State Duck Stamp Money UP IN SMOKE!

Bob B

Bob B

Well-known member
Found out some very bad news tonight!
After buying CT state duck stamps for the 17 years I have hunted in the state, I just got word tonight that the $385,000 that the state DEP had banked trying to get a pile big enough to match a federal contribution for a significant wetland project -------- was wiped out by a late and fast rewrite of state law sweeping DEP funds into our general coffers due to the Economic Emergency. Also taken was a total of some 16 million in other funds for environmental mitigation. Where did it go? As we are seeing----- up in smoke by a legislature trying to play shell games for failing to put anything aside during the good times and now looking really stupid when the revenue shortfall is starting.
Why does this boil my blood? Because the stamp law was passed with clear writing that stated that the funds could only be used for wetland conservation or restoration.
No foreign troops are invading CT soil --------- and yet, it is gone.
The 6000 duck hunters( and falling) pay $5 a stamp. That rate means 10 years of income (Because we are declining every year) has become another bull$hit hunting tax with nothing for the habitat. We have just been stuffed with a salt water fish lic.. Why should we think the same bastards wont use that dedicated funding to pork another fat city pig pile!

This is my vent, but I do not see us making a comeback after this kind of throat cutting. We are loosing hunting spots and failing to recruit youth hunters (50% of our class graduates dont hunt the year after they pass hunter safety) .


Our own state sportsmans lobby was not blasting this one like our fight for sunday to hunt deer. As a result the ducks got screwed and now the precedent is set.

Dont let this happen in your state.....

Forewarned from New England
 
That royally sucks! Too bad actually saving up for a project instead of borrowing the money is penalized like that.

Tim
 
already happened in NJ. they put revenues from licenses into general funds years ago. now they are getting rid of the state stamp all together. don't get me wrong, we still have to pay for a "stamp", but instead of a beautifully done piece of work from a local artist that I enjoy collecting, we get a piece of paper. great.
 
Bob ,

I to feel your pain here in RI. we will have a saltwater license thrown down our throats next year , from what i hear this a federal program but the states have the option to institute there own fees or else the feds will do it for them , i do not see any of that $$ going to anything but BS finacial needs that could be taken care of in other ways , Ri , had a decent phesant program until 2 years ago whe n it all went south well waht are we buying phesant tags for HMMMM , maybe to help with habitat and the purchase of the birds ?? The last 2 years have been by far the worst years for the phesant program , by the way that is why i choe to join a club that offers it to it's members , By the way i will be going Wedensday night at 7 pm for my interview. I hear what you are saying it seems the hunting heritage is slipping away from us all here in New England .


Dave M
 
There oughta be 50,000 of you at the Capital throwing batteries at the bastards, but there isn't so they will stick it to you time and again because you take it.
 
RJ,
you missed what I said. There are only 6000 guys who buy a stamp in the state. We have a very good ILA rep who has a very good email list and I read every one inc the junk just to make sure I dont miss something that needs a phone call or email to my local rep, and I can almost always get at least three to five others to do the same.
But if every duck hunter in the state showed up---- a fantasy----- at the state house, we would be laughed out of the place by the pols. who would say, "Bite me cause the 2 million in the cities think they should get their overpriced services from us and we are going to spend it on payroll and debt financing.

I was brought up on the idea that duck stamp dollars were untouchable and only for wetland protection. This is nuts. (I will try to limit my curse words).
 
No I heard you, I see that on a daily basis, anyone that lives in rural areas sees that everytime the politicians bend over backwards for flatlander tourists ignoring the locals wants and needs.

when outnumbered and outgunned you are fighting a guerilla war, if you are going to fight back at all.

that means things like batteries flying through the air. How will your F&W or Gov behave knowing 6,000 irate maniacs will be throwing batteries at him when he leaves work?

or keep backing up and see if they'll keep pushing.
 
