$1 fee on license for deer processing

[Scott M]

Was wondering if people were up in arms about the $1 fee for deer processing as was portrayed in the media stories. The DNR is staying out of it and MDHA is against it since most of its membership wouldn't want the extra fee. Seems like a good thing to me; I had a hard time getting into deer hunting because I was afraid of what I would do with all that meat. Maybe a few others are in my boat and could use the free processing to donate some or all of the meat but still get the experience. Besides, if we as deer hunters start donating to food shelves we are setting a great example to the non-hunters. What a great way to offset the negative press that you hear about from time to time (poachers, baiters, litterers, etc.) I realize nobody wants to get nickeled and dimed to death, but everybody's dollar bill would go a long ways.....If I changed your mind I hope you would call or write your representative or talk to your MDHA chapter....

[harvey lee]

I dont believe it is the duty of the sportsman to feed the world. I understand where you are coming from about changing the view of some on hunters but I dont believe we as sportsman should have to pay to do it.

You will still have the lawbreakers and they will still be in the press even if the meat is provided. Its not that hard to cut up your own deer and it doesnt take much for time or equipment.

All citizens pay taxes for so many different programs that I dont believe we need to have the hunters pay for and provide meat to non hunters.

I realize its only 1 dollar but it wont end there nor will it change the minds of the PETA group.

[koonie]

I've got to agree with Harvey here. If you shoot a deer I think you should be responsible for processing it. If you want to donate it to a food shelf that's fine but why should others have to pay for it? If you don't want to pay for the processing don't shoot the deer.

With the way things are going it won't be long and hunting and fishing will be to expensive for a lot of people. Iknow it's only a dollar but what's next. From what I've heard the federal duck stamp is going to jump from $15 to $25 and then to $35 in the next 5 years. If that happens you can bet the state duck stamp will also go up and then the pheasant stamp will also go up(probably). I know when I sell a fishing license one of the survey questions that comes up is "do you think the Minnesota fishing license is a good value?" HMMMMMM that sounds to me like if enough people answer yes that the fishing license will take a bump up as well. Just speculating here but it seems like a lead in question.

Right now I'm already paying $181.50 for hunting and fishing licenses. Enough is enough I say.

[xedge2002]

I would agree with both the previous posts. If they are going to charge an extra dollar on the license I would rather see it go to buying and maintaining habitat or keeping/upgrading the CRP programs.

[ScoutII]

So does this sound about right; If the DNR obtains the meat as evidence while prosecuting a poacher, the poacher pays the fee for processing the donated meat as part of there sentenceing. Road kills alot of times are barely worth the effort. And I would think that hunters who just like to shoot deer just to shoot deer would know hunting buddies that weren't so lucky to get deer and share, or otherwise be able to afford to donate processd meat rather than throw it away or expect the rest of us to pay for their inability to finish their job. Paper tagets are recyclable and are easy to process.

[Powerstroke]

Scout...you are reading into this the entirely wrong way. The money for meat donations is for exactly that. Not for dealing with other problems related to wanton waste. Your assumption is WAY off.

Personally I am okay with the $1 charge. Its going to a specific purpose. The main reason this is being brought up is because the DNR wants to reduce the deer populations. It wants people to take 5+ deer in the metro and up to 5 deer in some out-state areas. Very few people do and the main reason revealed in surveys was that hunters who wanted to help with culling the herd couldn't afford to pay $60-100 for each deer they donate. It also doesn't pay to process yourself for donation reasons cause then an individual has to find a way to donate home-processed meat that can't be verified.

I personally participate in deer management hunts in the metro and the question came up at every orientation we had. The people who are genuinely interested in reducing the herds are fine with the fee because they want to kill the deer for the cause and would like to donate the meat they can't keep. Its not about the ethics of shooting too many deer, its about having too many deer and no way to manage them. Its not about satisfying PETA either, wherever that came from.

My solution to pleasing both sides would be to place the processing fee on management tags instead of on the general licenses. It won't make as much money, but it will serve to charge those who are participating in the herd management.

If you (everyone) is concerned about the cost of licenses then you should read Dennis Anderson's article on license fees and how they are spent. It was in the last 2-3 weeks on sunday. A large portion of hunting licenses goes to other areas of the DNR besides wildlife and hunting related issues. If you want to start a fight, start there.

[harvey lee]

If the DNR wants to reduce the herd in a specific area, then they should give the license out for free. As far as hiding it inside of another tag, why?

If one cannot eat what he shoots then he should stop hunting and not expect others to pay thier way.

I shoot 4-6 deer per year and butcher what I need and give the rest away. Some years I have tags left and cannot find anyone who wants a deer so I stop hunting. I personally am not going to ask someone else to pay the way so I can keep hunting.

