New Jersey Hunters banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,014 Posts
I don't disagree with the $20 fee:

1. Hunters pay for wildlife
2. The county pays out a lot in overtime and signage.
3. It's better than the alternative "White Buffalo"
4. $20 bucks is reasonable.
5. It prevents the guy who went and got a free permit walking in at 3:30 - 4:00PM looking for a tree to run up and ruining someone's hunt. Serious hunters who will take the time and effort to find a spot in advance of the season.

just my .02 cents
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
Just to add my penny,
I opposed the fee because 1000's of people use the parks for free. They are provided with hiking trails, sports fields, activity centers, and etc. They don't pay for $#@^. Let them pay a "USER FEE " also. If the parks were to provide tree stands for us like they provide facilites for others I would agree with the fee.
1. Yes, Hunters pay for wildlife why should we pay more?[confused]
2. The overtime & signage is mostly for the non or anti hunters not for us.[confusedagain]
3. If they are asking for $20.00 to offset their expenses do you think they could afford to pay White Buffalo?
4. Any amount is not reasonable when you're retired Senior Citizen on a fixed income.[cry]
5. This could happen to anyone no matter how much they pay or who pays. You will now hear "I paid to hunt here so I'll hunt where I want"
Either way I'll will pay the $20.00 and another for my daughter also. [wallmad]
Will we see you at the MC Federation meeting tomorrow? :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,410 Posts
I couldn't make the meeting as my wife was not feeling well and I had to watch the kids. T=bolt I get your view and don't necessarily disagree. Anyhow, had I been there, this was my 2 cents;

“As a conservation and recreation agency, the Park System acquires and manages land both for resource protection and recreation opportunities.” This is straight from the Deer Management Program Objectives. Last year, the program went out of its way to “remind hunters that hunting is permitted within the parks as a deer management strategy, not as a recreational activity.” This is contradictory to the statement of objectives and it bothers me that the Park System does not recognize that hunting, like fishing, is a recreational activity. The State, the Federal Government and dare I say even Barrack Obama himself has recognized that hunting is a time-honored recreational way of life for many Americans.

Of the 4,500 programs offered by the park, the park averages around 21 persons per activity. With nearly a thousand hunters registered; hunting is not only a recreational activity, but just about one of the most active in the whole system. Of the park programs, only those that are performances or demonstrations are free. The rest charge a nominal fee and logically to cover the costs of instructors and moderators. In other words, they charge a fee to offset the costs of the program. If you are going to charge a fee to offset costs; then call it a recreational program.

Now I realize this is not politically convenient, but across the State and Country; communities are beginning to understand the dangers of overpopulated deer and the positive role hunting plays in controlling them. MOST conservation programs recognize that hunting is both a vital tool as well as a recreational activity; regardless of whether it is popular or not.

If you don't want to recognize it as a recreation, yet you want hunters to “assist in a management activity”, then you shouldn’t be charging them. As to having park workers conduct hunts; as a taxpayer, donor and supporter of open lands initiatives, even if I wasn’t a hunter, I’d object to paying manpower for something other qualified, experienced people will do for free. That doesn’t make much business sense. Just a side note, there were 961 hunters last year. At $20 a head, that’s $19,220. From what I have read, the County cut the Park System’s budget by $19,570. Probably just a coincidence, but I found it interesting.

The bottom line is if you are going to charge a fee, then call it a recreational program. If not, it's a "management activity" and hunters should not be charged for their services.
Oh well, doesn't sound like it would have made a difference.[smirk] But there' always next year.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Why are we even argueing over this? If $20 is what it costs to keep the hunts open, it's a no brainer. If we fight the fee and they close the parks what was accomplished. NOTHING!
The hunts are outside the normal scope of park operations. There is nothing binding that says they have to hold the hunts. The parks dept is trying to incorporate hunting to control the herd. There is overtime and other logistics that will be covered under the fee. Bottom line if you don't want to pay the fee don't hunt the parks! There will be more room for the rest of us who don't mind paying at all!:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,381 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Why are we even argueing over this?
I posted this, to inform those who, like myself, weren't aware of this new fee. It sure was kept quite, and now is cast in stone.
It's said, arguing on the internet, is like arguing with yourself, neither make any sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,711 Posts
$20 for a semi-private place to hunt in NJ? Sounds reasonable....
I've said the same thing about the Hunterdon County parks. In principle, I don't agree with the fee. However, the program does limit the number of hunters based on the size of the property and paying $25 for a permit is a lot cheaper than paying to lease a property or join a club.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,410 Posts
NJB:

