Root Admin Phil Lilley Posted February 26, 2015 Root Admin Posted February 26, 2015 SB 56 is dead and by default HB710. These bills would have made permits free(56) or treated non resident landowners as residents(710). bs1827 1
Smallieguy87 Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 looking at the amount of money that would have been lost from removing fees i have no idea why the state would even consider it unless they just want MDC gone completely. Taking the permits away would have also cut any federal funding if im not mistaken?
SpoonDog Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 looking at the amount of money that would have been lost from removing fees i have no idea why the state would even consider it unless they just want MDC gone completely. Taking the permits away would have also cut any federal funding if im not mistaken? From what I understand federal funds for wildlife and sportfish projects are based on the number of permit sales- MDC would probably still get federal money for threatened and endangered species, but federal funds for fish and wildlife management projects probably would've gone out the window. Smallieguy87 1
Smallieguy87 Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 now i dont know the back ground behind these bills or what the motivation was for them but they honestly seemed like absolutely terrible ideas and i cant imagine that many sportsmen in the state would have supported or endorsed this. Does anyone have any information about how or why these even came up? Terrierman 1
Root Admin Phil Lilley Posted February 26, 2015 Author Root Admin Posted February 26, 2015 Jealousy over money and accountability, and I'm sure there's some personal grudges there too. They are mad about the deer/farm bill that was defeated. The flood of bills started coming after its defeat. ness 1
Root Admin Phil Lilley Posted February 26, 2015 Author Root Admin Posted February 26, 2015 That's what I gathered after talking to my state rep yesterday. He did say something about the land MDC buys - that land is taken off the tax roles I guess and the state loses taxes because of it.
Terrierman Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 That's what I gathered after talking to my state rep yesterday. He did say something about the land MDC buys - that land is taken off the tax roles I guess and the state loses taxes because of it. Pretty sure it's the Counties that lose the tax revenue when land goes into tax exempt hands. MDC would probably be well served to do something about that issue.
Chief Grey Bear Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 That's what I gathered after talking to my state rep yesterday. He did say something about the land MDC buys - that land is taken off the tax roles I guess and the state loses taxes because of it. The MDC makes a yearly payment to each county in lieu of taxes dependent upon the amount of acreage per. Terrierman 1 Chief Grey Bear Living is dangerous to your health Owner Ozark Fishing Expeditions Co-Owner, Chief Executive Product Development Team Jerm Werm Executive Pro Staff Team Agnew Executive Pro Staff Paul Dallas Productions Executive Pro Staff Team Heddon, River Division Chief Primary Consultant Missouri Smallmouth Alliance Executive Vice President Ronnie Moore Outdoors
ness Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 I'm not too surprised. First and foremost, the bills are just dumb and bad for Missouri. Plus there have been a growing number of editorials the last couple weeks that are making these guys sound pretty petty and uninformed. Here's one I saw today. John
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now