6/17/19 - Heislerville WMA Drawdown of Impoundment #3

[NJDFW]

6/17/19 - Heislerville WMA Drawdown of Impoundment #3

_{-- Delivered by Feed43 service}

View the full article

[Buckeyes11]

I need a license and the necessary permits to hunt and fish there but the birdwatchers can park along the road and enjoy the WMA for free??

[Sako76]

Yup, no shortage of freeloaders!  Horseback riders too.

[Bucksnbows]

4 minutes ago, Sako76 said:

Yup, no shortage of freeloaders!  Horseback riders too.

The horseback riders are supposed to purchase a use permit, I think.  Not saying they do, but bird watchers or hikers don't pay anything.  Just we hunters, trappers and anglers.

[mazzgolf]

1 hour ago, Bucksnbows said:

bird watchers or hikers don't pay anything.  Just we hunters, trappers and anglers.

I like it that way and I do not want it to change.

Let me say this - and you heard it here first  - the minute the state starts requiring birdwatchers, hikers, etc. to pay for permits to access WMAs and other public lands for those activities, those people are going to demand changes to accommodate their activities; and you can bet those changes they demand will negatively affect hunting, fishing, and trapping. And when you start adding up the number of people that use public lands that are NOT hunters, anglers, and trappers and when you look at the current trends in the amount of people entering and leaving these outdoor activities, you will see hunters/anglers/trappers will soon be in the minority.

I like being able to say, "We are the ones paying for this land; you need to accommodate us first and foremost."

Everyone should consider reading this:

https://www.nj.gov/dep/fgw/pdf/2018/wma_user_surveyrpt18.pdf

"NJ Wildlife Management Area User Survey Final Report "

In the executive summary on the first page they make it very explicit what I'm talking about (for those that don't know: hunting/fishing/trapping are "consumptive" activities, whereas activities like bird watching and hiking are "non-consumptive":

Quote

 We surveyed 1,986 individuals (representing 4,198 people) at 107 WMAs from May 2016‐April 2017, and received input from 52 internal and external stakeholders at focus groups. Responses indicated overall satisfaction with the WMA system and a willingness to pay an additional fee to use these areas. A majority of surveyed users (53%) were participating in non‐consumptive activities, demonstrating the need for managers to find a balance between consumptive and non‐consumptive uses that maintains the integrity of the initial mission of WMAs as public hunting and fishing grounds, while simultaneously adapting and responding to the increasing demand for alternate, non‐consumptive forms of outdoor recreation.

And on page 2, the first recommendation listed is:

Quote

Hold discussions within NJDFW to clearly define “core” users of WMAs and how user input should be weighted to determine appropriate management goals and actions for NJ WMAs. 

Edited June 17, 2019 by mazzgolf

[vdep217]

15 minutes ago, mazzgolf said:

I like it that way and I do not want it to change.

Let me say this - and you heard it here first  - the minute the state starts requiring birdwatchers, hikers, etc. to pay for permits to access WMAs and other public lands for those activities, those people are going to demand changes to accommodate their activities; and you can bet those changes they demand will negatively affect hunting, fishing, and trapping. And when you start adding up the number of people that use public lands that are NOT hunters, anglers, and trappers and when you look at the current trends in the amount of people entering and leaving these outdoor activities, you will see hunters/anglers/trappers will soon be in the minority.

I like being able to say, "We are the ones paying for this land; you need to accommodate us first and foremost."

Agreed,  but a permit for mainatance of roads in wma lands could circumvent that they paid for the lands.  We could say we allow them the use for a maintenance fee as increased traffic requires more up keep..  this way there could be rules set with the permit and stop bird watchers and hikers from ruining our hunts..  I know it would still happen but then fines could be assessed when caught not just the old well its public land they can be here to.. allow restrictions on when and where can be accessed provide maps to open and non accessible areas open to hiking and bird watching during hunting season.  Collier's mills for example.. only the front lake that is a sanctuary would be open to bird watchers, and hikers must stay on roads during any open hunting season

Edited June 17, 2019 by vdep217

[Sako76]

Hey, B&B, I hear ya!  Yes, they are supposed to get a permit to ride horses on WMA's but I heard only a few permits are issued yearly.  I think Mazzgolf is right, if the State charges bird watchers and hikers then they have a say!

