Will you continue to Support CCA?

[mriguy]

MG is on Fiya!!!!!!!!!!

[Flatfishfreak]

Never have never will!!! Learned my lesson with D.U.!!!!

10% of the fishermen catch 90% of the fish

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Flatfishfreak

Never have never will!!! Learned my lesson with D.U.!!!!

I find it ironic that groups with names like "Trout Unlimited" and "Ducks Unlimited" are the some of the biggest pushers of harvest and access restrictions.

I'm still coming up the learning curve regarding CCA, but Trout Unlimited promoted an elitist agenda that actually opposed many state and federal stocking efforts in trout streams.

Dividing sportsmen and micromanaging details about how the natural resource pie is divided is bad conservation! Preserving our hunting and fishing rights for the next generation is as important as ensuring there will still be resources and habitat to hunt and fish.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

I find it ironic that groups with names like "Trout Unlimited" and "Ducks Unlimited" are the some of the biggest pushers of harvest and access restrictions.

I'm still coming up the learning curve regarding CCA, but Trout Unlimited promoted an elitist agenda that actually opposed many state and federal stocking efforts in trout streams.

Dividing sportsmen and micromanaging details about how the natural resource pie is divided is bad conservation! Preserving our hunting and fishing rights for the next generation is as important as ensuring there will still be resources and habitat to hunt and fish.

You are about to give me a stroke man, this is simply not true
Restricting harvest and access? No sir! No sir! No sir! I am not going to try and defend Ducks Unlimited because its pointless (just like trying to explain tripletail limits and basic wildlife management principles).

You need to start another thread where everyone can bash all the conservation organizations

Ducks Unlimited restricting access

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

Ducks Unlimited restricting access

Correct me if I am in need of a history lesson, but didn't DU push the banning of lead shot back in the 1980s?

Didn't this have the effect of driving up the price of duck hunting and effectively restricting access to the more affluent? Duck hunting is surely much more of a rich man's sport in 2013 than when my dad introduced me to duck hunting in 1978.

Don't get me wrong, the science showed a genuine need to reduce the use of lead shot in areas where it was being ingested by waterfowl. But the global ban for waterfowl hunting that was put in place was overreaching and is serving as a template for current efforts to expand lead bans to include upland game and rifle ammunition as well. RKBA advocates recognize current efforts to bad lead ammunition as aimed at 2nd amendment rights by driving up prices and restricting access. The 1991 waterfowl ban was the camel's nose in the tent.

Why is DU silent on the current issue of banning lead for upland game and rifle ammunition? (Feel free to correct me if my assertion of DU's silence is incorrect.)

Also, wasn't DU a player in a lot of the wetland preservation regulations in the 1980s and 1990s that amounted to a major governmental intrusion on private property rights requiring private landowners to jump through hoops to develop their own property?

The parallel between DU and CCA is this: supporting restrictive regulations that restrict access beyond the needs supported by sound science sets bad precedents that will be copied and exploited to further restrict hunting and fishing rights in the future.

[Duck Butter]

I sure didn't want to get into this but this is wrong on so many levels, its like "W" has gotten into your brain or something

[QUOTE=MathGeek;615330]Correct me if I am in need of a history lesson, but didn't DU push the banning of lead shot back in the 1980s?

Didn't this have the effect of driving up the price of duck hunting and effectively restricting access to the more affluent? Duck hunting is surely much more of a rich man's sport in 2013 than when my dad introduced me to duck hunting in 1978.

There are many many factors behind why leases are skyrocketing. One of them is because they can get it. If I was a farmer I would flood every bit of my land and lease it to the highest bidder, because people will pay it just to have a spot to sit. Duck hunting has become the 'cool thing' to do and a case of shells is the least expense for a duck hunter

Don't get me wrong, the science showed a genuine need to reduce the use of lead shot in areas where it was being ingested by waterfowl.

Then why did you say this "didn't DU push the banning of lead shot back in the 1980s?" Aren't you adamately FOR science driven regulations, I mean the entire tripletail thread would show that you are. Seems to me that lead was killing ducks indirectly and a conservation organization for ducks stepped in and showed the science that lead does in fact kill ducks (and it does still to this day, there are studies on Catahoula Lake going on yearly that will show this)

But the global ban for waterfowl hunting (global ban) that was put in place was overreaching and is serving as a template for current efforts to expand lead bans to include upland game and rifle ammunition as well. RKBA advocates recognize current efforts to bad lead ammunition as aimed at 2nd amendment rights by driving up prices and restricting access. The 1991 waterfowl ban was the camel's nose in the tent.
You are really reaching here. Lead is bad for ducks, period, don't try and put the rest on Ducks Unlimited, they did it for the ducks (DUCKS unlimited). This sounds like that Nazi and Jew thing you posted on the tripletail thread

Why is DU silent on the current issue of banning lead for upland game and rifle ammunition? (Feel free to correct me if my assertion of DU's silence is incorrect.)

