• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

GOAL Not Supporting Fish & Wildlife Fee Increases Until Serious Issues are Addressed

GOAL

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
492
Likes
938
Fish and wildlife.jpg

Recently, the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (DFW) has asked the sporting community to support a drastic increase in license fees. In their proposal, most license fees would double and stamps, such as waterfowl stamps, would quadruple. The rationale behind these enormous increases is that the DFW has not had any increases since 1996.

In the past, GOAL has supported modest increases to licensing fees, as the management of our resources sometimes requires such increases. We even supported the creation of the Wildlands Conservation Stamp to help safeguard the lands we hold so dear. However, this dramatic increase request comes at a rather troubling time. It is GOAL’s opinion that before we agree to any further fee increases some serious issues need to be addressed.

Some history. For nearly fifty years, Gun Owners’ Action League (GOAL) has been among the leading organizations that has been fighting to fund and protect the DFW from political influences. We often get questions from our own members as to why GOAL gets involved in wildlife management. The simple answer is this: it is your money.

Since the 1930’s, gun owners have been footing the majority of the bill for state level wildlife management through a federal program called the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (formerly the Pittman-Robertson Act). Through this program, gun owners pay a 10 – 11% excise tax at the manufacturer level on new guns, ammunition, and other items. Those funds are then distributed to the state level fish & wildlife agencies through a formula and then partially matched with money from the sale of licenses. Since the majority of DFW funding comes from gun owners, GOAL has always sought to make sure the money is spent only on professional wildlife management-and not political hackery.

So, in keeping with our historic guardianship of your money, before GOAL can support such drastic increases, we believe their needs to be much more discussion about the future of the agency and here are problems that need to be addressed:



  • The DFW’s recent foray into creating regulations in regard to coyote hunting was a purely political process, pushed by anti-hunters who would, if possible, put an outright ban on hunting altogether. This regulation and the process that spawned it, represented a sea change in how DFW operates where the voices of the sporting (the very people who fund the agency) were seemingly completely ignored.

  • For decades, our community has treated the DFW differently from the overall state bureaucracy. Historically, we were proud to fund and protect the agency, but recent events have shown that it may no longer be worthy of our protection. In fact, it may be to our community’s benefit to start treating the DFW like they are just part of the overall bureaucracy.

  • Although the gun owning and sporting communities have all but completely funded professional wildlife management in Massachusetts, we receive little, or no, respect or recognition for it. In the last few decades our communities have all but been ignored by the Legislature and the Governor’s office. In fact, these entities have actually become increasingly hostile to our overly generous people and priorities.

  • There is a national discussion taking place because the current system (The Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act) is beginning to fail. It is certainly not due to a lack of gun and ammunition sales-quite to the contrary. The problem is the declining sale of hunting licenses-especially in states like the Commonwealth, where gun owners and the sporting community face outright social bigotry from their own government. This being the case, why would we be so quick to agree to bail out a government the seems to hate us?

  • Specifically regarding the Legislature, the sporting community gets no respect and no recognition for the work and funding we provide. In the past, even our efforts to make simple changes in the law to allow for things like legalizing crossbows for general hunting purposes, are summarily shut down without regard for our countless hours of advocacy work.

  • During this COVID-19 period, we have also experienced our government targeting our industry, by specifically and intentionally shut down firearm retailers and access to mandatory training including hunter education. These deliberate attacks were not from a grateful government, but rather a hateful and spiteful one. Given this attitude toward us, why would we agree to feed the beast even more?
It is for these and other reasons why GOAL is recommending our community not support such dramatic license and fee increases until some of these issues are addressed.
 

Attachments

  • Fish and wildlife.jpg
    Fish and wildlife.jpg
    141.1 KB · Views: 6

deerdad

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
1,801
Likes
2,063
Location
Gill, MA
If they go and double the cost, it definitely will not be worth it here in MA. I'll take my chances and fish without a license. What little hunting I do will be done with something quiet and low profile. I would definitely spend the money in a different state.
 

