|
Post by swilk on Feb 21, 2016 21:42:20 GMT -5
Peel it out of the property taxes I already pay.
|
|
|
Post by span870 on Feb 21, 2016 21:45:45 GMT -5
Why should they be exempt? The state owns the deer not the landowner Beat me to it.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Feb 21, 2016 21:47:49 GMT -5
It's not just about Deer....
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Feb 21, 2016 21:49:35 GMT -5
I've never used a landowner tag anyway....I always use my lifetime license.
|
|
|
Post by nfalls116 on Feb 21, 2016 21:51:02 GMT -5
I pay my rent which pays property taxes therefore I should be exempt right?
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Feb 21, 2016 21:57:41 GMT -5
Seems to me it's just a way to game the system and get federal funds so just take it from the taxes all landowners pay....if they hunt or not. The states critters live on all land not just those that hunt.
|
|
|
Post by dsawyer72 on Feb 21, 2016 21:58:46 GMT -5
I'm a landowner, but always buy a license to help the state get the Fed money. They're cheap, I and figure the state needs the money. I don't buy tags.
|
|
|
Post by windingwinds on Feb 21, 2016 22:24:23 GMT -5
Absolutely no more ridiculous fees to a corrupt central government. Want to do something for Indiana wildlife? Fill a bird feeder. Don't clear fencerows, allow ground cover in your woods, stop overusing pesticides and weed killers, and start planting new trees. Governments are ineffective and very wasteful, and even if their intentions are good.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Feb 21, 2016 23:36:12 GMT -5
Is anyone else flat impressed by the sheer number of new members this thread has generated?
|
|
|
Post by jrsavoie on Feb 22, 2016 3:20:12 GMT -5
The best option would be, to not send the money to the Fed to begin with.
I'm not really sure how big a deal this is. Most hunting land owners I know, do not hunt exclusively on their own land, so they all get hunting licenses anyway.
As a matter of fact, I can not think of any that hunt exclusively on their own land.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Feb 22, 2016 5:55:48 GMT -5
YES......Should be Voluntary (landowner only)
|
|
|
Post by throbak on Feb 22, 2016 6:07:40 GMT -5
Indiana Received 18,000,000 PR money last year ,,,for the DNR With this 3.75 fee they would have possibly received 3or 4 million more At 50,000 a year that would be 80 Bioligist and CO jobs that's how big a deal it is !!
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Feb 22, 2016 6:11:51 GMT -5
Another note on PR - the amount of money available at the federal level right now is unprecedented due to all of the gun/ammo sales that have occurred in recent years. There's the solution in a nutshell. Tell your spouse that you need to buy another firearm to help the state. Lol! I've done my part by already buying two since the start of 2016.
|
|
|
Post by 76chevy on Feb 22, 2016 6:28:07 GMT -5
I think you mean Moot point. Only folks that should be Voteing are Land Owners with huntable land.... All other are a mute point .... IMO Very easy to vote Yes if your not a land owner! talk about Kings and serfs... That's like saying only politicians should vote.
|
|
|
Post by 76chevy on Feb 22, 2016 6:31:23 GMT -5
I can think of several who do. The best option would be, to not send the money to the Fed to begin with. I'm not really sure how big a deal this is. Most hunting land owners I know, do not hunt exclusively on their own land, so they all get hunting licenses anyway. As a matter of fact, I can not think of any that hunt exclusively on their own land.
|
|
|
Post by nfalls116 on Feb 22, 2016 6:41:10 GMT -5
Is anyone else flat impressed by the sheer number of new members this thread has generated? I am, I was thinking this sure dug them out of the wood work.
|
|
|
Post by 76chevy on Feb 22, 2016 6:42:32 GMT -5
why should the farmer who cash rents the property and his family get to hunt it without purchasing a license?
They have no claim to the land. I don't know if the owner should be required but the renter should certainly be required to purchase a license.
|
|
|
Post by dadfsr on Feb 22, 2016 7:00:06 GMT -5
why should the farmer who cash rents the property and his family get to hunt it without purchasing a license? They have no claim to the land. I don't know if the owner should be required but the renter should certainly be required to purchase a license. I was also wondering the same thing! I am also a landowner that pays taxes on the land and everything I do to that land (fuel, equipment, seed and plants). I also buy a combination license every year so to me this is really not needed since the state is already receiving their P-R funds from me for that-I also suspect that how I do the hunting license is certainly not unique and is more of a common practice with almost all landowners! So the increase in any Fed funds would probably be negligible if this TAX was included....just more and more un-needed paperwork for the government bureaucrats to justify their jobs and add more government payroll to our decreasing take paychecks!!!
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Feb 22, 2016 7:02:50 GMT -5
We do have a few new members expressing their opinion and that is AOK. I posted this on FaceBook on the hunt-indiana.com page. Some of the other "new members" have been here awhile. The mass email asked for input from everyone, active members or not. Again, that is AOK.
As in the past I'm sure that the powers to be are watching this thread for results and opinions.
IMO - Personally I don't ever see this happening on a mandatory basis, but IF I was a landowner I would not be opposed to a voluntary $3.75 license. Then the only ones that would be affected or the ones that want to buy the license. That license would be good for all hunting, not just deer hunting..
Good civil discussion.....
.
|
|
|
Post by chubwub on Feb 22, 2016 7:08:38 GMT -5
A couple thoughts going through my head:
Still think a mushroom hunting permit on state ground needs to happen. Tons of untapped money there imo and other states implemented them.
We have too much hunting ground locked up in private land and leases, and we just lost a bunch of state ground so this is part of the revenue problem imo. Not enough public places to hunt, people ain't going to buy licences.
People act like all the state does is take, and complain of feeding the state's deer but they sure do give some nice cushy money breaks to land owners for classfied forests and a few other programs,so technically if you are in that program, you did get paid for feeding the deer.
$3.75 is dirt cheap but I'm pretty sure it won't be $3.75. I was once chastised for moaning about the duck stamp increase so I'm throwing it back on you fellas, you spent all that money on land, gear, food plots, stands and cameras and suddenly a $3.75 stamp is too much when you hunt for free? I was told to rethink my priorities. ...so maybe you need to rethink your priorities.
|
|