huntin and fishin kid Posted October 7, 2004 Share Posted October 7, 2004 I would say no to the hole deal because I feel like i have spentt enough money on gear and stuff and feel like I shouldnt have to pay any more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainMusky Posted October 7, 2004 Author Share Posted October 7, 2004 huntin and fishin kid, just curious if you hunt pheasants, ducks or geese. If so, how do you feel about those stamps? Duck hunting has to be equally if not more expensive than musky fishing and you have to buy two stamps for that.I agree there are enough fees and charges nowadays and I not promoting another stupid charge for the sake of nickel and diming and outdoorperson, rather trying to find a way to secure the future of the resource. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainMusky Posted October 8, 2004 Author Share Posted October 8, 2004 No offense but do you REALLY think a $5 stamp would mean the difference between you fishing for muskies or not? Too many people take advantage of everything we have, but when asked to contribute to make something better or maintain it at its current level they are unwilling to contribute even a little. Too many people just see it as an elitist thing and I call it BUNK. Do duck hunters or pheasant hunters consider themselves elitist because they are forced to buy stamps? Come on! Jeers to those people who take advantage of our musky success story here in MN, but are unwilling to do anything to support it. Whether it be a stamp or a tag system or whatever I don't care. We need dedicated dollars toward this effort.I quit duck hunting a few years back, but it had nothing to do with the cost of stamps or elitist this or that.I suppose golfers are elitists because they can afford the green fees and golf balls! You are what you make of it! No one is forcing you to buy a $200 rod, $20 lure. If you choose, you can make your own equipment, lures, leaders etc and save a bundle. What does musky fishing cost me every year? I maybe buy a couple new lures to replace lost ones or a hot new one. Some leader material as I make my own, muskies inc membership and that is it. Gas towing a boat would be consumed if I fished for walleyes or something else so that doesn't count. I don't think a tax for wildlife would be the ticket. That makes it too easy to put the money toward loons, timberwolves or something else, I want dedicated money earmarked solely for musky efforts. The only way I see that happening is from a stamp or from tags for harvested fish. I don't think making everyone pay for our sport is the answer, we need to support it ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giant_Jackpot Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 Captain,My previous reply was meant to be a jab at the fact that our legislators have failed to pass the dedicated funding bills the past few years. Again, I would buy the muskie stamp but I do not think it is the way to go. The dedicated funding would go towards helping ALL things wildlife and I would bet the muskie’s part of that money would be more than they would get from the stamp alone. We need to look at the overall picture. Let me know what you think! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muskybuck Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 I still think they need a stamp and a tag. Especially the tag!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giant_Jackpot Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 Captain,I was referring to the 3/16 (or 1/4 depending on which bill got passed) initiative. This is where the legislature was going to dedicate 3/16 (or 1/4) of one percent of the overall sales tax (not just fishing licenses) to wildlife funding. If the bill had passed, the issue would have been put on the ballot and the voters would have decided to make a constitutional amendment for this. There would have been no repealing of this funding, it would be permanent. I’m sure the issue will come up again in the next legislative session and you will see me posting out here once again asking everybody to write to their legislators asking them to support the bill. We are talking something in the neighborhood of $190 million annually for wildlife funding! How does that sound to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish-n-Freak Posted October 11, 2004 Share Posted October 11, 2004 If you want to help the Muskies you have two ways to help very easy.#1 -- Contact your rep and push for the 3/16 initive that has been brought up.#2 -- Put your muskie stamp money towards a Muskies Inc. membership! This way your money does go towards stocking and education, just like you wanted the stamp to do. Just this way you are not getting the state involved! Muskies Inc. with a strong membership can push for the 3/16 bill and other things that would help not only Muskies, but our lakes in general.A stamp won't work! You can't prove a person is fishing Muskie not Pike and in May you can't prove someone is fishing Bass not Pike. If you require a stamp to fish for them, you will loose money. If you require a stamp to keep one, you are sending the wrong message and going against the education you want the stamp to fund.I have released ALL my fish, very quickly and only have three pictures over 20 years of fishing muskies. I have released 2 over 45 pounds and one was 57 inches. It's a personal decision, we need to push for higher size limits and better handling during the release. so those that are released do survive.Glad to hear so many are willing to do more, but a stamp is not the answer.Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnMickish Posted October 12, 2004 Share Posted October 12, 2004 I would be for it. Different states have all kinds of stamps. We already have a duck stamp, fur bearers stamp, trout, turkey, bear, small game, deer and everything else stamp. Pay for what you want to play with. If you don't want a turkey don't buy the stamp and support it. You want to catch Musky, buy the stamp. The fishing license is about the only "catch all" stamp we have. They don't have a generic hunting license that allows you shoot everything but you just about can with a fishing license.If, and I mean IF the money would be used for the the proliferation of the species then I am for it. But, on the other hand what would keep them from having a sunnie, crappie, walleye etc. stamp??My .02------------------It still beats workin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marine_1 Posted October 12, 2004 Share Posted October 12, 2004 A stamp would be a great idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giant_Jackpot Posted October 12, 2004 Share Posted October 12, 2004 Freak, good idea on the Muskies Inc. membership. I am a member but did not look at if from that angle.I also agree that a stamp is not the right way to go. How much extra can you charge for the stamp? Five dollars? Ten dollars? You have to remember that you are giving this money to a government organization so that means there will be some overhead associated with the administration of the stamp. How much would actually end up going to muskies? I don’t know, but I’ll bet it would not be much. And yes, other states have stamps for many things but does that mean the program is working? Again, I do not know the answer but if you are going to push that agenda you should provide some details on how the programs are working out.The 3/16 initiative seems to be a good middle ground on getting funding for all wildlife. Why focus your energy on one little area (the muskie stamp) when so many other things in this state need attention too? The extra money from the 3/16ths could help make Minnesota “THE” destination. Wouldn’t it be nice if all of the people from other states stopped here to do their hunting and fishing instead of passing through on the way to Canada? Think of the tax dollars they would bring in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainMusky Posted October 12, 2004 Author Share Posted October 12, 2004 Giant Jackpot-sure it would be great to have funding for wildlife taken right out of the sales tax dollars. My concern is where the 3/16 or 1/4 % goes. Which wildlife? I see muskies getting very little support going toward muskies with this. In a previous post these dollars could end up going toward Timberwolves or something. These are the reasons I would push for dollars ear-marked solely for muskies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big G Posted October 12, 2004 Share Posted October 12, 2004 I don't see how a stamp would work. There is no logic......A trout stamp, if I understand correctly is required to fish for trout. On designated trout streams, you can't fish for anything else, unless you have that stamp. So, with that said, on all musky waters, if you want to fish that water, you need a stamp.So, in a nut shell, all crappie, sunnie, bass, pike, walleye, perch guys have to buy a stamp to fish LOTW, Mille Lacs, French, Minnetonka, Forest, WhiteBear, Indy, Rush, Vermillion, Leech, Cass, etc, etc, etc.......I don't think that 95% of the fishing crowd is going to buy a stamp to fish their waters, because there are muskies there......I have another idea.........Let's put rainbow trout in Mille Lacs and make people who fish that water buy a trout stamp, just in case they catch one of those trout, because you have to have a stamp in order to fish designated trout waters........ORLet's have Minnetonka establish a BASS stamp, because it is listed as the top bass lake in the state. So, since it is a designated bass lake, with stamp required to fish for bass, you can't fish anything else, because you might catch a bass, then you have to pay a hefty fine to the dnr because you were fishing pike on a designated bass lake that requires a stamp......This is B as in B and S as in S.........It won't work.......If I come accross being sarcastic, no offense to anyone. Brainstorming like this helps make improvments to our fisheries.....But this idea won't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainMusky Posted October 13, 2004 Author Share Posted October 13, 2004 Big G, when you buy a pheasant stamp, can you only hunt designated pheasant areas and only shoot pheasants? So much for no logic? If you are applying the same logic as used for Trout stamps, NO, it doesn't make sense, but no one here made that assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big G Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 That is my point....If you're hunting, and you don't have a stamp and a pheasant pops up, you can't shoot. But you can shoot the rabbit.......in general hunting.....In general fishing....Prove that I'm not fishing for muskies if I don't have a stamp. I can throw big hair or wood for pike, but might hook a ski. Prove that I'm hunting for ski....Sure, buy one in good ethics and I'm all for it, but I don't see how you can enforce it........I also don't like the idea of having a stamp to keep a ski. As one other said, that is not what we are proposing/teaching for the growth and prosperity of the muskie.All I know is this........Trout stamps work. I don't know where the money goes......But it works..........Why, because the little creek I used to fish and trap minnows (nice rainbow chubs) close to my house is now a designated trout stream. I can't fish there anymore without a stamp and I can't trap the minnows there anymore.....Point is, I can still fish for muskies and catch muskies without a stamp and you can't prove that I'm fishing for muskies and I'm free as a bird. With a pheasant, you can hunt all you want, but until you pull the trigger on the bird, and you don't have a stamp, it becomes illegal.Like I said, it is good brainstorming and the thinking is in the right direction. I think though, that maybe better lobbying will get you further than stamps.Or, have a voluntary musky stamp purchase. I would assume that the majority of the ski hunters would buy a stamp, if the money goes in the right direction. It is just a manner of enforcing that I think would be very, very difficult. [This message has been edited by Big G (edited 10-13-2004).