[Bucksnbows]

What we have to realize is that the dedicated hunter and angler fund used to be used in part to buy WMA lands, but that practice ended long ago.  Now the general Green Acres funding is used and that means all NJ taxpayers are buying these lands, not just we that hunt, fish and trap.  So that has changed and very few know which lands were purchased with the dedicated Division funds and which came from Green Acres.  

[mazzgolf]

20 minutes ago, Bucksnbows said:

the dedicated hunter and angler fund used to be used in part to buy WMA lands, but that practice ended long ago.

Yes, I found this out reading that document I linked to earlier. Over 2/3rds! of WMA lands today were bought with Green Acres funds (NOT hunting/fishing/trapping licenses). But it is DFW operations costs that come primarily from hunting/fishing/trapping licenses (not from, say, Green Acres funds).

It says,

Quote

Initially, lands purchased for the WMA system in New Jersey were funded entirely from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses. The first of several Green Acres Bond initiatives was approved in 1961, which enabled the participation of the general public in the continued expansion of the system (NJDFW, 2017d).  Sixty‐nine percent of the existing WMA lands were purchased through Green Acres Bonds (Table 1), which were designed to “achieve…a system of interconnected open spaces, whose protection will preserve and enhance New Jersey's natural environment and its historic, scenic, and recreational resources for public use and enjoyment” (NJDEP, 2017).  Twenty percent of all WMA lands were purchased with hunting and fishing license revenue.  An additional 11% of the acreage was acquired through the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration (WSFR) Program (NJDFW, 2017a), which is funded from the collection of excise taxes and import duties on equipment and gear manufactured for purchase by hunters, anglers, boaters, archers, and recreational shooters (Table 1).  NJDFW operations, including habitat management efforts, are funded primarily by hunting and fishing license revenue and WSFR funds. 

 

It then says this:

 

Quote

 

As a condition of the Division’s participation and use of WSFR funding, hunting and fishing license revenue can only be used for administration of NJDFW, and the Division cannot allow any activities that interfere with the primary purpose for which WMAs are acquired, operated, or maintained (NJDFW, 2017a).  Federal Aid, Green Acres, and General Fund Capital appropriations also typically fund capital projects such as boat ramps, dams, and parking lots (NJDFW, 2017d). 

 

 

[Sako76]

OK, I didn't know that, I thought I saw a table where a majority of the land was purchased with dedicated hunting and fishing license money.  Does anyone know where how the Pitman-Robertson money is spent in New Jersey?

[chenrossi]

33 minutes ago, Sako76 said:

OK, I didn't know that, I thought I saw a table where a majority of the land was purchased with dedicated hunting and fishing license money.  Does anyone know where how the Pitman-Robertson money is spent in New Jersey?

PR money is put into the federal wildlife restoration account and those taxes are appropriated to each state based on the number of license holders, the size of the state, and some other odds and ends thrown into a formula. Some states receive more, some states receive less, and then there are minimal states, which means that states receive a minimum amount of funding. NJ is a minimal state meaning it doesn't fit crtieria based on license holders, area, etc. to be apportioned more than the minimal. So we receive the minimal amount of DJ and PR dollars annually. This is why it's important collectively hunters and anglers nationwide purchase stuff. Hunter ed loosely speaking is funded through PR money, hence why it is free in all states. PR money helps support many wildlife-related programs, maintenance of the ranges, and helps support many wildlife-related grant funded activities in states where states use hunter/angler money as match to be awarded grant money. Frankly most states wouldn't have near the programs they have without PR money and HA money available as match to receive PR money.

That's the in a nutshell version.

Edited June 18, 2019 by chenrossi