Illinois Outdoors at PrairiestateOutdoors.com
RulesIllinois Outdoors at PrairiestateOutdoors.com

Prairie State Outdoors Categories

Top Story :: Opinion :: Illinois Outdoor News :: Fishing News :: Hunting News :: Birding News :: Nature Stories :: Miscellaneous News :: Fishing :: Big Fish Fridays :: Big Fish Stories :: State Fishing Reports :: Other Fishing Reports :: Fishing Tips, Tactics & Tales :: Where to Fish :: Fishing Calendar :: Hunting :: Hunting Reports :: Hunting Tips, Tactics & Tales :: Where to Hunt :: Tales from the Timber :: Turkey Tales :: Hunting Calendar :: Big Game Stories :: Nature and Birding :: Birding Bits :: Nature Newsbits :: Critter Corner :: Birding Calendar :: Stargazing :: In the Wild :: Miscellaneous Reports and Shorts :: Links :: Hunting Links :: Birding Links :: Video ::

Big Buck Stories

1960s :: 1980s :: 1991-92 :: 1992-93 :: 1993-94 :: 1994-95 :: 1995-96 :: 1997-98 :: 1998-99 :: 1999-2000 :: 2000-01 :: 2001-02 :: 2003-04 :: 2004-05 :: 2005-06 :: 2006-07 :: 2007-08 :: 2008-09 :: 2009-10 :: 2010-11 :: 2011-12 :: 2012-13 ::

Scattershooting

Flathead's Picture of the Week :: Big bucks :: Birdwatching :: Cougars :: Dogs :: Critters :: Fishing :: Asian carp :: Bass :: Catfish :: Crappie :: Ice :: Muskie :: Humor :: Hunting :: Deer :: Ducks :: Geese :: Turkey :: Upland game :: Misc. :: Mushrooms :: Open Blog Thursday :: Picture A Day 2010 :: Plants and trees :: Politics :: Prairie :: Scattershooting :: Tales from the Trail Cams :: Wild Things ::


Print

Legislators pass license fee increases

November 02, 2009 at 06:24 PM

Hunters and anglers are probably going to pay more for that privilege next year.

Both the Illinois House and Senate approved an increase in hunting and fishing license fees during last week’s veto session in Springfield. All that is required for the increases to become law is a signature on Senate Bill 1846 by Gov. Pat Quinn.

Department of Natural Resources Director Marc Miller has pushed for the fee increases—$2 for a fishing license and $5 for a hunting license—to help his agency. The increases are estimated to raise an additional $3.5 million for fish and wildlife conservation.

If Quinn signs the bill, resident fishing licenses will increase from $12.50 to $14.50. A deer permit would go from $15 to $25 and hunting licenses would rise from $7 to $12.

Fee increases would go into effect Jan. 1, 2010.

Here is the text of DNR’s interpretation of Senate Bill 1846.

DNR’s take on Senate Bill 1846

IDNR is committed to improving quality recreational opportunities for its constituents, not only in the coming fiscal year but in years to come. In order to secure the future of the agency and its mission, we are asking our constituents to support us through several fee increases. The agency will diligently protect the integrity of dedicated funds that support the mission of IDNR and protect the supportive intent of the individuals who provide those funds, through hunting and fishing licenses, stamps and other fees. These proposed fees will allow the agency to enhance conservation opportunities, improve quality recreation and make critical hires for the agency, all of which lead to a better overall experience for outdoor enthusiasts.

Migratory Waterfowl Fee (Increase)

The cost of the State Migratory Waterfowl Stamp would increase from $10.00 to $15.00. The increase will be used specifically to improve and maintain state waterfowl areas. Currently, revenue generated from Migratory Waterfowl Stamp fees do not adequately support Waterfowl operations. Requires Legislative action.

FY10 - $111k FY11 - $243k

Deer Hunting Permit Fee (Increase)

The Resident Deer Hunting Permit Fee would increase from $15.00 to $25.00. The fee was last increased approximately 25 years ago. This fee would support an increase in Wildlife management staff.

Would require legislative action and an administrative rule change.