EMTDAD

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
2,874
Likes
2,580
Location
North Attleboro, MA
yeah.. I do all my fishing at my club.. might get a fishing license if the club requires it.. otherwise no.. I don't hunt enough to make it worthwhile..

I see a lot of the old-timers, who make up most of the hunters, and may be on fixed incomes, dropping it, further screwing up the state's expectations of finances and wildlife management.

FYI.. if you didn't see the proposed increases.

so.. basically,.. if you want to fish and hunt all 3 (archery, shotgun, primative) as well as turkey hunt, it's gonna run you somewhere around $120/yr.
 

AHM

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
11,716
Likes
11,423
Be funny if some malcontents started broadcasting DFW sightings
on Marine VHF channel 22, a la marine mammals in the shipping lanes -
just another navigational hazard to be avoided.

SÉCURITÉ SÉCURITÉ SÉCURITÉ​
A Clam Cop has been seen harassing boaters in Cocktail Cove​
on the north shore of Great Misery Island.​
Use caution when exiting or entering Manchester Harbor.​
 

Asaltweapon

NES Member
Rating - 100%
54   0   0
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
17,204
Likes
11,287
Location
Northern Mass
Hunt/Fish out of state and kill the agencies funding.
I do and that makes MA costs look like a bargain.

Stop hunting and watch the animals suffer from starvation and car/truck hits, beaver dams polluting water supplies and private wells from people who can't tie into a public water supply. Sounds like a great plan!!

Lack of Sunday hunting also sucks.

Who will enforce bag limits? Everyone with a half an ounce of brain matter knows there is a group of people who never heard of a short fish. Rumor also has it that same group take care of the stray cats and dog population. Just sayin.
 

AHM

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
11,716
Likes
11,423
Push SCOTUS to strike down Pittman-Robertson
as an unconstitutional infringement on civil rights under the second amendment -
because its tax on non-hunting/self-defense goods fails strict scrutiny.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
4,334
Likes
3,686
Location
Merrimack Valley
IIRC saltwater is about $10 for a resident.

I'd support a 2x increase on that, $20 still seems reasonable.

Last I checked my deer tag was what, 95-100? If that's getting pushed to 200 I can pick up a non-resident tag for less just about anywhere else. Out of state typically you aren't on top of people because of the lack of huntable land, you don't have to deal with nimby's panicking, you can use a rifle for increased accuracy and less damaged meat, and well, honestly, aside from being in your back yard I can't think of a single good reason to hunt in MA.

I've tried it a few times, unless you're way out west or have a special private parcel it's really a pain in the ass.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
4,334
Likes
3,686
Location
Merrimack Valley
Who will enforce bag limits? Everyone with a half an ounce of brain matter knows there is a group of people who never heard of a short fish. Rumor also has it that same group take care of the stray cats and dog population. Just sayin.
These people piss me off. I love it when fish and game roll down the canal at night and tag like 20-30 guys with short and too many fish.
 

71montess

NES Member
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Messages
9,184
Likes
4,489
Location
south of Dedham
IIRC saltwater is about $10 for a resident.

I'd support a 2x increase on that, $20 still seems reasonable.

Last I checked my deer tag was what, 95-100? If that's getting pushed to 200 I can pick up a non-resident tag for less just about anywhere else. Out of state typically you aren't on top of people because of the lack of huntable land, you don't have to deal with nimby's panicking, you can use a rifle for increased accuracy and less damaged meat, and well, honestly, aside from being in your back yard I can't think of a single good reason to hunt in MA.

I've tried it a few times, unless you're way out west or have a special private parcel it's really a pain in the ass.
What the eff is the matter with you ? You would support a raise in fishing license costs ? Dont feed the Bears !
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
743
Likes
551
Location
South Carolina
If they go and double the cost, it definitely will not be worth it here in MA. I'll take my chances and fish without a license. What little hunting I do will be done with something quiet and low profile. I would definitely spend the money in a different state.

