WDFW Proposed pricing for 2011

[winshooter88]

I see the same thing with the big increase on the second deer tag, however why is there no increase for the second elk tag.. my guess is that the master hunter user groups that get these tags have been speaking up. If deer goes up so should elk with no favortisum to other user groups.

wa.hunter, If you look at the spreadsheet linked to on the first post you will see that second elk tags have the same price increase as second deer tags.

Dave

[villageidiot]

I still say,  get rid of all the Ologists.   WDFW has so many Biologists doing every study known to man that is unproductive to wildlife conservation.  Some of these studies have been ongoing for years and we haven't seen any results except people employed.  Why do they keep funding the cougar collaring study?   We know all about cougars, when we have too many they start killing livestock and pets and they up the quota for next year.  The tidbit of info. they are gaining is great for National Geographic but what good is it for wildlife cons.?  It appears now that the cougar collaring teams have been given top priority and if they are in the area the hunters have to leave the area.  You can be ticketed if you chase a cougar they want to chase and collar.  Time to start passing out pink slips to Ologists and save a fortune.   

[Smokepole]

   No, not the dreaded pink slips.  Heaven forbid!   

[Special T]

Smokepole as a fellow business man I take umbrage  with the fact  you say "If you must generate funds, let developers pay some of the cost of habitat management." This is the same kind of let the other guy pay the cost mentality... Some pink slips that are non game related sound better to me.. Let us not forget that as a user group if we want to fight at the trough like swine then we need to be better organized... If we want to pay our own way, and demand better management, we need to be willing to foot the bill.   IF they made a good argument for what they were doing and why i'd pay DOUBLE what i do now... But they seem more interested in treating us like mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed BS!

[Smokepole]

Smokepole as a fellow business man I take umbrage  with the fact  you say "If you must generate funds, let developers pay some of the cost of habitat management." This is the same kind of let the other guy pay the cost mentality... Some pink slips that are non game related sound better to me.. Let us not forget that as a user group if we want to fight at the trough like swine then we need to be better organized... If we want to pay our own way, and demand better management, we need to be willing to foot the bill.   IF they made a good argument for what they were doing and why I'd pay DOUBLE what i do now... But they seem more interested in treating us like mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed BS!

In all due respect, Special T., allow me to clarify.  I believe the WDFW should focus on resources, not user groups.  I'm afraid instead of managing wildlife, they are managing people, which isn't their mission.  The reason I mention developers...  I have hunted Okanogan mule deer for 40 years.  I've seen how developing roads, fences, barns & houses has changed that county; how the winter range has been swallowed up, and the migration routes interupted.  You can't convince me that my user group is to blame & should foot the bill for everything wildlife related, when we are not the ones screwing it up.  As good stewards, we should all be responsible for our fair share.  My point is, if this state wants to meet their wildlife goals, then they need to recognize the root of our problems.  Money won't fix them.

I call it auctioning off hunting privileges to wealthy head hunters.  Others can call it what they want.  Times are tough right now, since we're raising a family & my wife lost her job.  Some venison would sure help.  If money wasn't so tight, maybe I would pay double like you.  But right now, I can't.  It's hard enough just to scrape up a few bucks to take my kid hunting.

So I hope you won't chalk my ideas up to some uneducated, pass-the-buck "mentality".  I'm just telling you how things look from my perspective.  I know when I need to cough up my fair share.  But I also notice when I'm being mistreated.  The best advice I've heard so far are the pink slips.  Everyone else is getting them, why should bureaucrats be immune?   
     

[Special T]

I think you and i don't disagree too much smokepole... Our tax system in this state is a fee/use based system, not an income tax system... Any activity we partake in should be covered by the groups that use the resource... When it does not it allows politicians to work one group against the other... Making you and me pay for someone else activities that we neither participate in or agree with. 
    When you and I need more money we need to provide product and/or service to get there. We are in the business of solving peoples needs and fixing their problems... I know for a fact that you provide an excellent service... All I  am saying is that IF the WDFW were to get their  together I would be willing to pay more for the Excellence in managing our hunting resources... (I currently feel their excellence is lacking and have reduced my purchase of their sub par services.  )
    My reaction to the "Developer" statement is because I have had land that I had to pay all kinds of BS fees to use... If government wishes to control my land they should purchase it from me, not regulate me from using it.  There are things that the WDFW could do that would not cost them too much to do increase Value, and thus revenue... They either lack the will or the ability to do them.
   We are certainly  being mistreated, and someone who knows nothing about  2nd deer tags came up with the huge increase in price.    I don't know about you, but i know when i jack up the price I usually get less takers...

[Smokepole]

I agree with everything you're saying Special T, even though my ramblings might be a bit different.  Running the wdfw is a complex job.  You hit the nail on the head... there needs to be ability and conviction at the top.  That would get things done.  I just think 162% in one year is irresponsible.

Another vote for pink slips.