FY10 - $559k FY11 - $1.118M

Hunting, Fishing, and Sportsman Combination License Fee (Increase)

This proposal would increase all resident hunting and fishing licenses by $7.00.

Resident fishing licenses would increase from $12.50 to $14.50.

A Non-resident 10-day fishing license would increase from $12.50 to $19.50 and a non-resident annual fishing license would increase from 24.50 to $31.50

The fishing license fees were last increased over 10 years ago. Fishing license sales support fish and aquatic management throughout Illinois.

Resident hunting license fees would increase from $7.00 to $12.00. Non-Resident annual hunting licenses would increase from $50.00 to $57.00. Non-resident 10-day hunting licenses would increase from $28.00 to $35.00. Resident hunting licenses were last raised in 1974. Revenue generated from this fee increase will fund an increase in Wildlife program staff as funds become available.

Sportsman combination licenses would increase from $18.50 to $25.50. (Only Illinois residents are eligible for a Sportsman license).

Would require Legislative action and an administrative rule change.

FY10 - $548k FY11 - $1.095M

Environmental Consultation Fees (New)

Currently, local units of government and private entities are required, by statue, to complete an environmental consultation review with the IDNR. This proposal would charge a fee of $500.00 to local governments or private entities seeking this consultation.

This fee will help cover the cost of performing these reviews, including supporting staff and the automated EcoCAT web based system that allows users to get results substantially faster. After getting the review results, cities sometimes charge developers for this information that they currently receive for free from the IDNR.

Requires legislative action.

FY10 - $545k FY11 - $1.190M

Office of Water Resources Permit Fees (New)

Create a series of regulatory fees for the IDNR Office of Water Resources ranging from $400.00 to $5,000 specifically for OWR permits and Lake Michigan water allocations. The proposal also creates an annual fee (TBD) for the use of the Chain O’Lakes, to be collected from boaters. These fees will fund permit and water allocation services, flood control and dam safety programs, and operation of the Stratton Lock and Dam.

Requires legislative action.

FY10 - $394k FY11 - $1.140M

Your CommentsComments :: Terms :: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Should be done like the other states and leave the residents alone and clip the out of state hunters and fishermen.  Just can’t ever get enough cash.  Where will it end??

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/02 at 08:31 PM

It will never end until all Liberal scum is removed from office here in this pathetic state….

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/02 at 09:07 PM

So the lifetime hunting license fee will NOT increase?

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/02 at 09:13 PM

I am a little bummed about my shotgun tags for deer going up to $50, but that is still cheap to hunt trophy whitetail.  I will be able to make do.  I hope this increase keeps our state parks open, and our officers in patrol. So overall, I AM FOR IT.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/02 at 09:20 PM

you better invest in the lifetime before they get anymore bright ideas.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/02 at 09:22 PM

Well looks like our IDNR got what they wanted &
we will all be paying more for it.
Now we will see if the IDNR budget next year still gets cut, to off set any increases ????
Hunters & Fishermen are caring the load AGAIN, Meanwhile bird watchers, hikers, stargazers & anyone who uses a state run park, that is NOT hunting & fishing, STILL gets a free ride.
What a joke !
PLUS the deerhunters are the ones getting hit the hardest.
Us deerhunters are getting to pay more for our hunting license AND all our deer permits.
IF, we can still find a place to hunt.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Anyone think any of this money will be used to hire back CPO’s, bring back check station, hire a turkey biologist, hire a real deer biologist, support a REAL access program, ect…????????

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/02 at 09:32 PM

Count me out for any firearms thats just too much on top of bow tags, combo license, and habitat stamp. I better make the most of this gun season may be my last for a while. I feel sorry for my buddy who gets combo tags for his family of 5 for firearm and muzzle loader. But, I doubt if he does that again.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/02 at 09:33 PM

So is this our ELECTED officials idea of a new enhanced retirement plan? We pay more in fees so they can steal more while in office.

Posted by knob on 11/02 at 10:06 PM

Fly1 actualy litetime license fees are figured on 30 times the current fee so yes they will go up to.
..
wsmbass I’m afraid its going to happen to a lot of people and the state won’t see one extra dime from this, I’m sure they won’t understand it though and will want more fee increases in the future to offset loss of permit sales.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/02 at 10:11 PM

I find it interesting that they are raising firearm deer permits so much; even if it has been 25 years.  DNR has been using the firearm seasons as an effective management tool to help decrease the doe population.  They’ve also added extra antlerless only days this year. 

