[Tweeters] Interesting conversation with a Game Warden

Tom Talbott tom.talbott at gmail.com
Thu Nov 14 17:34:40 PST 2013


There is no question that the "consumptive" users are better targeted and
have more incentive to pay. It is all in one place (you go to buy your
tags, passes, licenses at Walmart) and in totality they are avoiding being
charged with poaching. That is a bit more daunting than a parking ticket.
Buying a duck stamp is required for hunters. For anyone else, it is left up
to charity.

It is all built into the system for hunters. They aren't being magnanimous
for paying these fees, they are specifically targeted and for good reason.

The misconception is that there are "non-consumptive" users. Everyone
makes an impact and the original post points that out. But the system
doesn't recognize it. So, instead, we resort to trying to guilt people into
paying? That is not a good strategy either.

The first step was to get people to start thinking in terms of paying for
use. Before the Discover Pass, many places were free to use. Convincing
people that the money is actually needed is hard given the past, but not
impossible. It's definitely not going to happen though charity, though.

The system needs to adapt.

But for now, since the hunters are forced to pay out more money, they
pretty much feel like they rule the roost and those "non-consumptives" are
merely tolerated at best.

Tom


On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Hal Michael <ucd880 at comcast.net> wrote:


> It will be interesting to see what happens. The Discover Pass, as i

> understand it, has not generated anywhere near the revenue needed to keep

> the Parks open and maintain them.

>

>

>

> The trend in Government is for user fees. State tax money has been really

> cut back at Parks and WDFW. Without the consumptive users and their fees

> and taxes thereo would not be a WDFW, and probably not many F&W agencies in

> the US. Eliminate the consumptive users/uses and the burden will fall to

> the general public. Or, the non-consumptive users can pay the freight.

>

>

>

> As popular as they are, the national parks are underfunded. I suspect

> that in a legislative vote to fund schools, infrastructure, police/fire,

> jails, healthcare, or natural resources that resources would miss the bus.

>

> Hal Michael

> Olympia WA

> 360-459-4005 (H)

> 360-791-7702 (C)

> ucd880 at comcast.net

>

> ------------------------------

> *From: *"Tom Talbott" <tom.talbott at gmail.com>

> *To: *"Hal Michael" <ucd880 at comcast.net>

> *Cc: *"Tweeters" <tweeters at u.washington.edu>, "Walter Kuciej" <

> WALTERK74 at comcast.net>

> *Sent: *Thursday, November 14, 2013 3:13:02 PM

>

> *Subject: *Re: [Tweeters] Interesting conversation with a Game Warden

>

> Sounds like they are just perpetuating the problem.

>

> I think times are changing, though, and old ideas need to be rethought.

> Discover Pass is a start. The key is that it is centralized, easy to get,

> and well advertised. I remember having to hunt down all the different ways

> to buy the different passes in the past or getting to a site and finding

> that that pass had just expired.

>

> I believe most people (at least I know am) are willing to pay money if the

> process is up front, easy, and going for what they care about.

>

> Tom

>

>

> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Hal Michael <ucd880 at comcast.net> wrote:

>

>> Conceptually, yes. In practice, the non-consumptive industry shot down

>> proposals for taxes one their goods that would be equivalent to the

>> Dingall-Johnson, and Duck Stamp programs.

>>

>>

>>

>> The Discover Pass is essentially for State Parks. A pittance goes to DNR

>> and WDFW. How many here used to regularly buy the WDFW access pass?

>>

>> Hal Michael

>> Olympia WA

>> 360-459-4005 (H)

>> 360-791-7702 (C)

>> ucd880 at comcast.net

>>

>> ------------------------------

>> *From: *"Tom Talbott" <tom.talbott at gmail.com>

>> *To: *"Walter Kuciej" <WALTERK74 at comcast.net>

>> *Cc: *"Tweeters" <tweeters at u.washington.edu>

>> *Sent: *Thursday, November 14, 2013 1:33:47 PM

>> *Subject: *Re: [Tweeters] Interesting conversation with a Game Warden

>>

>>

>> "I know many birders have somewhat negative opinions of hunters, but if

>> it weren't for them, we'd have a lot fewer places to go. "

>>

>> I think that part of the problem is that the main way to support habitat

>> is to support hunting. Virtually all preservation exists to make sure

>> there will be enough birds to shoot in the future.

>>

>> Hopefully, this will change as more people learn that you can be in

>> nature without killing things. If there were actual passes and stamps

>> targeting birding and targeting habitat specifically for birds just because

>> they are birds, I believe you would have more people contributing. When

>> the state sees birders and photographers as an asset and isn't

>> predominately geared towards hunting, then they will see more uptake in

>> terms of revenue from them. It will be a balance, but for now the scale

>> seems rather tipped.

>>

>> I think the Discover Pass is actually the first step in this direction.

>> I know people that don't like it, but I find it to be much better than the

>> old system.

>>

>> Tom (renewed Discover Pass just came in the mail)

>>

>>

>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Walter Kuciej <WALTERK74 at comcast.net>wrote:

>>

>>> Yesterday we were leaving Eide Rd after dark, and stopped to talk with

>>> the friendly F+W guy. Learned a few things:

>>> Pheasant hunters have to wear orange; duck hunters don't.

>>> The area is stocked 3X weekly with 40-60 birds.

>>> The end of legal shooting time is adjusted periodically based on the

>>> length of the day, not necessarily "sunset", which is too subjective.

>>> Any changes to the Eide Rd. site will take years. Ducks Unlimited is the

>>> driving force here, not the Audubon society or any birding group.

>>> He was surprised at how many $100 citations he gives to birders who did

>>> not get a Discovery Pass, but feel entitled to use the Wildlife areas

>>> anyway.

>>> He was also amazed at how many "listers" come long distances to see a

>>> rare bird, and not only don't get a pass, but trespass on private property

>>> as if they have some right to do so, not being hunters.This also happens

>>> with more casual birders. We saw it on Thomle Rd. when the Snowy Owls were

>>> there last winter. People just walking across the field who said it was

>>> "public land", or maybe too cheap to buy the $10 permit from the farmer

>>> "What farmer?" Not everyone reads tweeters.

>>> This has resulted in areas being closed to the public by normally

>>> friendly landowners who would probably give permission if asked. He

>>> mentioned once having to close a public area that was being overrun by

>>> birders. As always, a small group can give a bad name to those who play by

>>> the rules.

>>> If a Discover Pass ($30, think of it as a "birding license") and a

>>> Federal Duck Stamp ($15, which goes to buy land for refuges) seem

>>> excessive, ask yourself how much you spend on optics, apps, gas etc.

>>> I know many birders have somewhat negative opinions of hunters, but if

>>> it weren't for them, we'd have a lot fewer places to go.

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Tweeters mailing list

>>> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

>>> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

>>>

>>

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> Tweeters mailing list

>> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

>> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

>>

>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20131114/4f2e29c1/attachment.html>


More information about the Tweeters mailing list