Remember that its DUCKS Unlimited, not upland game unlimited or pheasants forever or rifle ammunition unlimited. Their mission is for wetlands and waterfowl. No dog in that fight for them. And why do you want them to be, you just said they were 'overreaching' in the paragraph just above, which is it? Are the overreaching? or are they not doing enough? Can't have it both ways

Also, wasn't DU a player in a lot of the wetland preservation regulations in the 1980s and 1990s that amounted to a major governmental intrusion on private property rights requiring private landowners to jump through hoops to develop their own property?

Oh you mean when we FINALLY found out the real importance of wetlands and people had to actually apply for permits (what you call 'jump through hoops', I call permits, thank goodness this came about). Before this came around, a person could just do anything they wanted to with a wetland - develop it, dam it up, drain it, etc. This affects other people downstream. If you had property downstream of someone who altered their waterway, you could have been flooded downstream

The parallel between DU and CCA is this: supporting restrictive regulations that restrict access beyond the needs supported by sound science sets bad precedents that will be copied and exploited to further restrict hunting and fishing rights in the future.

That is your opinion and everyone is entitled to them, and you do not have to support anything they do

[cgoods17]

i dont believe that banning lead shot is the reason the price of duck hunting has gone up..

[southern151]

Originally Posted by cgoods17

i dont believe that banning lead shot is the reason the price of duck hunting has gone up..

Steel shot is certainly higher than lead shot.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by cgoods17

i dont believe that banning lead shot is the reason the price of duck hunting has gone up..

Maybe not for the average joe in LA, but I remember when I wanted to get legal to hunt some resident Canada geese and also any in season ducks that flew by a few years back on land I was farming in Ohio. I already had access to the land (farming it), a resident hunting license, and a 12 gauge (squirrel, deer, doves, coyote), along with ready access to a variety of lead shot sizes and chokes. I checked the regs and needed to buy steel shot and a duck stamp. Kinda pricey. After my first attempt, I quickly realized that steel shot stinks and forked over the dough for some bismuth or hevi-shot or something that actually put a few birds in the freezer. I think my son is finally putting those steel shot shells to use on his science project this year. But yeah, the lead shot ban and the duck stamp significantly increased my cost of participation and also reduced performance.

The military's move to lead free ammunition will similarly cost taxpayer's more money and downgrade ammunition performance. Similarly, if lead free ammunition is forced upon hunters, the costs will go up and performance will go down. Ditto of lead free sinkers and tackle are forced upon anglers.

[Super Spook]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Maybe not for the average joe in LA, but I remember when I wanted to get legal to hunt some resident Canada geese and also any in season ducks that flew by a few years back on land I was farming in Ohio. I already had access to the land (farming it), a resident hunting license, and a 12 gauge (squirrel, deer, doves, coyote), along with ready access to a variety of lead shot sizes and chokes. I checked the regs and needed to buy steel shot and a duck stamp. Kinda pricey. After my first attempt, I quickly realized that steel shot stinks and forked over the dough for some bismuth or hevi-shot or something that actually put a few birds in the freezer. I think my son is finally putting those steel shot shells to use on his science project this year. But yeah, the lead shot ban and the duck stamp significantly increased my cost of participation and also reduced performance.

The military's move to lead free ammunition will similarly cost taxpayer's more money and downgrade ammunition performance. Similarly, if lead free ammunition is forced upon hunters, the costs will go up and performance will go down. Ditto of lead free sinkers and tackle are forced upon anglers.

Woah Nelly- I think that $15 bucks we pay for a Federal Duck Stamp is one thing that has been good for ducks and duck hunters. Sorry that $15 helped run you out of duck hunting, but that has accounted for 5.2 million acres for the National Refuge System and valuable Waterfowl Production Areas.

For every dollar you spend on Federal Duck Stamps, ninety-eight cents goes directly to purchase vital habitat for protection in the National Wildlife Refuge System. The Migratory Bird Conservation Commission (MBCC) oversees the use of Federal Duck Stamp funds for the purchase and lease of wetland habitat. The MBCC also reviews, but does not approve, the use of Federal Duck Stamp dollars for the purchase of small natural wetlands and their associated uplands for preservation as Waterfowl Production Areas (WPAs).

