Habitat stamp Required

That's why we come in to through the basement door with our latest purchases.
And for many of us throw in a boat, electronics, trailer (can't be just any ole trailer), more rods/reels/tackle than we know what to do with, etc etc - there is no comparison to what the wife spends but we have to maintain her habits cost more than ours.
 
... gotta chuckle a little... you guys spend bajillions on every little, new, cool, hunting accessories... and carp at the$25... here in PA we've a $25 pheasant stamp and it's crazy put and take stock truck birds
Making it out to ya'll in SD with in a week in my new hand built camper... no hotel for me and Jack
 
It’s about being bs’d by gfp...the stamp could cost $1, or $100...big picture, they’re turning pheasant hunting into a product they’re marketing and leaving the science behind...dropping the brood count survey is one example...yes, there are times when that may cause some guys to stay home, so they quit performing that collection of data. I typically buy 4 licenses per year, so whether I spend $520 or $545 isn’t a big deal, but I don’t like hucksters, and I feel that this is the direction that SD is going...take the control from GFP and give it to the Dept of Tourism!
 
benelli-banger said:
It’s about being bs’d by gfp...the stamp could cost $1, or $100...big picture, they’re turning pheasant hunting into a product they’re marketing and leaving the science behind...dropping the brood count survey is one example...yes, there are times when that may cause some guys to stay home, so they quit performing that collection of data. I typically buy 4 licenses per year, so whether I spend $520 or $545 isn’t a big deal, but I don’t like hucksters, and I feel that this is the direction that SD is going...take the control from GFP and give it to the Dept of Tourism!
Click to expand...
The only control the GF&P might have lost in that deal was the POTENTIAL to cook the books in the brood survey report, which in my opinion, they never did in the first place. And as a report that was truly worthless in the short-term (year to year), it WAS false advertising. Pheasant hunting as an industry in SD is nothing new. It's been so for many, MANY years. There's nothing wrong with reallocating funds in an attempt to try to use it more efficiently. For years, I've combined for analysis, data from the brood survey with data that the GF&P gathers via hunter surveys and other sources AFTER the season. It's astounding how LITTLE one mirrors the other. Hunter success rates & "adjusted" preseason bird populations typically follow much more closely my OWN predictions, based on years of experience and what I know about pheasants & their relation to weather, crops, etc. The brood count survey accurately depicted nothing but long-term trends. The GF&P could interview experienced, long-time hunters in various areas and gather the same, if not better, info. I've not heard that the GF&P plans to cease hunter surveys, have you? I don't see elimination of the brood count survey as an example of "leaving the science behind". People are acting as though the GF&P is abruptly ceasing to manage the state's wildlife, which isn't at all the case.
 
everything you said is probably correct, but I haven't seen other states curtail their wildlife counts...seems to me it means something to someone, somewhere other than us hunters...like biologists?

I have found a correlation in the counts over the years...it isn't rocket science to think that if I hunt around Pierre, for example, and they do 15 or 20 routes around Pierre, that it is likely to show a broad correlation to the areas that I hunt if in that same geography. I ignore the statewide headline, totally meaningless...fwiw, just came back from ND...the report for the area where I was showed a 225% increase over last year...it looked like someone had planted 10,000 roosters in this area! they were everywhere! it was amazing. if they offered the option to buy a stamp to fund the brood count survey for an extra $25, I'd probably buy it. I don't trust politicians when they decide science doesn't matter...all of a sudden...:unsure:
 
fwiw, i make many trips to SD annually, not just in the fall...been there 6 times already this spring /summer...will probably make it 7-8 times before I'm done this fall...I get a pretty good feel for the #'s in my area, maybe not as good as a local, but far better than a guy who makes it out on one or two trips. I have never felt that GFP has been specious in their data...I trust it.
 
I’m not sure about hunter surveys...speaking of which, I don’t know anybody that I hunt with that has ever responded...maybe they do and never mention it...not sure I ever have...I would trust the surveys administered by gfp as much or more as those done by hunters, but maybe I am overlooking something...very well may be...other states do other data gathering, like rooster crowing in the spring (ND), in addition to the late summer bird counts that ND does....what else does SD do? I don't know...other than the canceled brood count survey and the hunter survey? If it is down to the hunter survey, I don't know that I would call that science...but it probably is and I am wrongheaded about my view of it. I know the data that goes back to 1930 or whatever has many, many columns of data...maybe that will continue??
 
Last edited:
my last thought of the morning, gotta get to work, been gone hunting since Tuesday; stamps just piss me off! If it is required, just make it part of the goddamned license! why make this $hit more complicated? One more transaction, one more item I might overlook. bought licenses already in MT and ND...all the little add-ons and the like are fine if it pulls them in automatically, but it just seems odd to break it out separately...maybe landowners don't need it, and that explains the separate item??? could be....good luck everyone!! corn coming out, beans are about done...birds should be bunched! very dry, too...easy to get in the sloughs...
 
B-B, I don't quite get it either (all the stamps & certifications & add-ons). I'm sure there are several "great" reasons for the break-out though. First, it probably gives bureaucrats a warm-fuzzy to pass something like a "habitat stamp". And I'm sure it makes revenue allocation easier to have it broken out when the purchase is made. We all know that otherwise the State is likely to get bogged down by simple math. I'm sure there are other things I'm not aware of & would just make me mad if I was.
 
My interpretation is that it is more palatable to the customer to provide us the warm-fuzzies...corporate marketeers piss me off in general
 
Could be as simple as ear marking and routing $$ to the correct funds. I think MN has 8-10 game & fish accounts. Some very specific like Trout & Salmon Management. Maybe even more likely is to keep the $$ out of general accounts where they can be siphoned off for other efforts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top