RJ
thanks for the pep talk.
I wont just roll over and take it. I also wont commit a misdomenor or down right assault on govt. prop. even if I am pissed. It looks stupid when shown in the press and dosnt help us one bit. The papers are already anti enough.
My satisfaction will only come from seeing the $ put back.
I am as fed up as you but I dont see a win without some serious strategy and public backing. My idea of guerilla warfare involves a diff. track but the same goal.
 
Why are you so surprized to get the SHAFT from your state government? Here in the Empire state I pay $250 for a Charter Boat License that allows my to catch 2 Fluke ove 21" for 45 days during the season another $250 for a Food Fish License and this October I have to get up another $400 for a Saltwater Fishing License and it all goes into the general fund
 
Yea, I hear you Jack,
esp after picking a net this spring full of 14 inch fluke that all went in the totes and ice for the trip to the market.
It dosnt bother me if the licence is going to the fund(not that I like it, mind you) but a stamp that was for one thing only and now it is in the till, that is not right.
Did you talk to Patric today when he was on the way home from the edge in his dads boat Mataura?
 
No I did not talk to Patrick He passed within 1/2 mile of me while I was Sharking. I called several times on the A Team radio but no response. By the way I had a 50 pound Striper this morning. The 31st caught on the Windy.
 
Bob

WHat did the funds go for? If they went for anything besides fish and wildlife management the state made a serious mistake. You need to contact the state and FWS and complain. Here is the law 50 CFR 80.

§ 80.4 Diversion of license fees.[/url] top
Revenues from license fees paid by hunters and fishermen shall not be diverted to purposes other than administration of the State fish and wildlife agency.
(a) Revenues from license fees paid by hunters and fishermen are any revenues the State receives from the sale of licenses issued by the State conveying to a person the privilege to pursue or take wildlife or fish. For the purpose of this rule, revenue with respect to license sales by vendors, is considered to be the net income to the State after deducting reasonable vendor fees or similar amounts retained by sales agents. License revenues include income from:
(1) General or special licenses, permits, stamps, tags, access and recreation fees or other charges imposed by the State to hunt or fish for sport or recreation.
(2) Sale, lease, rental, or other granting of rights of real or personal property acquired or produced with license revenues. Real property includes, but is not limited to, lands, building, minerals, energy resources, timber, grazing, and animal products. Personal property includes, but is not limited to, equipment, vehicles, machine, tools, and annual crops.
(3) Interest, dividends, or other income earned on license revenues.
(4) Federal Aid project reimbursements to the States to the extent that license revenues originally funded the project for which the reimbursement is being made.
(b) For purposes of this rule, administration of the State fish and wildlife agency include only those functions required to manage the fish and wildlife-oriented resources of the State for which the agency has authority under State law.
(c) A diversion of license fee revenues occurs when any portion of license revenues is used for any purpose other than the administration of the State fish and wildlife agency.
(d) If a diversion of license revenues occurs, the State becomes ineligible to participate under the pertinent Act from the date the diversion is declared by the Director until:
(1) Adequate legislative prohibitions are in place to prevent diversion of license revenue, and
(2) All license revenues or assets acquired with license revenues are restored, or an amount equal to license revenue diverted or current market value of assets diverted (whichever is greater) is returned and properly available for use for the administration of the State fish and wildlife agency.
(e) Federal funds obligated for projects approved prior to the date a diversion is declared remain available for expenditure on such projects without regard to the intervening period of the State's ineligibility.
[54 FR 15209, Apr. 17, 1989]
 
Thanks brad.
I will get a copy of that and put it in the file.
I believe the state stamp may not fall under that but I will check on it very carefully.

I talked to a friend wife last night. She is a member of the trial lawyers association of CT and the State tried to sweep their self funded account for malpractice(I think),
guess what,, a bunch of lawyers said "No you dont,,," And they didnt.

Late to the fight is better than not getting there at all, so on we go.
 
Bob Don't lie down on this. It is a stinking shame the State did this... I think Brad is on the right track. If the state ever received any Federal funds for wild life they may have to pay them back. It is worth checking into. Sounds like a law suit to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top