Hunter Safety vs Higher License cost

[mudminnow]

Would you rather make everyone take a hunter safety course, or pay 25 more dollars for a license?

I think it would go a long way in the public eyes if Hunters pushed for higher license fees to support the wildlife and lands we pursue them on.

Now before you start calling me a socialist Bernie supporter, I am completely opposite. But hunting license’s are voluntary and I think a higher license cost would not be a barrier to entry. What say the brain trust?

[BuckyTownsend]

Think it’s a shame we need a license to begin with

[SC REBEL]

Gun safety and handling should be mandantory in all schools. If you teach kids about guns and their proper use you would have less accidents. Used to be taught in all homes, like good manners, now that is not the case.Take them to shoot clays make it fun. An added plus is the liberals will have a melt down.

[SC REBEL]

No to any additional fees or taxes.

[wskinner]

We don’t need either. Why even ask.

[JABIII]

God gave me the right to "Arise, kill, and eat". Not the government.

If they want to make a $50, or whatever, per day fee to hunt government land, then that is their business...

[Bad Habit]

I have 6 sets of deer tags to keep up with- Damn the mess our legislators can make out of anything.
Hell no to any new requirements, fees or taxes- the govt will just finger fuck it to death everyway they can and ******* will get another new Caddy.

[Bad Habit]

God gave me the right to "Arise, kill, and eat". Not the government.

If they want to make a $50, or whatever, per day fee to hunt government land, then that is their business...

No- it's our business- our taxes paid for most of those lands and pay for their mis-management and non-upkeep.

[Beachbird]

Hunters safety does need to be back in schools, I think it is needed and will educate a bunch of folks about firearms that just don't have a clue. On another note, I think it's unfair that those of us that hunt and fish on public lands are the only one to pay the burden for use of public lands. I think that there needs to be a use fee for those that do not hunt and fish on public land but use them for hike/bike/atving on our dime. They also need to make sure that non-hunters do not interfere with any lawful hunt on public lands as well.

[DJP]

I am all for the lowest barriers of entry possible.
I hate it when I have the opportunity to introduce someone to the outdoors but we can't go hunting because he doesn't have his tag or stamp or migratory permit or sc stamp or whatever.
Hunting is going to die out if it gets more and more regulated. The population of the world is going up but the percentage of hunters is going down.

[Baggy]

Isn’t there a 17.00$ fee for GMA use in the sportsman liscence fee? Do non hunter, users not have to buy this permit? Serious question?

[scatter shot]

Non hunters do not pay a fee to use WMA lands. And I don't think they should. Once they start paying they get a bigger voice at the table when discussing public land use. This would be a bad thing IMO.

[Tater]

You need to pull out a regs book or get online and look at the license types available.

Adding this requirement will fuck the state out of a good chunk of federal money.

[Sportin' Woodies]

Duck stamps went up to $25 a couple years ago.

Show and tell me how much better duck numbers and duck hunting have gotten since then.

[Baggy]

If I have to pay to hunt there, it would seem just say trail riders for one should have to pay the same fee to use the land for their hobby. I guess I always assumed they did pay.

[dbenn454]

Non hunters do not pay a fee to use WMA lands. And I don't think they should. Once they start paying they get a bigger voice at the table when discussing public land use. This would be a bad thing IMO.

They get to use it 365 days a year. Hunters don't, and can't use it on Sunday. They have it all already. And I agree, if they were to pay to access the only thing more they could want is more days when hunters aren't allowed. Don't let them have more skin in the game.

Only peons hunt wma and peons don't make $1000 campaign donations. Nothing will be done about Sunday hunting or habitat improvement unless the improvement is to plant pine trees anywhere possible and ignore them until they can be cut.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[Glenn]

How many states require a special permit to hunt public land? Is SC in the minority on that front?

[Tater]

All the one’s I’ve hunted public land on required a permit to be purchased to do so.

[Baggy]

I know there are some how brow MF’rs up in here,.... but peons... seriously?

[Tater]

Would you rather make everyone take a hunter safety course, or pay 25 more dollars for a license?

I think it would go a long way in the public eyes if Hunters pushed for higher license fees to support the wildlife and lands we pursue them on.

Now before you start calling me a socialist Bernie supporter, I am completely opposite. But hunting license’s are voluntary and I think a higher license cost would not be a barrier to entry. What say the brain trust?

I’ll tell you what is sad....

Every single person on this site benefits from LWCF funds and I would be shocked to find out that even 10% knows what it is and if more than a handful have contacted their senators or their rep to ask that it be fully funded and permanently reauthorized.

It’s even worse for the people that holler about their tax dollars being wasted and where does this money go and how have we benefitted from it, etc.... LWCF money comes from offshore leases, not a single tax dollar is spent on it. Read up on it, learn it and call you damn reps.