I’m guessing those efforts will be a wash come next year with fewer people willing to pay double for those permits.  I understand the need for the extra revenue, but at the same time, don’t they appear to be reversing course with respect to QDM?  Personally, I think there needs to be a balance between QDM and consistent revenue for DNR.

I also agree with others that the outfitters and non-resident permits should be raised by a certain percentage first.  The IL whitetail is highly coveted and we should take advantage of the supply and demand that is in our favor with this resource.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/02 at 10:42 PM

they sure could afford the billions on the olympics .
why mess with families trying to enjoy the outdoors?
won’t be able to afford our hobbies after long.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 08:22 AM

It will never change untill enough people get so tired of the way our state does business and let them know in Springfield we can vote the crooks out. Remember we have to take care of the golf course guy that ran the DNR for week and are new DNR’s assistant and how many more brother in laws need a job. 10% unemployment and they got the balls to do this. It’s a joke!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 08:31 AM

Yeah this sucks.  The state should provide us all with one giant buck on our front porch each year to shoot.  I also want 10 pound largemouth in every lake and a guarantee that I’ll catch one every time out.  Until they provide it, I don’t want to pay a dime.  If we just got rid of the liberals, we wouldn’t have to pay any taxes and the forests would be full of game.  If we only had Sarah Palin, we would have caribou and elk and bear to shoot also.  Of course, she wouldn’t raise any fees for that!
Everything should be free dammit!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 08:50 AM

I dont think raising the price is a bad idea. The only thing that is wrong about it is that it costs me $110.00 to get a nonresident hunting license in Iowa. lets just make the nonresident fees closer to our neigboring states. I have a bunch of buddys that live in iowa and come here to hunt because it only costs them $50 bucks where it costs me $110 to go hunt with them. Not to fare

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 09:19 AM

Hey spicoli your missing the point. Allot of us don’t want the state to do anything but leave us alone.  Seems like everytime we turn around they want money and to tell us what we should do or shouldn’t do. We don’t want to hunt and fish for free but we do want is some honest laws and fees accross the board. You must have a steady job some guys out there don’t and paying more to enjoy something that belongs to all of us gets a little old. And that my friend Sucks

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 09:44 AM

No, I do get it.  I too have friends who are out of work.  They are collecting unemplyment benefits just like yours most likely are.  We had to pay for that and I am glad to do it for your friends and mine.  If you want the state to leave you alone, then leave it alone as well.  Don’t go to school.  Don’t drive on roads.  Don’t expect police, fire, snow plows to help you out.  Don’t collect the benefits that you are railing against paying for.  Look, I am not stupid.  The politicians in this state have been sucking the place dry.  Pensions, perks, patronage, and the rest of that crap has to stop.  It is up to voters to do that.  Who should we be voting for in the primaries?  I have no idea yet.  On the other hand, there are things that we demand of gov’t and as long as we make those demands, we have to pay for them.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 10:04 AM

I don’t necessarily disagree with the resident fee increases.  It’s been how long since they happened?  For those of you who think the non-resident fees need increased… they already have.  My objection here is the amount of the increase.  Increasing too much will drive people away, especially in the current economic state.

Similar to increasing the non-resident bow tags several years ago.  My dad lived in IL for 30 years and then had to move to TN.  I got him to come back and hunt with me in IL again for a few years, then the DNR raised the bow tags so high, so fast it drove him out.  So what happens to the average Joe who comes in and hunts with his buddies for a weekend or 2?  He stays home cause it hurts the pocketbook too much.  I laughed my butt off when the DNR raised the prices and the number of tags and then didn’t sell them all.  GREAT PLAN!!!

