SFW-use your power..

brorblixen · Apr 12, 2017

SFW,
First off, this is not a post about pro or con SFW.
As we all know, hunters/anglers pay the "duty" for DWR budgets across the country. The non-consumptive's don't. Its time for that to change.
Take your big stick, go up on to the Hill to the Legislature, and draft a real bill with teeth that compels the mtn bikers, the canyon users, the wildlife viewers, etc., to buy an annual "Outdoors Pass." (Exempt the hunters/anglers as they pay for a litany of other fees as it is, i.e., habitat stamp, app fees, most of all Pittman-Robertson)
Pass it and show other F&G agencies how it can be a model to tap the sleeping giant of "non-consumptives."
(It cant hurt improving your image amongst some of the "haters" as well.)

eelgrass · Apr 12, 2017

If you're talking about State land, okay. If you mean Forest Service and BLM land, the Feds might not like you charging an access fee to land you don't own.

brorblixen · Apr 12, 2017

They somehow do it when I want to enter federally-owned Millcreek Canyon along the Wasatch Front. Im sure thru some form of interlocal agreements or something it can be done. A good PR campaign with the right "faces" can get it done. They passed a Zoo, Arts and Parks tax that just goes on the tax rolls on a County-wide basis. There's got to be something that can be done on a state-wide basis..

Sierra · Apr 12, 2017

The problem with having non-hunter's fund their fair share is that it will give these anti-hunters a bigger say in how to run things. By having the agencies rely on hunters for their funding, we (hunters) retain some leverage. IMO, it's a small price to pay to keep our rights. Is it fair? Hell no! But I'm willing to do it.

smokepoll · Apr 13, 2017

+1 sierra

elkantlers · Apr 13, 2017

>The problem with having non-hunter's fund
>their fair share is that
>it will give these anti-hunters
>a bigger say in how
>to run things. By
>having the agencies rely on
>hunters for their funding, we
>(hunters) retain some leverage.
>IMO, it's a small price
>to pay to keep our
>rights. Is it fair?
>Hell no! But I'm
>willing to do it.

My thoughts exactly.

Vanilla · Apr 13, 2017

I agree that there is a huge untapped revenue base among non-hunting or fishing outdoor enthusiasts, but this would not be the time politically for Utah to do this.

Right on the heels of the Outdoor Retailer fiasco? Not going to happen.

eelgrass · Apr 14, 2017

brorblixen, I do like your point and you're right.

I'd like to see a change made to the Federal Income Tax forms. Check a box that asks "Do you want wolves?" If you check "yes", $100 is added to the tax you owe. Why should the cost of management of wolves and the damage they do to ranchers and big game herds not be financially paid for by those who insist on having them? Hunters pay money every year to manage and nurture what the wolves eat. Why should wolf lovers ride our backs for free? Without us, there could be no wolves.

Hoopermat · Apr 19, 2017

The SFW wants those public lands to be transferred into state control. Why would they do anything to help.

Castnshoot · Apr 20, 2017

" a real bill with teeth that compels the mtn bikers, the canyon users, the wildlife viewers, etc., to buy an annual "Outdoors Pass." "

That is a terrible idea!

You as a hunter pay for the chance to take something home with you that belongs to the public.

Paying a fee to recreate is like paying to set out in your own back yard to drink a beer.

Why anybody who believes in public land access would get on board with something like that is beyond me.

2_Point · Apr 20, 2017

Just because it is public land doesn't mean it is free. There are costs involved with public lands just like there are costs involved with maintaining your back yard so you can drink a beer.

Castnshoot · Apr 20, 2017

There are already too many reveanew sources to count dedicated to taking care of public lands.

Do you really want to see someone get a ticket for stepping on BLM land with out a costly government pass tided around their neck?

Come on you guys!

BrowningRage · Apr 20, 2017

As sportsmen, we pay for the resources that we "consume" through licenses (big game, small game, fish...). The 'non-consumptives' have to pay fees to use any maintained facilities or sites, especially if they stay over night. ATV's and the like already pay fees to be legally registered and licensed as well.

What you are asking is to charge people money just to be on public land. Like, "you can't go to your local park unless you buy the annual 'park pass' from your city"...

Like it or not, I believe there should still be opportunity to be on public lands without having to pay anything to be there.

"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24

pufftuffly · Apr 20, 2017

>" a real bill with teeth
>that compels the mtn bikers,
>the canyon users, the wildlife
>viewers, etc., to buy an
>annual "Outdoors Pass." "
>
>That is a terrible idea!
>
>You as a hunter pay for
>the chance to take something
>home with you that belongs
>to the public.
>
>Paying a fee to recreate is
>like paying to set out
>in your own back yard
>to drink a beer.
>
>Why anybody who believes in public
>land access would get on
>board with something like
>that is beyond me.

Couldn't agree more.
A stupid idea all around.

Muley_73 · Apr 20, 2017

You do pay money to be able to drink a beer in "your" backyard. You also pay green fees to go golf on the public golf course. Why is that? Because it cost money to maintain the course? Well it also cost money to maintain mountain roads, to fight forest fires, to study the beetles that destroy the forest. It cost money to study riparian areas that are impacted by people accessing and using public land. It cost money to pick up the beer cans that puffy throws out his window because he got bored drinking in his backyard. It cost money to put up signs on the mountain so people don't get lost. Recreation cost money no way around it.

eelgrass · Apr 21, 2017

BLM and Forest Service employees are paid with tax dollars, so we already pay. They just print the money, but in theory we pay.

Castnshoot · Apr 21, 2017

MULey 73,, You did a good job of making my point.

You are right, we already pay some sort of tax or fee to the government for every little thing we do or touch.

How much is enough?

I just do not get that way of thinking.

Muley_73 · Apr 21, 2017

No I believe going out and accessing for recreation is different than everyday use. We pay taxes that go toward a municiple golf course at well but when you show up to hit some balls they still charge you more.