a lot for pheasant hunting.

[Gordie]

carpshooter your so right on the money (no pun intended)

I stated before that the increase is less than a box of shells.

Its like the guy that complains about the high gas prices and he speeds by you at 85 miles an hour.

This is something we will all have to deal with as the price of our sport will never decrease it will only increase that goes from the gas in our trucks to the shells in the blind bag. The times dictate the rise in stamp costs and what better way to fund the waterfowl than thru that.

Yes we can make donation to other entities but you will still end up having to pay to play.

I for one will pay to play Just my

[brittman]

The money you pay for a federal stamp = more ducks. Those who complain about license prices and stamp prices have the right to do so, but they should not have the right to complain about the lack of ducks or hunting opportunities then. Without the revenue from the stamps, there would be a lot less ducks and a lot less places to hunt.

That is simply wrong in most years !!!

While 98% of the money is spent on land acquisition and easement leases, the amount of land is small compared to what remains in private ownership.

Vast majority of ducks hatched in the US are from private lands. Federal duck stamp money has no impact on the Canada ducks that are hatched.

[carpshooterdeluxe]

That is simply wrong in most years !!!

While 98% of the money is spent on land acquisition and easement leases, the amount of land is small compared to what remains in private ownership.

Vast majority of ducks hatched in the US are from private lands. Federal duck stamp money has no impact on the Canada ducks that are hatched.

Obviously more ducks are hatched on private land. I'm not ever going to argue to the contrary. But I've seen enough research and tromped around the eastern dakotas and western minnesota to know that the 3 million acres in the prairie pothole region that has had some sort of investment from federal duck stamp dollars is some of the best duck producing ground in the world.

[brittman]

Carp,

Sorry, but again you seem misinformed.

I assume that the 3 million plus acres you are referring to is CRP. CRP and CREP are ag program that are run by the USDA. That federal money is from a different budget and NOT from Duck Stamp revenue.

No Fed Duck Stamp money has been used to purchase that land, the land is privately owned and farmers are paid by the USDA not to plant crops. The USF&WS has little if any involvement with CRP.

I guess it maybe possible that a few acres enrolled in CRP are also enrolled in a Federal easement, dont know the rules. We should make sure the Feds are not paying twice to conserve the same land.

[carpshooterdeluxe]

Carp,

Sorry, but again you seem misinformed.

I assume that the 3 million plus acres you are referring to is CRP. CRP and CREP are ag program that are run by the USDA. That federal money is from a different budget and NOT from Duck Stamp revenue.

No Fed Duck Stamp money has been used to purchase that land, the land is privately owned and farmers are paid by the USDA not to plant crops. The USF&WS has little if any involvement with CRP.

I guess it maybe possible that a few acres enrolled in CRP are also enrolled in a Federal easement, dont know the rules. We should make sure the Feds are not paying twice to conserve the same land.

http://www.fws.gov/duckstamps/

Your assumption is wrong.

[brittman]

Help me Carpy. I have seen these pages and this link many times before.

Show me where Federal Duck stamps have secured 3 million acres in Dakotas and Western MN.

I see about 165,000 acres in Federal Refuges (combined MN and both Dakotas) secured with Duck Stamp dollars.

http://www.fws.gov/refuges/realty/pdf/MBCFacres2010.pdf

WPAs account for another 650,000 acres or so, but that is over the entire US.

Easements are another 2 million acres, but this again is across the entire US and it is not land owned, but "leased".

[carpshooterdeluxe]

Page 2.

http://www.fws.gov/refuges/realty/pdf/MBCC_2010.pdf

[brittman]

Hey thanks. Good report. And for the most part the numbers match my numbers above - should I pulled from another part of the same web site.

Really trying to determine whether the easement numbers are accumulative or net total. The easement information is not as clearly defined. Do they count the same acres over as leases are renewed or shifted from temporary to permanent?

Looks like my $15 is spent fine. Still cannot support an increase. It appears that they are still protecting less than 10 - 15% of the available habitat in the Dakota and Western MN. Changes in draintile rules and wetland loss are still key to longer term protection and out of scope for USFWS dollars.

[carpshooterdeluxe]

Hey thanks. Good report. And for the most part the numbers match my numbers above - should I pulled from another part of the same web site.

Really trying to determine whether the easement numbers are accumulative or net total. The easement information is not as clearly defined. Do they count the same acres over as leases are renewed or shifted from temporary to permanent?

Looks like my $15 is spent fine. Still cannot support an increase. It appears that they are still protecting less than 10 - 15% of the available habitat in the Dakota and Western MN. Changes in draintile rules and wetland loss are still key to longer term protection and out of scope for USFWS dollars.

I can't answer your easement question off the top of my head, but I will be hunting with a bunch of usfws staff towards the end of september; one of them should have some good insight.

I agree that there is only so much that the feds can do with the money they have, but unlike MN DNR for example, the feds try to obtain the best of the best, and then improve it as well. MN DNR seems to think that simply buying as much land as they can is the answer. Look at the quality difference on WMA's vs. WPA's in western MN. WPA's are being grazed for grass regeneration, trees are being cut down for less avian predator perches, etc.

My contention will always be that of all the federal programs out there, the duck stamp program is actually one that is done with little waste and seems to be managed properly.

[brittman]

Totally agree the quality of the WPAs are far superior to MN WMA in most all cases. The initial management and the continued management is often far superior.

Heck where we hunt prairie chickens the MN WMA land is beginning to have volunteer trees and cedars. If the DNR cannot prioritize and burn this land to keep it grass, what can they do.

Too often the MN WMA land is a swamp that is donated or acquired via tax forfeit. Federal land usually is more balanced in its habitats.

Too bad that more of the 2-3 million acres in easements in ND, MN and SD are generally not open to hunting by the general public. Guess in benefits those unafraid to ask.

[carpshooterdeluxe]

Totally agree the quality of the WPAs are far superior to MN WMA in most all cases. The initial management and the continued management is often far superior.

Heck where we hunt prairie chickens the MN WMA land is beginning to have volunteer trees and cedars. If the DNR cannot prioritize and burn this land to keep it grass, what can they do.

Too often the MN WMA land is a swamp that is donated or acquired via tax forfeit. Federal land usually is more balanced in its habitats.

Too bad that more of the 2-3 million acres in easements in ND, MN and SD are generally not open to hunting by the general public. Guess in benefits those unafraid to ask.

I would venture to guess that hunting is a distant second place to duck production when it comes to those easements. Personally, don't have a problem with non-access to the easements. If you can't find a spot to shoot ducks or geese in the Dakota's right now, you should take up golf

[a47mlb]

[Finlander]

Are you still able to buy duck stamps at the post office?