I’ve lived in IL all my life, but all my relatives are out of state.  I take big offense to people bashing non residents when the ones I know just want to come here and hunt with family and friends.  The DNR in this case only caters to the outfitters, high $ rollers, and Chicago.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 11:44 AM

Hey Spicoli, move to California. It would be your Utopian paradise. If we could only keep people like you in one state, but the problem is all you liberals are like locusts. You destroy everything with your “ideals”, and then move on to the next state. I don’t need police to help me out, since I am armed much better than them, and I would be happy if my house would bvurn down since nothiung is selling in this economy. The roads up here in the Chicago suburbs already rival Beirut, wo what the hell is the difference? So they send out some bums to do a half ass patch or bettter yet do an half ass job on a road to last for another 14 months. Money well spent.


All my rambling aside who wants to bet that the DNR gets their budget reduced by 3.5 million or more?? Well looks like my prophecey of calling Miller a piss boy for Quinn has come true. But its alright after all, he has a picture or two of him with a deer and a fish. This state needs an enema from top to bottom or nuked from orbit.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 11:59 AM

you guys are pathetic… we have the lowest fees for hunting and fishing anywhere and neither had been raised in like 20 or more years…imagine if they did it with the cost of inflation or even averaged it out copared to all the other states, you would be paying a heck of a lot more.. pay the few bucks and just enjoy it… you guys seem to have no problem paying for internet so 2 or 5 dollars shouldnt kill you.,

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 12:00 PM

sorry 10 years ago

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 12:10 PM

A johnh A deer permit $15 to $25 thats $10, fishing up $2 hunting up $5 so far thats $17 bucks and then there the habitat stamp. And if you want to shoot a bird on DNR ground thats if your lucky enough to ge a permit theres more dollars out of your pocket. And the list goes on.So just what do we get thats going to be differt when the raises go into affect. Thats the big question I’ll bet you belive it’s going to be awhole lot better. Hey you want too bet. I’ll also bet you think and theres know waste in government.Baa Baa

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 12:41 PM

Johh H,

I’ll give you double what the fee increases will cost me, and with it, you can buy a clue. It has aABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with a few dollars. IT HAS ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING TO DO WITH where the increases will go, and how much the DNR will be cut by. The only thing this fee increase will do is siphon off 3.5 to 5 million of the DNR budget to go to projects in Chicago such as free health care and food stamps for illegals or maybe it will even go to legislators pay raises, better yet maybe we can bus homeless people off the street ala ACORN so they can vote for whoever they tell them to for a pack of smokes. One can only imagine what are scum sucking politicians have ion store with this money. BUT it will not make one damn difference in hiring biologists, CPO’s, getting back check stations, keeping DNR jobs, keeping hunting parks open. And if I am wrong, I would gladly eat the biggest damn crow pie anyone on here could make. Its no wonder govt has such an easy time making us all grab our ankles, when so many people willingly do it, because they can’t see the forest from the trees.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 12:51 PM

johnh

Please re-read most of these posts - I believe you may have misinterpreted them.

You are right, when comparing hunting and fishing to other leisure activities, the new fees are pretty reasonable.  I know a lot of guys that don’t think twice about blowing $50-$100 at the bar in ONE NIGHT.

Please remember however, that ~75% of IL is rural.  Not everyone has the money that the people from the city and suburbs do.  Many still hunt and fish in order to provide food for the families, not just to supplement the food that they already have.

In addition, people want fairness.  I understand life isn’t fair, but we can still try to do all we can to make it happen. 

This is why we elect officials - for balance and fairness.

The current proposals are, plain and simple - unfair.  It has nothing to do with the increased license fees.  The fact is, the proposals are short-sided and unfair and it is due in part to politics and taking the easiest way out.

Who here, couldn’t have thought up these permit increases?  My 5 year old could have.

We don’t elect these people for 5 year old solutions.  Oh, that’s right, Marc Miller was appointed and Quinn was never elected.

Maybe I can summarize.

Hunters and Fisherman embrace a rate hike if:
1.  We get more service, not less.
2.  Political waste and abuse is eliminated
3.  They are NOT the only ones paying for statewide services that benefits the masses.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 01:02 PM

Please don’t get me wrong..but..lets be honest…we all waste $25.00 a year on things that we don’t need (soda pop..beer..cigs..chips…candy…eating out…etc). So the extra money that we will have to pay next year is not because we don’t have it…it’s because we’ve already spent it on other things. The real reason that we are upset is because…we don’t trust where the extra monies are going..I think most hunters would not be so upset with the price hike if we knew 100% of the monies was going to help the hunters and the future hunters. I’m not upset to pay the extra…it’s the gut feeling that the extra monies are not going to be use for the betterment of the great outdoors that we love and enjoy… that is what gets me!!! To change this..we need to VOTE ACCORDINGLY…that is the BEST SHOT that we have…stop voting according to the party of your choice…start voting according to the person’s views on your hunting rights..rights to own guns and so on. Our BEST SHOT is not in the woods to save our rights as hunters…but our BEST SHOT is in the balletbox!!! Take aim and VOTE!!!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 01:44 PM

you can thank jim edgar , for the general fund. before jim each office had its own budget. if we are paying 15$ dollars for a deer tag, that means your probably paying 10$ to much. all the increases in fees and licences you might as well flush down the toilet. all more money for them does is help a useless buracracy. i’d be surpried if we get a return of 5cents on the dollars. as for out of staters or your friends and family that live out of state, tough. i would cut out of state tags and useless people in the system. privilges? anything i pay for with my tax dollars is a right .no man dictates to me whate my privileges are. state legislaters , the governor, all have the privilege to serve us . instead they act as thieves.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 02:09 PM

If you bought 2 bow deer permits, 2 turkey bow permits, 2 gun deer permits & hunting license from MO and IL.  Missouri (http://www.mdc.mo.gov/regs/permits.htm) is charging $41 for everything to current residents and Illinois is going to charge $127.50 resident tags.  Illinois seems a lot higher that the Missouri big time. Will Illinois get 3 times a better run DNR that Missouri.  Can someone please double check my math.  Thanks.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 02:23 PM

Being retired, the fee increase will affect the number of tags I’ll buy. I’m mostly a waterfowl hunter but I hunt deer right out in my back yard (since I unwillingly feed them all summer via my flower and veggie gardens) as a matter of necessity. Instead of 2 or 3 tags, I’ll probably just get one e/s and call it good.

It occurs to me that there may be others like me that will not buy as many tags, so the revenue will probably remain the same as it is now BUT the deer numbers will increase (less tags sold), causing more problems with car collisions, crop damage, etc.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 02:51 PM

I think the biggest problem is the fact that most if not all of this money will be spent elsewhere.  I doubt any of it will go to the DNR. The way the system is set up in Springfield,it will send most if not all to another area.  You can bank on that.  This is just another way to raise income for the state not for the DNR.  I would not have a problem with the fee increases if they could guarantee us that the money would stay in the DNR.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 03:06 PM

I am up for it!  I thing they should make it Chicago D.C.!  Separate Chicago from the rest of the state.  I am tired of my tax money going to support Chicago and the rest of the state gets pissed on!  They complain about the roads in Chicago being in bad shape, but I can betcha they don’t have dirt roads like we do down here in Southern IL because the township can’t afford gravel for them!  Now we have more of our money going to support them!  This just plain ol’ sucks!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 03:21 PM

Sluhunter,
Remember that Missouri has a state dedicated sales tax for natural resources, which provides most of that states base funding, rather than licenses as in IL, so the comparison is not entirely accurate.  Several other states do as well, so keep that in mind.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 03:28 PM

You guys are long on BS but short on facts.  At the federal level, the red states that you love so much receive far more tax money from the feds than they pay in.  The states that fund those welfare states are almost all blue.  Of course DC is the huge exception but for example Queen Sarah’s Alaska receives 1.80 for every dollar they pay in.  Your hated blue state of California receives .81 for every dollar they pay in.  Your heroes down south are the welfare pigs that suck they money from the rest of us.  Sorry to hit you with those facts.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 03:35 PM

And so what are you trying to say Spicoli?  Why don’t you support the idea of separating Chicago from the rest of the state.  If we are welfare pigs sucking the money from the rest of you.  Then we can charge you a nonresident fee for hunting our wonderful “downstate Illinois”! Since you guys are so loaded.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 03:55 PM