If you do the math, the fine if caught might be less than the license.

True story. My BIL got caught for having two untagged does hanging in his barn. He got a summons. The fine was $110. A resident doe tag cost fifty cents at the time and you could buy fifteen extras after the season opened as long as there were still tags available for that game zone! He was not happy about the fine.

Until I pointed out that he didn't lose his license. Or his shotgun. And he got to keep the deer. And I pointed out that if he had paid the full fifty cents for all the ones he hadn't tagged, he was probably still ahead. He was incorrigible.

License fee increases? What license fee increases?
 

groundscrapers

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
3,358
Likes
689
Location
413
Goal has a finite budget. Why are they squandering it on hunting fees issues when the overwhelming majority of gun owners here in the state don't hunt or fish. Pardon the pun but there are MUCH bigger fish to fry.
 

Asaltweapon

NES Member
Rating - 100%
54   0   0
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
17,204
Likes
11,287
Location
Northern Mass
Goal has a finite budget. Why are they squandering it on hunting fees issues when the overwhelming majority of gun owners here in the state don't hunt or fish. Pardon the pun but there are MUCH bigger fish to fry.
Because there are soooo many other organizations that look out for sportsmen and woman who are 100X more likely to own firearms than some tree hugger with a camera and a bird book?

I look at GOAL the same way I look at Sportsman's Alliance Of Maine. SAM is mostly sportsmen based that also does a lot for gun owners.
 

hv55maxx

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
2,494
Likes
792
Location
Northwest Assachusetts where the dragons be
I highlighted the benefits of hunting in VT for me while living 15mins away with hunting, bow, and muzzleloader licenses costing about what MA will cost. I can use a crossbow on a Sunday and take a doe, 3 things i cant do living in Zone 2 in MA. Dont think im not going to go that route if you make the cost of in state licensing the same.
 

Dennis in MA

NES Member
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
24,820
Likes
16,571
GOAL shouldn't be supporting an increase in fees regardless of the 'issues'

Neither should we support your boss for increasing your pay. ;)

C'mon. Costs ARE going to go up. Hasn't it been 15 or so years since the last increase??? To be perfectly honest, I'd like to have a few guys on key weekend days running a stake-out on the Canal for striper-stealers. Too many guys are just ignoring the catch limits. We went from good striper fishing to crappy because everyone overfished it. You aren't going for the "value" of fishing today. Today, that same 3-fish Charlie has a $200 rod and a $300 reel on top of about $50 of line and $30 lures. Tell me if he keeps 3 fish versus one his cost-per-fish is less than going to Fresh Catch.

It's important that we have this carve-out where our revenue pays the bills. Do we really want to see F&G go general-fund??? The point of having it based on lic. fees is that it gives us a theoretical say. And GOAL is taking advantage of that, which is great. (Although this is STILL mASS and they STILL don't listen as much as they should.)

Aside: Here's what I don't get. A 3-day non-res fishing lic is going to be $35. A SEASONAL non-res fishing license is. . . . $50. Seriously???? Unless I'm from EBF, Wisconsin and here for a 2-day conference, I'll spend the $15 more every time. Hell, Quabbin is only $5/day. So fishing ANYWHERE but Quabbin is more than 2x more expensive??? Maybe make the 3-day a bit more affordable. Making it a 30% discount off of a full lic is just stupid.


Here is how they won't get what they think, though: Hunting stamps are going from $20 to $40 each. I tend to get an archery and primitive stamp just in case. I have a BP gun. I don't own a bow, but I tend to order my lic in January so I just get it in case I end up deciding this is the year. I won't bother at $40. So instead of getting me for $50.20 usually, they'll get me for $75. But not for $105. So much for that working out. (As these changes often do. It isn't that people don't get lic's at all. It's that they cut down on the things they don't need. So the overall increase in revenue is significantly lower than they thought.)
 

jkelly1229

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Nov 16, 2014
Messages
8,089
Likes
5,683
Neither should we support your boss for increasing your pay. ;)

C'mon. Costs ARE going to go up. Hasn't it been 15 or so years since the last increase??? To be perfectly honest, I'd like to have a few guys on key weekend days running a stake-out on the Canal for striper-stealers. Too many guys are just ignoring the catch limits. We went from good striper fishing to crappy because everyone overfished it. You aren't going for the "value" of fishing today. Today, that same 3-fish Charlie has a $200 rod and a $300 reel on top of about $50 of line and $30 lures. Tell me if he keeps 3 fish versus one his cost-per-fish is less than going to Fresh Catch.

