Federal Upland Stamp, is it time?

If there were guarantees put in place that would ensure the money went to creating more habitat and aggressive predator control I would be all for it. This would have to apply whether it was controlled on a Federal or State level. Funds for programs like this can be manipulated/raided by politicians on both levels.
 
870-Lefty said:
If there were guarantees put in place that would ensure the money went to creating more habitat and aggressive predator control I would be all for it. This would have to apply whether it was controlled on a Federal or State level. Funds for programs like this can be manipulated/raided by politicians on both levels.
Click to expand...

There are guarantees put in place through the Duck Stamp Act. Pretty sure that's why the folks proposing this want some sort of federal involvement. I think they should try to piggy back onto the Duck Stamp act if possible but I think Congress would have to make changes to the act itself. That's a toughy!!!
Leave it up to the states.
 
Chip said:
I don't think giving the federal government more money is the answer to anything.
Click to expand...

I knew this would be the biggest hurdle for an upland stamp but the success of the federal duck stamp and how Its funding is used proves that it can work.
 
Chip said:
I'll take your word for it
Click to expand...

You don't have to Chip, this is a sounding board for us to address concerns and I want to hear yours as much as anyone's. I was simply pointing out how successful the federal duck stamp program has been, without it my home wouldn't have the remaining wetlands we have and those few remaining areas are my only real opportunity to hunt wild pheasants.

We have a very big, diverse pool of upland hunters on here from all walks of life giving us a great resource to discuss issues and address problems and solutions.
 
quail hound said:
I knew this would be the biggest hurdle for an upland stamp but the success of the federal duck stamp and how Its funding is used proves that it can work.
Click to expand...
There may be a bigger hurdle and that's is it legal to do inprovements solely for nonnative "game birds" on federal land???
 
Last edited:
wesslpointer said:
There may be a bigger hurdle and that's is it legal to do inprovements solely for nonnative "game birds" on federal land???
Click to expand...

Healthy uplands benefit a whole lot more than just game birds; insects, song birds, waterfowl, reptiles, amphibians, mammals, raptor, water quality, and air quality are positively impacted by upland habitat, don't get hung up thinking this is just about pheasants.
 
quail hound said:
Healthy uplands benefit a whole lot more than just game birds; insects, song birds, waterfowl, reptiles, amphibians, mammals, raptor, water quality, and air quality are positively impacted by upland habitat, don't get hung up thinking this is just about pheasants.
Click to expand...
That's what the Fed duck stamp does why do you need the Feds to do what each state can do. Also its not just Pheasants its Huns ,Chukar, Quail, turkeys est in a lot of states! The reason for the Fed Duck stamp is because there "MIGATORY" and no one state can do it. If you want to help support the hunting industry go hunting take youth's hunting. Support groups like Pf that you can have a say in not a bunch of FED biologist "job programs" that want to do study's and think of Pheasants as "INVASIVE"
 
With good input like this there should be a nice list of pro's and con's that can be addressed. We all are for raising money to be used for upland. We just want to know that it is being used wisely. Been lied to, too many times. For example: Hunters dollars brought Moose back to Colorado. Hunters dollars improved a variety of Moose habitat throughout this state. Non hunting public benefitted with viewing and photography. Then, a Legal moose hunter who hunted public property and shoots a moose with his bow is berrated when his moose dies in the view of photographers and others. Now, the DOW closed the area he was hunting in legally. 100% public land and the animal would not even be here if it was not for hunters dollars. DOW tells it's base that it try's to expand hunter opportunity, but we know different now..This is only one example of mistrust, but we want to make sure of our upland future in the best possible scenario. I have a gut feeling that there may be both a state and federal stamp on the horizon.:cheers:
 
