What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Thank a hunter and an angler today

  • Thread starter rattler
  • Start date
"Approximately 50 percent of the revenues that fund the activities of the state fish and wildlife management agencies are generated from hunter’s license fees."

"During the year 2000, 15.1 million licensed hunters generated more than $580 million for state and wildlife agencies. When combined with the license fees from our friends the anglers, this total exceeded $1 billion."

"Since the time of the federal duck stamp passage, hunters have provided well over $500 million to protect and purchase wetlands. As of the year 2000, more than 1.7 million stamps have been sold totaling nearly $25 million in revenue."

"In addition to the above fees, the fifty years of the Pitman Robertson Act (to provide funding for the selection, restoration, rehabilitation, and improvement of wildlife habitat, while it supports wildlife management research and distributes information produced by the projects) has produced in excess of $2 billion in federal excise taxes that have been matched by more than $500 million in state funds (chiefly in hunting license fees) for the sake of wildlife restoration."

"Given the above facts, there is no question about the commitment of hunters to conservation. All told, we reach into our pockets and provide almost 75 percent of the annual revenues for state fish and game agencies along with our friends the anglers."
 
That's a very true thing. Some people don't ever realize it, and it's easy to loose sight of: even though hunters kill wildlife, they are among the people who wish to protect nature the most. Predators are a part of nature, and while some hunters may be detatched from any shred of true bond to nature, they still want to protect the lands, even if for reasons not extending beyond their own selves. Thanks for posting this, rattler, good food for thought.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (rattler_mt @ Oct. 01 2005,2:59)]"Given the above facts, there is no question about the commitment of hunters to conservation. "
I'm sure that conservation is the first thing that hunters and anglers think of when they purchase or renew there licenses.
smile_l_32.gif


I doubt that the greater majority would care where their money goes so long as they get the chance to catch their fish or shoot their "whatever they feel like".

Having said that, I have no idea or comprehension about what the Federal duck stamp passage is or how it works. Just thought I'd take the opportunity to be cynical, right or wrong.....
 
Sean. it was hunters who brought the pronghorn back from near extinction in the 1920's and '30's. it is because of hunters that the whitetail deer has the highest population its probably ever had in its history, including before humans settled North America. its huners that are spending the hundreds of thousands of dollars to protect bighorn sheep and their habitat though PETA and other organizations routinely get in our way. here in a poor reservation town, last years Ducks Unlimited Dinner raised several thousand dollars. it hits the $100,000 plus mark in bigger areas. remember hunting licences were originally started by hunters, not the government. hunters recognized the declining populations and hunters were the ones who stepped up to the plate and took it appon themselves to regulate themselves.

Sean yes there are idiots purchasing hunting licences who could care less about anything but the horns on top of a critters head but most of us are good ppl who will open up their wallets and break out the checkbook faster than anyone to keep our tradition going. there are ppl spending $30,000 on a sheep hunt, $10,000 of which can be a tag they purchased at auction, if they wer just interested in shooting a sheep with big horns they could do it at a fraction of the cost and never leave a cumffy pickup seat(though i do hate the practice). instead they shell out $20,000 plus to ride horse and hike above the tree line, spending days in some of the most beautiful and roughest country on earth. yeah they are just out to wack the critter for something to mount on the wall...........................
 
I agree that the money is good for the conservation effort, but in the end, "they are just out to wack the critter for something to mount on the wall..........................." and some people will shell out big bucks to do it. Think of the hunters who used to travel to other continents to hunt - big $ spent for a trophy. I think some people just want to live the big game hunter fantasy. This is not an attack on you or your motives for hunting - but I don't think the vast majority of hunters are concerned about wildlife conservation or habitat protection except where it pertains to where or what they hunt.
 
Things are better now, but fish and wildlife agencies were 100% committed to fishing and hunting for a long time, to the detriment of species displaced by stocking or whose habitats were modified to increase the population of things to shoot or catch.

As far as I know, all the state and federal agencies now have non-game species programs.  But those are a table scrap to toss to the suburbanites who don't hunt or fish.  If they don't get fed, neither will your agency.
 
the only stocking programs in Montana are for fish as far as i know. most of this is in the eastern half of the state where native species are not loosing a foot hold. i catch just as many native sauger as introduced walleye and they have the same basic niche. in the western half of the state, introduced species are being taken out in areas so that the native cutthroat trout can be reintroduced without there being competition. the local Walleyes Unlimited is really big on heping save the pallaid sturgeon, a species with no real sporting or economic value.

the Ducks Unlimited have purchased and preserved more acres of wetland than probably any other operation.

PETA and other organizations refuse to allow the shooting of introduced wild horses and burros which are destroying habitat and are the #1 threat to desert bighorns, along with desert whitetail mule deer and a whole host of lesser species.(by lesser i mean micro species like kangaroo rats, burrowing owls ect versus the macro species like deer, bighorns ect)

say what you may about hunters and anglers but they as a group will openup their wallet faster than most to help out the cause of protecting animals both game and non game alon with protecting their habitat
 
While I'm not in the position to deny that most hunters/anglers are definitely interested in conservation(and for the ones I met they seemed to mostly be enjoying just being out in the wilderness). Some of the stuff with fishers is a bit odd. For one thing Largemouth bass, bluegill, pumpkinseeds, crappie, etc. etc. etc. are not native to CA and yet are regularly stocked into suitable places(usually "artificial" lakes)and fished for. Seems a bit odd from the conservation point of view
 
rattler_mt, I agee with you 100% I'm an avid fisherman and I believe without fisherman and hunters some of the lakes and forests would be long gone due to pollution and and other activities.
 