It's important that we have this carve-out where our revenue pays the bills. Do we really want to see F&G go general-fund??? The point of having it based on lic. fees is that it gives us a theoretical say. And GOAL is taking advantage of that, which is great. (Although this is STILL mASS and they STILL don't listen as much as they should.)

Aside: Here's what I don't get. A 3-day non-res fishing lic is going to be $35. A SEASONAL non-res fishing license is. . . . $50. Seriously???? Unless I'm from EBF, Wisconsin and here for a 2-day conference, I'll spend the $15 more every time. Hell, Quabbin is only $5/day. So fishing ANYWHERE but Quabbin is more than 2x more expensive??? Maybe make the 3-day a bit more affordable. Making it a 30% discount off of a full lic is just stupid.


Here is how they won't get what they think, though: Hunting stamps are going from $20 to $40 each. I tend to get an archery and primitive stamp just in case. I have a BP gun. I don't own a bow, but I tend to order my lic in January so I just get it in case I end up deciding this is the year. I won't bother at $40. So instead of getting me for $50.20 usually, they'll get me for $75. But not for $105. So much for that working out. (As these changes often do. It isn't that people don't get lic's at all. It's that they cut down on the things they don't need. So the overall increase in revenue is significantly lower than they thought.)
Umm 75>>>50.20 is it not?

So they are tagging you for more cash still
 

Path-Finder

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
736
Likes
1,179
I could see an increase in the fishing license. Mass actually has alot of good fishing opportunities. I could definitely get behind the increase for the saltwater if the money was increased surveillance of striper poachers as I've witnessed many googans keeping short fish. The hunting license though is not really worth it. There isn't enough public land until you get further west. The public land I hunt on around me is over hunted with little deer sign. I'd rather hunt in Maine.
 

pastera

NES Member
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
6,300
Likes
4,640
Location
Taunton
Neither should we support your boss for increasing your pay. ;)

C'mon. Costs ARE going to go up. Hasn't it been 15 or so years since the last increase??? To be perfectly honest, I'd like to have a few guys on key weekend days running a stake-out on the Canal for striper-stealers. Too many guys are just ignoring the catch limits. We went from good striper fishing to crappy because everyone overfished it. You aren't going for the "value" of fishing today. Today, that same 3-fish Charlie has a $200 rod and a $300 reel on top of about $50 of line and $30 lures. Tell me if he keeps 3 fish versus one his cost-per-fish is less than going to Fresh Catch.

It's important that we have this carve-out where our revenue pays the bills. Do we really want to see F&G go general-fund??? The point of having it based on lic. fees is that it gives us a theoretical say. And GOAL is taking advantage of that, which is great. (Although this is STILL mASS and they STILL don't listen as much as they should.)

Aside: Here's what I don't get. A 3-day non-res fishing lic is going to be $35. A SEASONAL non-res fishing license is. . . . $50. Seriously???? Unless I'm from EBF, Wisconsin and here for a 2-day conference, I'll spend the $15 more every time. Hell, Quabbin is only $5/day. So fishing ANYWHERE but Quabbin is more than 2x more expensive??? Maybe make the 3-day a bit more affordable. Making it a 30% discount off of a full lic is just stupid.