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Super Spook

Woah Nelly- I think that $15 bucks we pay for a Federal Duck Stamp is one thing that has been good for ducks and duck hunters. Sorry that $15 helped run you out of duck hunting, but that has accounted for 5.2 million acres for the National Refuge System and valuable Waterfowl Production Areas.

For every dollar you spend on Federal Duck Stamps, ninety-eight cents goes directly to purchase vital habitat for protection in the National Wildlife Refuge System. The Migratory Bird Conservation Commission (MBCC) oversees the use of Federal Duck Stamp funds for the purchase and lease of wetland habitat. The MBCC also reviews, but does not approve, the use of Federal Duck Stamp dollars for the purchase of small natural wetlands and their associated uplands for preservation as Waterfowl Production Areas (WPAs).

Yeah, yeah. And all the lottery proceeds go to support education. And your social security payments are kept in a "lock box" for you to draw on in retirement.

Most "dedicated" governmental funding schemes are shell games. The US treasury (federal funds) are one huge frungible, co-mingled deal.

On the whole, I'm glad the feds bought some wetlands rather than confiscating them through regulation without compensating the orignal owners.

But you are not going to convince me that a Duck Stamp is not just another tax, kinda like Obama Care is just another tax.

[Duck Butter]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Yeah, yeah. And all the lottery proceeds go to support education. And your social security payments are kept in a "lock box" for you to draw on in retirement.

Most "dedicated" governmental funding schemes are shell games. The US treasury (federal funds) are one huge frungible, co-mingled deal.

On the whole, I'm glad the feds bought some wetlands rather than confiscating them through regulation without compensating the orignal owners.

But you are not going to convince me that a Duck Stamp is not just another tax, kinda like Obama Care is just another tax.

You have some reala issues with the government. The duck stamp is not a tax. It goes specifically to wetland conservation, and that is the cheapest thing you will buy to go duck hunting


Some of you guys have got to take a break from Rush Limbaugh, he will have you believing this stuff

[Super Spook]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Yeah, yeah. And all the lottery proceeds go to support education. And your social security payments are kept in a "lock box" for you to draw on in retirement.

Most "dedicated" governmental funding schemes are shell games. The US treasury (federal funds) are one huge frungible, co-mingled deal.

On the whole, I'm glad the feds bought some wetlands rather than confiscating them through regulation without compensating the orignal owners.

But you are not going to convince me that a Duck Stamp is not just another tax, kinda like Obama Care is just another tax.

Not saying it's not a tax, but one of the good ones IMO. I don't trust them any more than you, but this is accounted for and put in the ground so I'm told. It has been a good thing for wildlife conservation and well worth $15.

[bmac]

Originally Posted by cgoods17

i dont believe that banning lead shot is the reason the price of duck hunting has gone up..

Come on, don't those leases provide ammo? All that steel shot drove those lease prices up!

[cgoods17]

Originally Posted by bmac

Come on, don't those leases provide ammo? All that steel shot drove those lease prices up!

[cgoods17]

it is not THE reason duck hunting has gone up..

I guess since gas prices are so high, it is the reason that vehicles are more expensive now days..

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by cgoods17

it is not THE reason duck hunting has gone up..

I guess since gas prices are so high, it is the reason that vehicles are more expensive now days..

Mandated fuel economy standards and safety features to compensate for lighter vehicles (to meet the fuel economy standards) are a big part of it.

[cgoods17]

what about the fact that land/lease is becoming harder and harder to come by? i think that is more of the reason that duck hunting is more expensive than lead shot.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by cgoods17

what about the fact that land/lease is becoming harder and harder to come by? i think that is more of the reason that duck hunting is more expensive than lead shot.

Yes, that is a major factor in Louisiana. Less marsh (erosion) and more people. The laws of supply and demand are at work. But for families that have owned land in LA for generations, the cost of ammo and the federal duck stamp are major factors in recurring expenses, as they are for families that own the land they hunt or hunt nearby public land in other states.

[cgoods17]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Yes, that is a major factor in Louisiana. Less marsh (erosion) and more people. The laws of supply and demand are at work. But for families that have owned land in LA for generations, the cost of ammo and the federal duck stamp are major factors in recurring expenses, as they are for families that own the land they hunt or hunt nearby public land in other states.

There are more factors than just the banning of lead shot.