  • #10
I used to fish...but quit because the thought of tearing up their mouths with a hook, even a barbless one, bothered me.  Even though I was a catch and release person.  I felt I was subjecting animals to pain for my own entertainment, and I felt, for ME, that it was wrong.  

I have absolutely nothing against hunting or fishing. I just couldn't pull the trigger. These sportsmen provide a valuable service.  And  their license fees go towards conservation. I wish environmentalists and hunters/fishers would form some sort of compact...we all want the same outcome, and together could be an un-beatable force for habitat protection. I don't care if the guy pulling the trigger on the deer is thinking about conservation...the death of that one deer might help the rampant over-grazing of the forest that goes on in my area.

By the way, folks...the house of representatives voted to gut the endangered species act. Write your senators and tell them that this is stupid and heinous.

PETA is very extreme, and make an excellent foil for the rest of us. They are VERY useful, they make the rest of us look reasonable. They got McDonalds to change the way their "product" is treated while it's still alive. Tyson's, too. Ever seen the video where Tyson's workers are stomping chickens to death, throwing them against walls, etc.?  PETA made that video, and Tyson got fined half to death. Yay for PETA.

The department of homeland security has now made filming in animal processing plants "an act of terrorism." Hmmmmmmm......

The senate recently passed a law barring the slaughter of horses for food. The meat is shipped to Europe, where it is regarded as a delicacy. I think it was a stupid move...now where are all these unwanted horses going to end up?  Horses have been used as food since the dawn of man-kind. There are even a couple of breeds, the Breton being one of them, that were specifically bred for human consumption.

"Wild" horses don't belong on this continent at all. Neither do sheep and cattle. They aren't native, and they cause massive destruction to the western range. I've no problem with the culling of wild horses.  I wish, at the same time, they'd cull cattle and sheep. I'm thinking that cattle and sheep cause the most damage, just because of the way they graze, and because there are more of them, and most ranchers don't practice sustainable grazing programs. Some do...and the native wildlife/plants flourish on their ranches. And their cattle and sheep are fat and sassy. And they make money.  

JMO.
 
  • #11
Most anglers won't care if a stream is too fouled to support a wild trout population if it's stocked with something they can catch.  Otherwise anglers might be screaming about trout disappearing from streams that are too warm or too silted up because of clearing, paving, development, or any number of other things.  They're pacified by pale hatchery trout and think "environmentalists" are wackos for wanting to preserve watersheds and restrict roadbuilding and so on.  Trout Unlimited is an exception, but it's too elitist for most people.

I quit fishing a few years ago after being an avid fisherman most of my life.  With the last many years being catch-and-release.  But my thinking has changed like April's and now catch-and-release seems twisted.  Big animal torments small animal for entertainment, then lets it go.  Then torments another.  For even more entertainment, stick the hook in a dog treat and cast it towards the closest puppy.  Bet that thing will jump.  But be sure to release it after you reel it in.

I don't see anything wrong with fishing or hunting for dinner but it isn't something I do because I'm a vegetarian 364 days every year.  Just about everyone in our dog club hunts and most fish.  My wife has trained our dogs for field work too and it's really awesome to follow a pointing dog through a field that has quail and pheasants.

Unfortunately, most if not all of the birds the dogs find around here are stocked because there are so many hunters and so little undeveloped open land.  And most of those hunters think environmentalists who want to restrict land development are commies.  As long as the state wildlife program gives them some state land with birds for them to shoot.  Otherwise maybe they'd rise up on their hind legs and clamor for an end to sprawling suburbia.
 
  • #12
Herenorthere...unfortunately,you are right. It's really sad. That's my favourite one..."environmentalists are commies" LOL! LOL!
 
  • #13
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Having said that, I have no idea or comprehension about what the Federal duck stamp passage is or how it works.
Since 1987, all ducks - wild or in cultivation - in the USA are required to get a quality assurance stamp on their bellies within three days of hatching.

Any ducks caught without this stamp may be immediately neutralized without further warning.

<ducking>
 
  • #14
about the only fish i care to eat are walleye, sauger and salmon so thats all i fish for. hunting i shoot does just as often as bucks. horns are nice but roasts, tenderloins and jerky is better. as far as fishing in Montana there is tons of support to rid lots of the rivers in the mountains of introduced specied so that they can be restocked with native cutthroat trout. here in the east though, about the only species seeing a threatened or worse status is the pallaid sturgeon and they are getting lots of help even if it isnt a game fish.

364 days a year Bruce? wanna make it 363? i think its the last saturday in January every year the Regina Downtowners Optimist Club in Regina, Saskatchewan have a wild game dinner, Darla and I pay $40 a ticket AND travel 3 hours, usually in a snow storm AND deal with crossing the border to go to it, in the last 3 years the only reason we missed it is cause they roads were blocked with 8-9 foot drifts of snow. a friend of ours is the head cook for it and boy is it worth the trip and the hassel of getting up there. he is that good of a cook.
 
Back
Top