Here is how they won't get what they think, though: Hunting stamps are going from $20 to $40 each. I tend to get an archery and primitive stamp just in case. I have a BP gun. I don't own a bow, but I tend to order my lic in January so I just get it in case I end up deciding this is the year. I won't bother at $40. So instead of getting me for $50.20 usually, they'll get me for $75. But not for $105. So much for that working out. (As these changes often do. It isn't that people don't get lic's at all. It's that they cut down on the things they don't need. So the overall increase in revenue is significantly lower than they thought.)
No you shouldn't support my boss increasing my pay

Why not make the permits apply to all who use the resources maintained by the fees?
That and I was under the impression that Mass areadly moved the license fees into the general fund - if that is incorrect AND there is a good business reason for increasing the fees then i have no issue with it (how about allowing Sunday hunting AND offer that as an add on where only persons with a sunday permit are allowed on land purchased with fees).
 

Masswhole

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
1,107
Likes
2,948
Location
north shore
I do and that makes MA costs look like a bargain.

Stop hunting and watch the animals suffer from starvation and car/truck hits, beaver dams polluting water supplies and private wells from people who can't tie into a public water supply. Sounds like a great plan!!

Lack of Sunday hunting also sucks.

Who will enforce bag limits? Everyone with a half an ounce of brain matter knows there is a group of people who never heard of a short fish. Rumor also has it that same group take care of the stray cats and dog population. Just sayin.

I understand all that.

The Dept’s not going to disappear if license #’s drop but it will get their attention and perhaps cause them to reassess their punitive fees.

With the exception of firearms, purely to support shops fighting the good fight, I avoid paying sales tax in MA like a religion. I don’t like how they spend it so f em.
 

whalerman69

NES Member
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
1,830
Likes
1,763
Neither should we support your boss for increasing your pay. ;)

C'mon. Costs ARE going to go up. Hasn't it been 15 or so years since the last increase??? To be perfectly honest, I'd like to have a few guys on key weekend days running a stake-out on the Canal for striper-stealers. Too many guys are just ignoring the catch limits. We went from good striper fishing to crappy because everyone overfished it. You aren't going for the "value" of fishing today. Today, that same 3-fish Charlie has a $200 rod and a $300 reel on top of about $50 of line and $30 lures. Tell me if he keeps 3 fish versus one his cost-per-fish is less than going to Fresh Catch.

It's important that we have this carve-out where our revenue pays the bills. Do we really want to see F&G go general-fund??? The point of having it based on lic. fees is that it gives us a theoretical say. And GOAL is taking advantage of that, which is great. (Although this is STILL mASS and they STILL don't listen as much as they should.)

Aside: Here's what I don't get. A 3-day non-res fishing lic is going to be $35. A SEASONAL non-res fishing license is. . . . $50. Seriously???? Unless I'm from EBF, Wisconsin and here for a 2-day conference, I'll spend the $15 more every time. Hell, Quabbin is only $5/day. So fishing ANYWHERE but Quabbin is more than 2x more expensive??? Maybe make the 3-day a bit more affordable. Making it a 30% discount off of a full lic is just stupid.


Here is how they won't get what they think, though: Hunting stamps are going from $20 to $40 each. I tend to get an archery and primitive stamp just in case. I have a BP gun. I don't own a bow, but I tend to order my lic in January so I just get it in case I end up deciding this is the year. I won't bother at $40. So instead of getting me for $50.20 usually, they'll get me for $75. But not for $105. So much for that working out. (As these changes often do. It isn't that people don't get lic's at all. It's that they cut down on the things they don't need. So the overall increase in revenue is significantly lower than they thought.)
Sorry but it is not the guy's fishing the canal with rod and reel depleting a species. Think commercial nets/volume/$$$. I used to try and explain that to the boy scout herring counter in Middleboro when they dropped the limit to 36 fish. They were busting my balls for taking a couple dozen fish while the purse seiners off shore were taking in metric TONS of herring not to mention bycatch. Same thing with the pogie. Ya ain't gonna do it with a rod and reel cause then you throw in the stat that 30% of the fisherman catch 70% of the fish. I made those % numbers up but I think you can see where I was going . :)
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom