Guests - If You want access to member only forums on FM. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on Fishing Minnesota.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

  • Announcements

    • Rick

      Members Only Fluid Forum View   08/08/2017

      Fluid forum view allows members only to get right to the meat of this community; the topics. You can toggle between your preferred forum view just below to the left on the main forum entrance. You will see three icons. Try them out and see what you prefer.   Fluid view allows you, if you are a signed up member, to see the newest topic posts in either all forums (select none or all) or in just your favorite forums (select the ones you want to see when you come to Fishing Minnesota). It keeps and in real time with respect to Topic posts and lets YOU SELECT YOUR FAVORITE FORUMS. It can make things fun and easy. This is especially true for less experienced visitors raised on social media. If you, as a members want more specific topics, you can even select a single forum to view. Let us take a look at fluid view in action. We will then break it down and explain how it works in more detail.   The video shows the topic list and the forum filter box. As you can see, it is easy to change the topic list by changing the selected forums. This view replaces the traditional list of categories and forums.   Of course, members only can change the view to better suit your way of browsing.   You will notice a “grid” option. We have moved the grid forum theme setting into the main forum settings. This makes it an option for members only to choose. This screenshot also shows the removal of the forum breadcrumb in fluid view mode. Fluid view remembers your last forum selection so you don’t lose your place when you go back to the listing. The benefit of this feature is easy to see. It removes a potential barrier of entry for members only. It puts the spotlight on topics themselves, and not the hierarchical forum structure. You as a member will enjoy viewing many forums at once and switching between them without leaving the page. We hope that fluid view, the new functionality is an asset that you enjoy .
Sign in to follow this  
brittman

Wildlife Plates or Window Sticker Required for WMA access??

Recommended Posts

brittman

How many of you out there purchase one of the wildlife plates for your trucks and cars?

How about this idea.

Any vehicle accessing MN WMAs would require either

a wildlife license plate

or a window sticker (just like the state parks).

NRs would need the sticker too

Pay (a little) to play. $30 per - would add up quick.

Easy for the COs to enforce. Handicapped plates exempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lawdog

I like it. I've had the wildlife plates since the first year they came out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Augusta

If the money goes for more public access, then I'm all for it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brittman

Idea is same as snowmobile pass, X-ski pass, etc...

Those who use - pay .. or contribute more ... if added $$ goes to more land acquisition, walk-in, or better management of current land I am for it.

If access is the key to hunter satisfaction, retainment, etc.. then let's do something ... stop whining and try something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WAG416

So would this mean that if I even want to hunt in a WMA, and my vehicle is parked along the road,and doesn't have the wildlife plates,i cant hunt there,

or, is this just for driving into WMA's with the vehicle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwhjr

I've got the plates and I like the idea. WAG416 - Looks like brittman's idea was either the plates or a sticker like the state parks. \:\)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brittman

You would need the plates or the sticker. Idea is those that hunt the WMAs support them at a heavier pace.

Pheasant stamp everyone buys and this supports biologists, management plans, and some land management.

License plate / window decal: $$ goes to habitat land acquisition and or walk-in land ... more public land. Not just pheasants, but ducks, deer, sharptails, ruffs ...

Our MN income tax money will not be diverted to more hunting land. The bills come before the MN house and senate, but will not go far without additional funds - and who will raise taxes?

The idea is pay-to-play...

In the era of $15 box of shells and $60 tanks of gas, one could argue $30 for land access is cheap or one could argue ouch... another bill.

Seniors and handicap could run free ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jigging-matt

I like the idea. I have Consevation plates now, and like the idea of where the money goes. plus you get to deduct you tabs on you income taxes anyway, so what is the big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gspman

My only concern is that the legislature in their infinite "wisdom" would find a way to put that money into the General Fund just like our fishing license fees. Then the money will go for whatever is needed instead of back into the WMA's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jameson

 Originally Posted By: brittman
Any vehicle accessing MN WMAs would require either

a wildlife license plate

or a window sticker (just like the state parks).

NRs would need the sticker too

Huh? Most WMA's don't allow vehicle access. Vehicle access to the parking lot?-I'll park on the road. What if I walk in from my private land next to the WMA? What if three of us are dropped off and then picked up later on by someone not hunting? Don't I already buy a pheasant stamp to support habitat?

I don't buy the wildlife license plates, because I believe I use that money at other times to help the wildlife. Others may not be able to help the wildlife in other ways, or have more to give than I.

What is the reason to have plates or stickers to access WMAs? More money to improve the habitat? Vehicle I.D. is NOT a good way to do this. Have less people use the WMAs? Vehicle I.D. is a good way to do this.

How about leasing naming rights to certain WMAs? Wildlife groups private and public would pay so much to have the name of the WMA. That would be good advertising for many companies and groups. These same groups may want to have the finest WMA in the land, so they would invest money into the habitat. This would attract more people, bettering the groups investment. Just an idea that wouldn't take money out of average Joe's pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rockman

This idea is nothing more than another user fee to the sportsman.WMA'a are already paid for and owned by the state,so what is the point of gathering more money via a sticker or license plate? Is the point to keep funding available to buy more land, to convert it to WMA land? I get that idea, but the land has to be available to buy, first off, and I don't think a whole lot of MN residents who are land owners are lining up at the DNR to sell off their land to the state.I agree with the post that the money garnered from this idea would probably end up in the general fund anyway,so what is the point of doing it? I do not have the plates as of right now, and really don't plan on buying them.If anyone wants to rip on me for this, have at it.I don't care.I pay enough money for several MN licenses already,so where does it stop? If some of you have a hole burning in your pocket with money you want to donate to the DNR for more WMA land,write your check to them, but keep the rest of us out of it.And yes, I do pheasant hunt on WMA land during the season.Enough said,for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Northland Sportsman

I don't like the idea of another fee. We already pay licenses, stamps, etc. for the privilege to hunt on public lands. Also the current numbers of hunters and anglers are going down, fewer people buying licenses and participating in the outdoor sports. I think this would keep more people from hunting and hurt the sport in the end because if people don't use them they could be viewed as surplus and sold to private individulas. Could also keep someone on the fence from giving hunting a try due to added costs. I think we need to keep the public lands and waters open to as many people as possible to keep youg people interested in the outdoors we love so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2thepointsetters

If the money just went to WMA's then it would be good. But I doubt it would, the next thing you know your also paying extra money to fish in your favorite lake etc. Politicians cant handle money... I dont really support pay to hunt opportunities because I think they are the downfall of our sport.( rich mans sport )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ImissReeds

I also see the rich man mentality playing here. I'm all for supporting WMA's and public land, but I don't want to see anyone who as already bought proper licensing to have to debate "drawing the line" since its just another $30 on top of the large pile of money in the eyes of some. Public land doesn't equal leased land...

On the other hand, if you don't ALREADY have a hunting license of some kind (which is where the WMA was originally purchased from),,,

then I think you should have to buy a user pass such as a bird watcher permit or a hikers pass or a bunny hugger armband \:\)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this