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giant_Jackpot Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 Here is some text from S. F. Bill Number 401 from the senate. This is all subject to change with the new session but it gives you an idea of what is in the bill. I don’t particularly like the arts section but that might be an area where we have to compromise.34 percent of the receipts shall be deposited in the heritage enhancement fund and may be spent only to improve, enhance, or protect the state's fish, wildlife, habitat, and fish and wildlife tourism; 22 percent of the receipts shall be deposited in the parks and trails fund and may be spent only on parks, trails, and zoos in the state; 22 percent of the receipts shall be deposited in the clean water fund and may be spent only on protection and restoration of the state's lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, and groundwater; and 22 percent of the receipts shall be deposited in the arts, humanities, museum, and public broadcasting fundI still think the pro stamp folks here are missing the overall picture. Why put your energies towards just one part of the wildlife picture? Let’s make it better overall. I should mention that I don’t do any hunting but I am all for the hunters getting their fair share of the much needed funding. ATV folks need help too for new designated trails. The list could go on and on.Who amongst you is going to call or send an e-mail to your legislator on either of these subjects (the stamp or the 3/16)? When the time comes, I will be all over them like I was last year to have them support the 3/16 initiative. The only way to get either done is to let them know how you feel. And don’t tell me you don’t have time to do it. If you have time to be posting on these boards, you have time to send off a quick e-mail to your legislator telling them how you feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Christianson Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 GJQuite simply.......I agree 1000%! Yes, one thousand percent.Great post. Lets use the momentum that the 3/16ths bill has gained over the last few years, and seal the deal.Everyone benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giant_Jackpot Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 Captain,We do agree! But if it is 1% now on a hypothetical $100 million per year, that means muskies get $1 million. If the yearly dollars went up to $200 million then the muskies get $2 million. I don’t know about you, but I like those numbers.As far as I know, the license fees would remain in place so no changes there. This is just additional money for wildlife in general.So I can count on you to send e-mails regarding the 3/16 initiative to your legislators when the time comes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainMusky Posted October 14, 2004 Author Share Posted October 14, 2004 GJ, I think it is great to enhance the future of wildlife, but what I am concerned with in a bill like this is there is nothing stating what percentages go toward the management of which species. They have leeway on deciding where the dollars go, I would doubt that much of it will end up going toward muskies. Even if it started out that way, it could be changed to divert funds to something else. I agree this will benefit wildlife as a whole in MN, but as far as giving hard dollars dedicated to muskies in this state, I don't see it happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giant_Jackpot Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Captain,If you can get me some hard data on how much of a $5.00 trout stamp actually goes towards the trout you might be able to change my mind. Remember I did say that I would have no problem buying a muskie stamp if it came to that. I just believe we should put our efforts to the overall picture.I look at it this way. Right now the muskies get a certain percentage of the DNR budget. If the DNR budget goes up, then so will the dollars that go to muskies. If you feel that muskies need more money then make your opinion known to the DNR. You can do this by sending correspondence to them directly or do it through an organization like Muskies Inc. Just stating your wishes out here on this forum is not going to make it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainMusky Posted October 14, 2004 Author Share Posted October 14, 2004 Jackpot, already done the things you mentioned. The response I got was that "there isn't enough interest in supporting it" or "we have no data to support the number of musky anglers in this state to get an idea of what type of funding it needs" or my favorite "the state of musky fishing is excellent in MN right now..." NOW, but who is to say it will remain that way.How about $4 of every $5 stamp goes toward muskies? I don't know what the administrative costs are for these things so I can't give you hard numbers any easier than you can give anyone hard numbers as to what percentage muskies will get out of the 3/16 bill. If the 3/16 bill passes I believe we will be in a better position than we are now.I don't think that the funding laid out in the 3/16 bill should be in lieu of fees from licenses. Hypothetically speaking, if 1% of every license sold goes to muskies I would see this staying the same with additional dollars coming from the 3/16 bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainMusky Posted October 14, 2004 Author Share Posted October 14, 2004 Jackpot, You bet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giant_Jackpot Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Sounds good. Now on to the lake.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Quicksteel Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Just a question....Why should a natural resources funding vehicle include 22% for museums, arts and above all, public broadcasting!!!??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts