Be Heard On Regulation Changes

[BredMan]

My 2-cents worth ----

I would suggest that some people should look at other state conservation programs and see how poorly they are operated and funded. Has anyone put much thought into why we have so many "out of state" hunters and fishermen?

Maybe loosing the hunting for "free" hurts a few people but I am darn glad to pay a small fee to hunt and fish each year. And to those that threaten to move out of state because of this, you got to be kidding, go ahead and move, I hope you find a better place!!

How on earth could a measly few dollar cause such a stir. As for the land owner requirements, maybe the 80+ acres is a bit too high. That's a good debate to present, but I have a neighbor that owns 80 acres and handicapped as well and each year he gets a string for "free" deer tags you could wallpaper your bedroom with. He's even surprised by it all.

Increase is less than one beer at a cheap bar. Why all the crying!

[jdmidwest]

Last year I felt screwed as a landowner, I only got one tag for an "any deer". In the past, we got at least one bonus and I used it during the Muzzleloader part. I complained along with other landowners to the MDC and this year when my tags printed, I got both the Antlerless and the Any Deer tags. Last year it would have cost me an extra $7, which was BS because we take deer to control the population for the most part. Last year, acorn crop was nil, there was a drought, and the deer were in the pastures eating up grass we use for the horses. Hay was scarce due to a late frost and we really could not tolerate any "crop damage". One field we counted 30+ deer in a 30 acre patch and they were keeping the grass pretty thin. We own 235 acres, so the new law will not affect me or my dad. On a normal year we harvest 5-10 deer off our property depending on who we let hunt it. I harvested a 120 class buck and the others ended up with 5 slick heads. Had we received the free bonus tags, 5 more could have been thinned out. I believe that the winter and other factors may have done some herd thinning this year because the deer signs have not been as thick.

[bigredbirdfan]

You can alway count on Chief who has never seen a government program or decision he didn't like. Now I can add Tadman. You guys win. I am sure you are in the majority on this. Landowners should have it stuck to them just like the rich.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Bigbird - why don't you grow up and quit crying?

[bigredbirdfan]

Bigbird - why don't you grow up and quit crying?

It's BigRedBirdFan or BRBF. Not bigbird and I know what your intentions are. I've got to hand to you to you and Tadman. Your personal attacks and not substance have won me over. I think this is the best darn proposal since reintroduction of the river otters.

http://www.takebackthemdc.com/start.html

[Al Agnew]

Okay...a visit to the MDC annual report for 2006-2007, budget for fiscal year 2007:

Total receipts: $171,676,000

Permit sales: $30,953,000

Federal reimbursements: $23,211,000

Sales tax: $103,333,000

Sales and rentals: $8,948,000

Other sources: $3,965,000

Interest: $1,267,000

So...60% of the total MDC budget comes from the sales tax. Which obviously tells you that if the sales tax was repealed, MDC would either have to cut their entire budget by that amount and dump a lot of their land, or else raise permit fees VERY substantially to make up even a small part of the shortfall. Keep in mind that MDC gets zero money from the state legislature, unlike most other state fish and wildlife agencies. Permit costs are held down in MO because of the sales tax. In most other states they are held down because the agency gets money from the legislature (which of course comes from taxes).

Expenditures, 2007:

County assistance payments 0.85% (this is payments in lieu of taxes and road construction cost sharing)

Capital improvements 13.86% (this includes both land acquisition and infrastructure improvements, and totaled a bit under $23 million)

Fisheries 7.23% (this is actual management of MDC lakes and river management areas)

Forestry 9.35% (includes management of forest lands, tree seedlings to landowners, aid in development of state's timber industry, etc.)

Wildlife 9.76% (wildlife management of public land, natural areas, etc.)

Outreach and education 9.34% (includes the Conservationist magazine, website, educational materials to schools, books and videos, etc.)

Private land services 5.33% (includes cost sharing with landowners developing wildlife management and resource plans, direct consultation and assistance to landowners, controlling nuisance wildlife)

Protection 8.61% (includes everything having to do with agents, including hunter education programs and share the harvest programs)

Resource science 7.33% (this basically includes everything the biologists do)

Regional public contact offices 2.00% (basic running of regional offices)

Administrative services and human resources 17.39% (this paid for the permit point of sale system, along with all the vehicles and equipment owned by MDC, etc.)

Design and development 7.40% (engineering, achitectural, surveying, and construction design)

Administration 1.5%

You'd have to go into a lot more detail in order to figure out exactly how much went to things like salaries. However, nothing really jumps out at me as being questionable about the percentages. One thing to note--the capital improvements figure equals a total of $22,855,000, and that includes not only land acquisition but developing infrastructure on the lands owned. I don't see that as "buying up all the land in the state" exactly.

A few other tidbits...the total number of landowners obtaining deer and turkey permits is probably about right at 75,000.

Fifteen counties have more than 10,000 acres of MDC land--nearly all of them in the deep Ozarks of southeast MO (Current River area), but also St. Louis and St. Charles County. Carter County is the leader with over 24,000 acres. Another 35 counties or so have between 5000 and 10,000 acres. Does that sound like MDC owns a lot of land percentage-wise? I don't think so.

[jjtroutbum]

I don't think I have ever read a thread with less substance and more attacks buy such a new member on this board. Think I may go delete his welcome from me to the board. Since his manners are so lacking

[Trevor K]

Dr. Lonnie Hansen, the state deer biologist for the MDC, actually came in to my wildlife management class a week or two ago. He said that Missouri's deer population is at a comfortable level right now. Twenty years down the road we may have a problem. But even then, the problem isn't with reaching carrying capacity. The problem is with the number of deer that farmers and general public will accept. I think there would have to be some kind of disaster before we'd see starving deer. He said that the MDC actually basis most of it's deer hunting restrictions on public attitude, not carrying capacity.

[tadman]

I don't think I have ever read a thread with less substance and more attacks buy such a new member on this board. Think I may go delete his welcome from me to the board. Since his manners are so lacking

Ya know there kido, yer right. I have been a tad hard on the little feller. I mean he as been here a whole 7 months longer than me and he doesn't mind sharing all of years of outdoor experience, knowlege, and wisdom. Being the "ancient one", I should of known better than to blind side him with common sense and actual time in the field. I guess I should spent more time at that fancy math school he went to.

Just how long does one have to be a member of this board before he can call it like he see's it? It must be 7 months? Well there again, from the many post I have read by him it must be shorter time than that? Or does it depend on what side yer on?

[Phil Lilley]

Gotta jump in here.

I'm not going to micromanage this forum BUT the rules clearly state that members are to respect each other. Unfortunately, I see more and more rude and personal comments by the same people, old and new alike. Some are clearly instigators and others react.

I think there's been some good points brought up in this thread, good ideas for the most part. But I would suggest do the research, give references to what you're saying and quit the personal stuff.