Post by: bigtex on March 04, 2014, 11:35:38 AM
Duck Stamp Legislative Proposal – The budget includes a legislative proposal to increase the cost of a Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp to $25.00 per year, beginning in 2015, from its current cost of $15.00. With the additional receipts, the Department anticipates acquisition of approximately 7,000 additional acres in fee simple and approximately 10,000 additional conservation easement acres in 2015 to benefit waterfowl habitat. The legislation also proposes the price of a Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp may be increased after 2015 by the Secretary with approval of the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 04, 2014, 11:46:13 AM
Post by: bigtex on March 04, 2014, 11:49:06 AM
I don't have a problem with the stamp increasing once by about 65%, but I do have a problem with the responsibility of future increases going to the secretary of the interior without congressional oversight. When that happens, we'll have a $50 duck stamp within 5 years and the funds will be spread around the Department of Interior, not earmarked for wetlands conservation.Well in order for the duck stamp funds to be appropriated elsewhere it would require congressional legislative changes. But I agree, I would rather see congress responsible for the fee of the stamp then the department.
Post by: Gringo31 on March 04, 2014, 11:53:33 AM
I don't think I will be in favor of any fee increases. Had it with all gov't asking/charging more and more money when I don't think they really care or "get it". :twocents:
Post by: vandeman17 on March 04, 2014, 11:54:57 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 04, 2014, 11:57:11 AM
:yeah: But do we KNOW that? For now maybeI don't have a problem with the stamp increasing once by about 65%, but I do have a problem with the responsibility of future increases going to the secretary of the interior without congressional oversight. When that happens, we'll have a $50 duck stamp within 5 years and the funds will be spread around the Department of Interior, not earmarked for wetlands conservation.Well in order for the duck stamp funds to be appropriated elsewhere it would require congressional legislative changes. But I agree, I would rather see congress responsible for the fee of the stamp then the department.
Post by: Bob33 on March 04, 2014, 11:57:28 AM
Post by: bigtex on March 04, 2014, 11:58:38 AM
I have never liked the duck stamp. Not only do we need a small game license plus migratory bird validation, then we need a stamp on top of it.The reason for the stamp is waterfowl is a federally managed species. That stamp is essentially your federal duck hunting license. Since waterfowl are federally managed, any violation of waterfowl laws is not only a state violation but also a federal violation.
Post by: bigtex on March 04, 2014, 12:00:30 PM
Yes we KNOW that. It is under the US Code (federal law) that the funds from the stamp must go towards conservation. The only ones that can change the USC is Congress. USFWS could want a change all they want, but until Congress changes that law the funds can only go to conservation.:yeah: But do we KNOW that? For now maybeI don't have a problem with the stamp increasing once by about 65%, but I do have a problem with the responsibility of future increases going to the secretary of the interior without congressional oversight. When that happens, we'll have a $50 duck stamp within 5 years and the funds will be spread around the Department of Interior, not earmarked for wetlands conservation.Well in order for the duck stamp funds to be appropriated elsewhere it would require congressional legislative changes. But I agree, I would rather see congress responsible for the fee of the stamp then the department.
Post by: vandeman17 on March 04, 2014, 12:07:57 PM
I have never liked the duck stamp. Not only do we need a small game license plus migratory bird validation, then we need a stamp on top of it.The reason for the stamp is waterfowl is a federally managed species. That stamp is essentially your federal duck hunting license. Since waterfowl are federally managed, any violation of waterfowl laws is not only a state violation but also a federal violation.
I understand that but I just think that for the state to require two licenses then a federal validation is excessive. If a guy wants to go out and just hunt ducks in wa, you are looking at $40 for small game, $17 for migratory bird and then $15 or whatever for the duck stamp. $72 to hunt ducks for a resident seems pretty ridiculous and now they want to add $10 more to it. Turning more and more into a rich man's sport every year
Post by: deltaops on March 04, 2014, 12:47:00 PM
Guess I will not be duck hunting next season. :dunno:
We buy these stamps and don not mind the price raise, next year it goes up again. When will enough be enough?
Stop buying the stamps and licenses. Since we all know that will never happen, guess if we want to keep hunting, we will just have to continue to pay the high prices and gripe about it. :chuckle:
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 04, 2014, 01:00:04 PM
Yes we KNOW that. It is under the US Code (federal law) that the funds from the stamp must go towards conservation. The only ones that can change the USC is Congress. USFWS could want a change all they want, but until Congress changes that law the funds can only go to conservation.:yeah: But do we KNOW that? For now maybeI don't have a problem with the stamp increasing once by about 65%, but I do have a problem with the responsibility of future increases going to the secretary of the interior without congressional oversight. When that happens, we'll have a $50 duck stamp within 5 years and the funds will be spread around the Department of Interior, not earmarked for wetlands conservation.Well in order for the duck stamp funds to be appropriated elsewhere it would require congressional legislative changes. But I agree, I would rather see congress responsible for the fee of the stamp then the department.
In the case of the waterfowl stamp, does it say that the conservation has to specifically be waterfowl, or might it be diverted to others, like for example, canus lupis conservation?
Post by: Special T on March 04, 2014, 02:36:59 PM
Post by: bigtex on March 04, 2014, 06:41:04 PM
MUST be waterfowlIn the case of the waterfowl stamp, does it say that the conservation has to specifically be waterfowl, or might it be diverted to others, like for example, canus lupis conservation?Yes we KNOW that. It is under the US Code (federal law) that the funds from the stamp must go towards conservation. The only ones that can change the USC is Congress. USFWS could want a change all they want, but until Congress changes that law the funds can only go to conservation.:yeah: But do we KNOW that? For now maybeI don't have a problem with the stamp increasing once by about 65%, but I do have a problem with the responsibility of future increases going to the secretary of the interior without congressional oversight. When that happens, we'll have a $50 duck stamp within 5 years and the funds will be spread around the Department of Interior, not earmarked for wetlands conservation.Well in order for the duck stamp funds to be appropriated elsewhere it would require congressional legislative changes. But I agree, I would rather see congress responsible for the fee of the stamp then the department.
Post by: fireweed on March 04, 2014, 07:50:43 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on March 04, 2014, 08:00:20 PM
Find a way to charge the bird watchers.
I don't think I will be in favor of any fee increases. Had it with all gov't asking/charging more and more money when I don't think they really care or "get it". :twocents:
No kidding. How about a bird watching license with a big fat increase?