[KatoMike]

Come on guys - it's a lousy buck for crying out loud. How much money do we all spend on hunting and fishing each year? And you are upset about giving a dollar to a good cause. What happened to Minnesota nice?

[koonie]

If you want to donate a deer to the food shelf why should someone else have to pay for it. You shot the deer it's your responsibility.

If I want to donate a case of soup to the food shelf I'll buy a case of soup and bring it there. I won't ask someone else to pay for it. In fact my dart team does this every year.

As far as management hunts go the processing should be taken care of by that individual city.

I realize it is "only" a dollar but this whole thing really isn't about filling the food shelfs'. It's about people not wanting to pay for processing a deer THEY SHOT AND ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR!

[harvey lee]

Its not the dollar for me as I am sure I waste more than that. I dont mind giving if I would like too but I dont want to be forced to.

[ScoutII]

[quotIt also doesn't pay to process yourself for donation reasons cause then an individual has to find a way to donate home-processed meat that can't be verified.e] So can you enlighten me on how the processors packaged meat can be donated successfully when home processed will be refused? Food shelves taking perishables sounds risky nomatter where it came from. I remeber companies that quit donating over the due date products to food shelves because of possible liability problems. Maybe we should donate the home processed meat to an organization for a wildgame feed and give the donations from the gamefeed to the foodshelf and get more bang for the buck without the middlemen.Government has a way of not being very effectient in handling funding and distrubution. That way we could get a quality low cost meal and donate to a good cause at the same time, win,win.

[paintbrush]

I am also dead set agaisnt this $1.00 forced down our throat fee.Food shelves are a social program and should be funded by those willing to donate, or come out of the states general fund,not forced upon one group of individuals,us hunters, to pay for that program.

[bottomdweller]

Maybe when you go to buy your liscense they could ask if you would like to donate a dollar to the processing fee. Kind of like what they have when you fill out your taxes.

I am against forcing everyone to pay. We have enough of that now.

[harvey lee]

Good idea bottomdweller. The ones that would like to can and the others dont have to. All by choice. That makes so much sense that I doubt the state would do it.

[RBuker]

I hope that some of you who are opposed to having the $1.00 fee rammed down your throat are never in the position to have to go to the food shelf for your next meal.

I'm all for the dollar donation. As long as it goes where it's supposed to, I think it's a wonderful idea.

I'm not a wealthy person but if that dollar could give someone a tasty meal of venison that they wouldn't otherwise get, I'm all for it. While some of the folks who visit food shelves are lazy and don't choose to work, often their children have no say in the matter.

On the same note, if increasing our hunting and fishing fees would help increase our natural resources, hunting access, game animals and birds, etc, I'm all for it. Heck I get so much enjoyment out of it that I'd pay double what they are.

Randy

[Scott M]

I agree, great idea bottomdweller. But if it was voluntary, would it be enough to support everyone who wants to drop a deer off at the processor? Same question goes for management tags. Would there be enough money generated? Thank God there are a few MDHA chapters that finance donations already.

I guess everybody splits this thing a different way. For me, and I will right away admit that I'm hugely in the minority, is it's about the chance to be out there. I see it as a recruitment issue or tool. Get someone to try deer hunting and they are hooked for life. But if they don't have a freezer big enough for all that meat (like me and most others in my tax bracket ), they may never try. And then another person will never hunt for the rest of their life. Hunter numbers are staying the same, but our percentage of the population is dropping. I don't think it's an ethical issue where someone is making a choice to not eat all that meat- at least it shouldn't be that way. I totally agree with those who say "You shoot it, you eat it." I have to follow that mandate for nasty ducks, why should it change for anything else.

I'm as stingy as anybody here, but when it comes to hunting and fishing, we have a real bargain in what we pay to be able to hunt and fish this great state. If fee increases come, I will continue to pay them, least concerning to me is 8 bits for deer processing and venison donation to those with mouths to feed.

Any other good ideas floating around?

[tealitup]

Why not change a law that allows a hunter to donate its meat directly to the food shelf. Currently, and and all meat has to come from a processor and can not come directly from the hunter.

Many food shelves do not abide by this law which leaves them open to a lawsuit if someone were to get sick.

Should everyone have to give a dollar for this service? I do not believe so - make it a question when you buy your license - like do you hunt waterfowl? what zone do you hunt? would you like to donate $1 for processing services.

[Walleye Guy]

I realize I look at this in a way too simple form. Its a buck. Big deal. Spending an extra dollar doesn't change my financial situation and if I can be part of a larger effort that helps people who need food, wonderful.

One other aspect to keep in mind. If this program is implemented, some hunters in some zones may hunt longer and shoot additional deer because they have a place to take them. This (in theory) could help reduce deer numbers in areas where they need to be reduced. If the reductions do not happen, certain areas/zones may be faced with programs such as earn-a-buck, lotteries for buck licenses etc.