I love all of Illinois.  I was responding to the guy who advocated it earlier.  I would support no such thing.  You can’t have it both wyas jcscan.  the regions that you strive to be like are tax drains yet you act like your money is subsidizing others.  It is just not true.  I am glad to have a diverse state and don’t mind paying extra for the services that you consume.  Call it being a friendly neighbor.  That aside, lets all band together somehow and get rid of corruption in this state!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 04:05 PM

it cracks me up when people complain about a 25 dollar dear tag to shoot 100 lbs of meat. thats money you wont be spending at grocery store in long run and is still essentially saving money…the problem with most the people who post in here is that no matter what they think the sky is falling and things are going to get worse…whatever happened to that can-do american spirit? i dont see one person on here running for political office, instead there playing couch potato pundit. remember these are the guys you voted in or were appointed by the people you voted in.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 05:42 PM

I almost puked the other day when I saw in the Peoria Journal Star that the state of Illinois is giving millions to build a new museum in Peoria.  WTF…  Aren’t we broke and were giving money for a new museum!!!! Another place for liberals to waste money.  Two hours north of Peoria there are some great museums. Thanks to people like Quinn, Ray Lahood and Dave Koehler thats how are money is spent.  Politicians that could care less about the average joe.  All this new revenue that is going to be produced from these increases this will be how our money is spent.  No new biologists, No new CPO’s, and I could go on and on.  This is rule under Governor Quinn and Miller.  Get ready to bend over somemore boy.  It isn’t gonna get any better unless we vote these guys out.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 05:50 PM

everyone here is assuming that the money will be siphoned off and that no improvements will be made…sorry to say there already has been improvements cause at this time last year alot of state parks were closed.. all i see is negative comments from everyone and when good things get done they do not say one word about it… that is the problem with america nowadays it has gone from a country of optimism to a country full of pesimist that just look for the fault in things.. honestly how many deer do you need to kill? if your feeding your feeding your family then pay the 25 dollar tag and higher liscence fee and im sure it still will come out cheaper then hamburger for the same amount of meals. if your shooting for the sport of it then you dont need 300 tags do you really? so the people complaining bout the tags are just complaining cause they have nothing better to do… if you dont like the way things are run for office yourself and make a change, compaining on a forum wont do a thing.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 05:51 PM

lol no matter how much people complain quinn still better then blago

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 05:55 PM

Cumberland it is a fair comparison in my opinion why is this bill we are talking about not a tax plan? Why not a bond program for Natural Resources?
..
They can borrow for anything else in the state, look at some of the grants I’ve posted going to office buildings and national labs. All from bond funds, how much good could that money have done for our parks?
..
The DNR base funding in IL is funded by the GR fund which is tax dollars that we all pay. License and permit fees are supposed to be extra funds to help cover the costs associated with the activities that people pay for associated with them, not keep the doors of the DNR open or keep parks open for everyone. 
..
The sales tax in Mo is for parks and soil and water conservation only and guess what everyone in the state pays every time they buy something, so parks are funded from everyone something like 1 cent on every 8 bucks spent in the state. This keeps the burden off of one group and opens means new funds from non residents visiting since most buy something.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 06:11 PM

I am one of those is not currently working and paying my 12.50 to go fish is hard enough. I understand that the increase has not happened in a long while but what timing the economy stinks and now we have to pay more? Thats rubbish I can say that the lakes in my area have mediocre fishing at best throughout the whole year and Im not sure i can afford the rate increase this new goverment has gone to putts in a handbasket and it doesnt look like its going to get better anytime soon at least Gov. Ryan thought about us outdoorsmen occasionally maybe we ought to ask for proof this increase is really needed to benefeit our outdoor expiriences and not the freckin pockets of legislators

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 07:18 PM

Fee increases in Illinois reminds me of this little ditty:  The meetings will continue until we find out why we can’t get anything done around here…or(fees will increase until we can find out why we are spending/wasting so much.)

recession…what recession…we don’t need no stink’n recession…

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 07:41 PM

If hunting isnt worth a few more dollars stop going.  And no one is hunting to ” feed their family” if they are many they should get a job that will help more than long hours in the forest chasing deer.  This isnt the stone age. I will pay 500 a be able to participate in the sport i love.  If ya dont love it dont do it.  This isnt a hard argument really.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/03 at 10:37 PM

well said clint

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/04 at 04:35 AM

if someone cant afford a few more bucks for something then..A. get a better or second job, B. need to learn how to budget cause i guarantee i could find the amount of money they need for any increases wasted on something like beer, cigerettes, cable, or internet.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/04 at 04:39 AM