Why should the hunts be outside of normal park operations? Why shouldn't there be hunting allowed as in the State WMA? My tax dollars pay for it, I vote and donate towards open space preservation; yet only hikers and horse riders get to use it?

The argument really isn't the fee. What it comes down to is the continued reduction of hunting in the parks over the past few years.

Last year, the Park System eliminated gun hunting in four parks. The reason as stated in the proposal, “is to reduce the actual and perceived impact of hunting on neighbors, visitors, and staff ". The parks they targeted were by their own definition, "largely undeveloped with limited public use". 3 of the 4 parks don't even have hiking trails through them and nominal deer were culled. The only reason for doing this was to appease the antis.

The program goes through great lengths to explain and rationalize tested conservation practices yet then doesn't practice them because of anti-hunting sentiments. That's like saying "Yeah we know the bears are a problem, but they're cute fuzzy animals". Until the public gets educated that hunting is a normal everyday activity, it will continue to be eroded from the parks.

I think the $20 fee is there to appease the antis and the suggestion to have employees hunt is just a "taste" of what's to come.

BTW, since you're from Ocean County, you should pay double!:D JK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
I don't disagree with the $20 fee:

1. Hunters pay for wildlife
2. The county pays out a lot in overtime and signage.
3. It's better than the alternative "White Buffalo"
4. $20 bucks is reasonable.
5. It prevents the guy who went and got a free permit walking in at 3:30 - 4:00PM looking for a tree to run up and ruining someone's hunt. Serious hunters who will take the time and effort to find a spot in advance of the season.
BINGO! For $20. you get to hunt in your backyard, eliminate some of the less than serious hunters, and provide a small token amount of financial support to the parks system...this type of fee is now standard in most county/municipal deer management programs and actually on the low $$ end.
Ray
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
At $20 a head, that’s $19,220. From what I have read, the County cut the Park System’s budget by $19,570. Probably just a coincidence, but I found it interesting.
I think the $20 fee is there to appease the antis and the suggestion to have employees hunt is just a "taste" of what's to come.
I wonder if the cull was a smoke screen to get the fee passed[confused] A Corzine trick[wallmad]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,956 Posts
Just to add my penny,
I opposed the fee because 1000's of people use the parks for free. They are provided with hiking trails, sports fields, activity centers, and etc. They don't pay for $#@^. Let them pay a "USER FEE " also. If the parks were to provide tree stands for us like they provide facilites for others I would agree with the fee.
1. Yes, Hunters pay for wildlife why should we pay more?
2. The overtime & signage is mostly for the non or anti hunters not for us.
3. If they are asking for $20.00 to offset their expenses do you think they could afford to pay White Buffalo?
4. Any amount is not reasonable when you're retired Senior Citizen on a fixed income.
5. This could happen to anyone no matter how much they pay or who pays. You will now hear "I paid to hunt here so I'll hunt where I want"
Either way I'll will pay the $20.00 and another for my daughter also.
Will we see you at the MC Federation meeting tomorrow?
I agree with NJHUNTSMAN on this one...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,956 Posts
Why are we even argueing over this? If $20 is what it costs to keep the hunts open, it's a no brainer. If we fight the fee and they close the parks what was accomplished. NOTHING!
The hunts are outside the normal scope of park operations. There is nothing binding that says they have to hold the hunts. The parks dept is trying to incorporate hunting to control the herd. There is overtime and other logistics that will be covered under the fee. Bottom line if you don't want to pay the fee don't hunt the parks! There will be more room for the rest of us who don't mind paying at all!
NJBowman, you have a point too...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,529 Posts
I wonder how long it will take for the state to start charging a fee to hunt in state parks?......To offset budget shortfalls and cost of managing the hunts of course.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top