As an avid sportsman I would pay a more for licenses, but perhaps not to travel out of state due to increases. I used to hunt Michigan most of my younger life, but it just got out of hand with the time VS money required situation. It all comes down to recruitment of new people interested in what we love to do. I believe that hunting and trapping are the greatest losses in the recruitment department, not fishing nearly as much.
Yes in order to operate things as has been the normal situation, it will require more money. But, using the economics of raising prices to offset losses from recruitment, is sort of like trying to spend ones self into prosperity. Is does not work. If the fees are raised, recruitment will be further reduced, not only from Ohio residents, but also from non-residents,, and then after that condition even more increases will have to follow. Will the new fees and the budget that arises from them be the new anticipated financial needs for the division? Would they get accustomed to these fund amounts if there was more cash influx? I would bet so. To me raising fees to offset a bigger problem is like placing a bandage on an infected wound, it is going to get really bad and smelly at some point.
We need to fix the recruitment problem not make it worse. Some ideas: Allowing on-line hunter safety and trapping courses would be a good start. Although well intended, it has caused part of the problem, as has the PC culture in schools and on television. Another thing would be to keep the youth deer season back in the best prime time and not buckle to those who gripe about it. A good hunter shouldn't be worried about some competition from some youngsters. Put a ML or firearms season back in the works over Christmas break while all the kids are off from school, and not buckle to the whiners here either. Its about recruitment, without hunters and fisherman it is a moot point, and that should be the most important factor.
Reply With Quote