Do the politicians know anything about supply & demand.  In some areas we have too many deer today, especially does.  We need to lower the price to control the doe population.  I think a lot of hunters are going stop buying that extra tag to shoot a doe.  Also, I think the hunters that are meat hunters, might start shooting more small 4 or 6 pt bucks instead of that doe, because it does NOT pay to shoot a doe or yearling at $25 per permit.  What is Illinois DNR plan if hunters stop shooting does and the herd gets too big?  I know DNR needs more money, but this is NOT the way to get the dollars.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/04 at 08:08 AM

For those of you that are supporting this fee increase as if it is “protected” fromn the hands of politicians (Spicoli, Johnh, Clint) just answer one question for me.
....
With all the money from the sales of spring and fall turkey tags flowing into the coffers, WHERE IN THE HELL IS OUR IDNR TURKEY BIOLOGIST????
....
Gee whiz, did it all flow into the coffers of the general fund?
....
For Pete’s sake you’d think with all that money we could afford the salary of one iddy bitty dinky little turkey biologist.

Posted by Henry Holt on 11/04 at 08:11 AM

Man some pretty elitist attitudes on here, but to those of you who are on board with these new license fees (because they say they need it) I wonder what tune you’ll be singing when Quinn and the boys trot out there 50% tax program after the Feb. primaries. Meanwhile we’ll keep borrowing and spending.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/04 at 08:30 AM

“If hunting isnt worth a few more dollars stop going.  And no one is hunting to ? feed their family? if they are many they should get a job that will help more than long hours in the forest chasing deer.  This isnt the stone age. I will pay 500 a be able to participate in the sport i love.  If ya dont love it dont do it.  This isnt a hard argument really”.
..
Well I for one know people that will not be able to afford these increases, not because they are wasting it in bars or smoking but because they have found themselves laid off. SO what do you propose for them tell the kids they don’t get to go? oh I know perhaps fall behind on bills? .
..
I also know that for some this is a matter of principle. Why pay more when they keep robbing funds. I know some of you can’t understand that now, but come next year I have a feeling you will. Once they start screaming they need more.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/04 at 08:54 AM

i think you’ll see a lot more poaching . the farmers whose lands i hunt on just want them dead. they don’t care about tags. if you’re paying for yourself plus several children , that comes to a lot of dough. plus the economy is poor and people in rural areas will do what they have to do to get by. i can pretty much guarantee, you will see jesus christ and elvis walking down the street hand in hand before you see this stolen money ,used for what its intended.as for people who spend an obscene amount of money on deer hunting, i reallly think you need to find a new hobby. you’re just ruining it for future generations, and you’re the reason our numbers are falling off .

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/04 at 10:06 AM

How much did the fees for an outfitting license go up? Correct me if I’m wrong but i didn’t see them go up at all. 

I don’t mind paying extra for a “well ran” DNR.  With that said, I would like to see some type of checks and balances put in place and ran honestly.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/04 at 10:10 AM

Hunting is fast becoming only the rich.I dont mind paying extra for a place but when all the already wealthy farmers wont even talk to person unless you are an outfitter paying big money,then we are screwed.The game will suffer and numbers will continue to drop.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 11/04 at 10:47 AM

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

Comment Area Pool Rules

  1. Read our Terms of Service.
  2. You must be a member. :: Register here :: Log In
  3. Keep it clean.
  4. Stay on topic.
  5. Be civil, honest and accurate.
  6. .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Log In

Register as a new member

Next entry: After back surgery, Michigan teen back in the hunt

Previous entry: Bucks, archery totals falling

Log Out

RSS & Atom Feeds

Prairie State Outdoors
PSO on Facebook
Promote Your Page Too

News Archives

July 2019
S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Copyright © 2007-2014 GateHouse Media, Inc.
Some Rights Reserved
Original content available for non-commercial use
under a Creative Commons license, except where noted.
Creative Commons