[ozzie]

i am not for it......a dollar is not a big deal but the way that hunters have to pay for it is bogus. If you do hunt you probably know someone that would love to take any extra venison you don't want. If you want to donate it to food shelves then pay for it yourself or don't shoot the deer!! To me it is just another way to extract money from my pocket.

[lawdog]

Call it what you will and give it any special program name, it doesn't matter, its still just a tax...

[bottomdweller]

You nailed it lawdog. I dont mind donating, I love too, but when your forced it becomes a tax like lawdog said.

I think between minnesota and wisconsin there are enough of those.

[eyehead]

Quote:

---

While some of the folks who visit food shelves are lazy and don't choose to work, often their children have no say in the matter.

---

Right on RBuker, Im all for the one dollar increase, and Give me a break it's a dollar!! Sometime's I think certain people just like to whine and cry about things.

[harvey lee]

I have and will always donate to food shelves and other food programs without even thinking about it. I do not like a law passed that states I have to. Thats the problem, if they made it a donation I would probably donate also.

[Whoaru99]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

While some of the folks who visit food shelves are lazy and don't choose to work, often their children have no say in the matter.

---

Right on RBuker, Im all for the one dollar increase, and Give me a break it's a dollar!! Sometime's I think certain people just like to whine and cry about things.

---

That's just it, "it's only a dollar", but a dollar here and a dollar there adds up.

Every day I put any loose change I have into an ice cream pail. It's only a few coins here and there, but you know what? It doesn't take long for that pail to fill and when I cash it in, it comes to $500 give or take a little.

[Eric Wettschreck]

Here is a real problem in Minnesota. We are so used to being nickel and dimed to death that the "It's only a dollar." is no big deal.

It is a big deal. It's another tax. We pay enough taxes. I'm with Harv, donate if you want to. Don't donate if you don't want to. But let's be done paying more taxes for awhile. My salary needs to go up more just to keep up with the ones we have now.

[BLACKJACK]

Quote:

---

I hope that some of you who are opposed to having the

$1.00

fee rammed down your throat are never in the position to

have to

go to the food shelf for your next meal.

---

RIGHT ON Rbuker!! We all need to think of the ones that are less fortunate than we are.

When this $1 idea came out I was also against it, why saddle it onto the deer hunters, if its such a good idea, why not fund it from the General Fund? After thinking about it I don't care if they do put it on or not, its going to a good cause and it will generate a lot of good publicity for deer hunters. Plus it only a dollar, thats not going to kill me.

My concern is what do they do with the excess dollars rasied? It better goto deer management and not into the General fund.

[lawdog]

Quote:

---

it will generate a lot of good publicity for deer hunters. Plus it only a dollar, thats not going to kill me.

---

Do you seriously think it will generate good publicity for hunting? Do you think the Start Tribunes and WCCO's of the world are all the sudden going to go out of there way to say how great the hunting public is because we paid this tax? Do we get credit for saving all the wildlife and the habitat with Robinson-Pittman money or the DU PF etc. land? No.

I agree too that I can swing an extra dollar easy enough, but when we need more hunters to help ensure our future, should we be raising the costs to get into hunting? Lots of people who hunt are fairly poor themselves, what about them?

[Eric Wettschreck]

No, a dollar will not put me in the poor house. However, at what point do we look towards St. Paul and say enough is enough? Pretty soon there will be a tax on my poo-poo. Oh wait, there is. There is actually a tax on my sewer bill.

There will be no good pub out of this. People who donated in the past will continue to donate. People who didn't donate will continue to not donate. The only thing that will change is the state will get more tax money.

Quote:

---

I hope that some of you who are opposed to having the $1.00 fee rammed down your throat are never in the position to have to go to the food shelf for your next meal.

---

Nah, I think instead of going to the food shelf, I'll go shoot a deer instead.

[kaz2611]

who pays for the processing of other meats that go to the food shelf? im all for donating to the food shelves but i think it should be left at the hunters choice when they purchase their license. alot of hunters have their venison professionally processed if it is stamped by processor why then cant this be donated to a food shelf and the state wants to charge a hunter abuck on top of his /her processing fee. im not trying to make this sound like its a big money issue but in reality it is from the standpoint that dnr would like to donate venison to the food shelves but doesnt have the necessary funds to have it processed therefore they want the deer hunter to pay for it reguardless if they want to donate or not. In my opinion it should be left up to the hunter wether or not they wish to donate a $1 for processing.

[101winchester]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a few years back we had another $1 added to our license fee to pay for deer feeding during tough winters and low and behold that money was put into the general fund never to be seen again from what I remember. DNR said that if it wasn't used that year that is where it went with no stockpiling.