Its $525 in belgium, but no limits on mallards


Hum...

A point to ponder. Fees charged a government is in fact a TAX!! We are taxed plenty already!

http://www.fws.gov/southeast/federalaid/pittmanrobertson.html

I wonder if they are going to give you a kiss when you buy a stamp? A 66.6% increase in price is a pretty hefty markup. If you want to put more money towards conservation, there are several ways of doing that. Make a donation to DU, Delta, or do what I do and buy two stamps every year. I use one for my license and keep one for when my son gets older. Putting more money towards conservation should be a choice, not a requirement.

I thought the price increase from $15 to $17 was already set to kick in soon.

I think if you hunt even once $25 is a small contribution toward conservation. I don't think that should be a choice at all. Now contributing more is.

Not a big deal to me. But then I have a Lifetime Hunting/Fishing License here in Texas. All I ever have to pay for is the Federal Duck Stamp.

They should implement a class to teach people how to tell time when they pick up licenses.

I don't see it as a big deal.
I don't know of anything else that hasn't had a price increase over the last 20 years.

Agreed.

Someone enters a Bill for a price increase almost every session. Unfortunately there is always something that kills it. Be it a loan addition, wording that allows the funds to be used for other reasons than waterfowl, multi year increases, importation of polar bear trophys, protections for lead ammunition, etc. Every time the bill gets subjected to so much political wrangling that the bill never makes it through. I support it as DU presents it, but we really need to read the fine lines within the bill and follow future changes in the the actual bill to find what they are not telling us, and make sure there are no amendments attached to it that are not are in our best interest.

It has only been reported out of committee, so it has a long ways to go.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s1865#overview

The current Bill is just a reintroduction of last sessions Bill. So this article on should still apply in describing it.
http://www.akbizmag.com/Alaska-Business-...-Stamp-Program/

It is not a $25 increase. It is a guaranteed increase every 5 years. It would allow the Secretary of the Interior to consult with the Migratory Bird Commission and set Duck Stamp prices every five years. $25 initially, then 5 years later to $30, then it looks like there is no set limit on the increase amount every 5 years after that. The Secretary of the Interior will also be able to issue exemptions to the stamp requirement for some groups and individuals.


The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.

12/19/2013--Introduced.
Migratory Bird Habitat Investment and Enhancement Act - Amends the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act to allow the Secretary of the Interior, for each 5-year period beginning in 2014, to set the amount to be collected for each Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp sold under the Act. Limits such amount to $25 for the initial 5-year period and to $30 for the subsequent 5-year period.
Requires the United States Postal Service (USPS) and the Department of the Interior, or any other agent approved by the Department to collect the amount established for each Stamp sold for a hunting year if the Secretary determines, at any time before February 1 of a calendar year, that all amounts in the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund have been obligated for expenditure.
Permits the Secretary, in consultation with the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission, to waive requirements under the Act relating to the prohibition on the taking of migratory waterfowl with respect to certain individuals as determined to be appropriate.

It has always been a user pay system. Sportsman have always carried the funding for our sports with hunting and fishing licenses and various stamps which of the duck stamp is the founding father. We also pay with our taxes collected on guns, ammunition and various other sporting good items. This money funds almost the entire conservation effort in this country. Without us there would be no conservation. Land prices have increase so much in the last 8-10 years the money generated at the current price does not have much buying power anymore. our northern waterfowl breeding grounds are not increaseing but decreasing everyday. I know it sounds like a big jump but when you know the money is spent on our cause, I think it is over due.

So how many of you actually know where the money goes? It's no coincidence that DU is pushing the campaign to get this pushed through. The Feds are also looking at reducing the number of workers that help manage Federal properties. At the same time, I believe that some of the funds would be used to purchase more wetlands for waterfowl. So the way I see it, there would be more land to manage and fewer people to manage the land. When are they going to come up with a lottery system that will allow hunters access to reserves twice a week. If they set it up right, it would make money, keep the birds better circulated, and potentially put more hunters in the field. To me, it's typical government. Poor management of resources.

http://www.fws.gov/duckstamps/conservation/conservation.htm

Alazon Bayou WMA in East TX was bought with duck stamp money as were a number of other federal refuges and state wma's in TX. I know places i've hunted in the plains states called Waterfowl Production Areas (WPA's) were purchased with duck stamp money, and are open almost all season. (It varies by state and location) I think it's one of the most efficient uses of conservation money.

I think your confusing the buying of the land with duck stamp funds compared to hunter management by the various governing bodies of that land. Corps of Engineers, TPWD, US Fish and Wildlife, Bureau of Reclamation, etc. Each of these manage their lands differently based on size, location, accessability, and hunting pressure. Almost all studies have shown that these natural areas do make money for the surrounding area. I think you might have one particular area in mind that only allows access twice a week, and that has more to do with managing hunting pressure than it does conserving habitat for waterfowl and other wildlife.