BleuBijou said:
With good input like this there should be a nice list of pro's and con's that can be addressed. We all are for raising money to be used for upland. We just want to know that it is being used wisely. Been lied to, too many times. For example: Hunters dollars brought Moose back to Colorado. Hunters dollars improved a variety of Moose habitat throughout this state. Non hunting public benefitted with viewing and photography. Then, a Legal moose hunter who hunted public property and shoots a moose with his bow is berrated when his moose dies in the view of photographers and others. Now, the DOW closed the area he was hunting in legally. 100% public land and the animal would not even be here if it was not for hunters dollars. DOW tells it's base that it try's to expand hunter opportunity, but we know different now..This is only one example of mistrust, but we want to make sure of our upland future in the best possible scenario. I have a gut feeling that there may be both a state and federal stamp on the horizon.:cheers:
Click to expand...
That horizon as far as a state stamp has come and gone In Idaho we had a both a waterfowl as well as an upland stamp. It was so mismanaged by IDFG both stamps were discontinued. Stick with PF some thing you can have a say in. :thumbsup:
 
I fear it would be mismanaged; the Feds have a history of doing this. On a state level, at least in WA state, WDFW does little for upland birds; their philosophy has been "we release a few birds on over-hunted release sites & have "Feel Free to Hunt/Hunting by Written Permission Only" programs; that's enough. If funds from a stamp were dedicated to opening more private lands & creating habitat on those, it might be worthwhile. A majority of the "Feel Free to Hunt" program lands largely resemble parking lots with no birds & which don't support more than mice. Many "Written Permission" sites are reserved for select hunters while many people are denied permission. On a Federal level, I can see these funds being assigned to states with thriving pheasant populations, which would be good for both birds & hunters who live there/have the means to go there, while little will go toward states such as WA. I, for one, am tired of paying for programs from which I realize little or no benefit.
 
Though

I am not a supporter of giving the Feds anymore money to mismanage.........

This is an excellent & thought provoking thread.






My mistrust of Govt. runs too deep to keep throwingm oney at something. PF is my favorite. No Fed agency is (probably) as efficient as P.F. at returning dollars to results.
 
Federal upland stamp

This sounds like an excellent idea, except the issues others who have brought to light indicates it would just be money that might be misused.
 
Something like 95 cents from every dollar generated by the Fed waterfowl stamp goes to buying, protecting, and restoring wetlands. Instead of getting hung up on what might happened or how money might be misused I think it would be good for sportsmen and the organizations that represent us to get in front of an issue and shape it to work for us the way we want it to work.

Imagine if your local PF/QF club could get matching state and federal funds to complete habitat projects, local club dollars could go a lot farther.

I don't trust the gov anymore than any of you guys, did anyone see budget amendment sa838 that the Senate voted in favor of to sell OUR federal lands? You think I trust these people that would do that? Not a chance.
 
I think the federal waterfowl stamp gives us some idea of what to expect, but waterfowl are migratory birds, crossing state lines. Pheasant do not migrate, and I think state governments may have a better understanding of the issues their gamebirds face. Minnesota has a pheasant stamp also...
 
I would say, keep the money as local as you can.
Pheasants Forever, your area and/or where your interests are. Quail habitat, grouse habitat, good stuff, just make the money go to anywhere but the Federal stuff.
Donating $$$$ to the Federal guys that could care less about an introduced species like our Ring Necks. No Way I don't think so. :eek:
 
mnmthunting said:
I would say, keep the money as local as you can.
Pheasants Forever, your area and/or where your interests are. Quail habitat, grouse habitat, good stuff, just make the money go to anywhere but the Federal stuff.
Donating $$$$ to the Federal guys that could care less about an introduced species like our Ring Necks. No Way I don't think so. :eek:
Click to expand...

You never know. My county's conservation district have a few nativists. Regardless they've been producing thousands of acres of prime grade A pheasant habitat. Maybe they don't realize what they've been doing but pheasants have benefited along with all other wildlife.

Maybe it's time we start promoting careers with such gov't agencies amongst our pro-hunting/pro-pheasant youth. Similar to efforts to get youth outdoors. I've been hearing some bad news from a few insiders about not just anti-pheasant but anti-hunting types moving in on careers within such agencies. Nick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top