Jump to content
Bonefreak

Assunpink WMA field/farmer lease/"in kind" services observations

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

For those of you calling for increased license/permit fees, remember that those are considered a "tax", and must go through the State Legislature which will completely politicize them and open them up for all sorts of shenanigans by the clowns in Trenton.  That is the reason you don't see very many changes in costs for licenses or permit fees or haven't in a long, long time.  The Division does not have the power to regulate fees in NJ, only suggest changes to the state legislators.   

Edited by Bucksnbows

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Federation gets to name 6 members of the Council whereas Farmers get 3 members.  Here's the breakdown:

 

Composition

This law established the composition of the Council as follows: three members of council shall be farmers, recommended to the Governor for appointment by the agricultural convention; six members shall be sportsmen, recommended to the Governor for appointment by the New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs; and two members shall be commercial fishermen. One farmer representative and two sportsmen representatives in the council shall be chosen from among residents of any of the following counties - Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Morris, Passaic, Sussex and Warren; one farmer representative and two sportsmen representatives in the council shall be chosen from among residents of any of the following counties - Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Ocean, Somerset and Union; and one farmer representative and two sportsmen representatives shall be chosen from among residents of any of the following counties - Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester and Salem. With the creation of the Marine Fisheries Council in 1979, the commercial fishing representatives were replaced on the Fish and Game Council with the Chairman of the Endangered and Nongame Species Advisory Committee and a public member "knowledgeable in land use management and soil conservation practices."

 

 

Outstanding info bucksnbows!!  Thanks!!  Now that is a comprehensive understanding of the NJSFC and how they affect Division operations.  I will be getting more involved with my County's Federation Chapter and working with their reps to find out what is going on!

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But remember Murphy already has the bill to change that. was posted here before, basically antis on the council 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found out that the farmer/lease agreements do not allow for depredation permits to shoot deer at night off their WMA crops......thank god!!  But I had to check on it, because you never know with some of these unreasonable decisions being made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a fairytale BUT.... A “balanced” oversight committee representing all the interested parties comprised ofa ecologist/and or biologist, a hunter interest group, a hunter conservation group(ie NWTF or similar) & local farmer coalitions with clear guidelines. The program needs to be beneficial to all parties.

 

In my opinion it’s a self defeating program as whole, it with never produce its promised intention to the sportsman. Also I think think many of you are over valuing relatively small agricultural plots. And even with oversight the two linchpin parties, the state and the farmers have aligning interests $$$. So in essence the “sportsman’s” position would be weak from inception.

 

Another angle of attack would be to comprimise the monetary position of the state. Many WMA’s throughout the state were purchased through green acre funding/grants either in totality or majority. Which means a multitude of tax money in differential proportions was used to complete the purchase. Essentially, YOUR money. Following the monetary gains made by the state and stopping them from going into a general fund. This would have to be done through legislation and will more than likely have to be undertaken by a political action group. However, trying to appropriate the money back into the program and further incentivize farmer cooperation would be the most beneficial approach. Of course this comes with a potential to backfire depending on how you view the program as it is. But, by incentivizing farmer participation and cooperation (Equipment repair/replacement, generous tax deductions associated with program participants, Facilitating cooperation with private lenders to procure essential equipment, help offset labor, fuel, maintenance and associated costs. Negotiating higher but fixed grain prices along with yield limiting incentives. Providing crop/yield insurance. Things of this nature) and putting constraints on how the money from each lease is to be appropriated is the only way for the sportsman to remotely gain level ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Federation gets to name 6 members of the Council whereas Farmers get 3 members.  Here's the breakdown:

 

Composition

This law established the composition of the Council as follows: three members of council shall be farmers, recommended to the Governor for appointment by the agricultural convention; six members shall be sportsmen, recommended to the Governor for appointment by the New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs; and two members shall be commercial fishermen. One farmer representative and two sportsmen representatives in the council shall be chosen from among residents of any of the following counties - Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Morris, Passaic, Sussex and Warren; one farmer representative and two sportsmen representatives in the council shall be chosen from among residents of any of the following counties - Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Ocean, Somerset and Union; and one farmer representative and two sportsmen representatives shall be chosen from among residents of any of the following counties - Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester and Salem. With the creation of the Marine Fisheries Council in 1979, the commercial fishing representatives were replaced on the Fish and Game Council with the Chairman of the Endangered and Nongame Species Advisory Committee and a public member "knowledgeable in land use management and soil conservation practices."

 

 

 

This is a fairytale BUT.... A “balanced” oversight committee representing all the interested parties comprised ofa ecologist/and or biologist, a hunter interest group, a hunter conservation group(ie NWTF or similar) & local farmer coalitions with clear guidelines. The program needs to be beneficial to all parties.

 

In my opinion it’s a self defeating program as whole, it with never produce its promised intention to the sportsman. Also I think think many of you are over valuing relatively small agricultural plots. And even with oversight the two linchpin parties, the state and the farmers have aligning interests $$$. So in essence the “sportsman’s” position would be weak from inception.

 

Another angle of attack would be to comprimise the monetary position of the state. Many WMA’s throughout the state were purchased through green acre funding/grants either in totality or majority. Which means a multitude of tax money in differential proportions was used to complete the purchase. Essentially, YOUR money. Following the monetary gains made by the state and stopping them from going into a general fund. This would have to be done through legislation and will more than likely have to be undertaken by a political action group. However, trying to appropriate the money back into the program and further incentivize farmer cooperation would be the most beneficial approach. Of course this comes with a potential to backfire depending on how you view the program as it is. But, by incentivizing farmer participation and cooperation (Equipment repair/replacement, generous tax deductions associated with program participants, Facilitating cooperation with private lenders to procure essential equipment, help offset labor, fuel, maintenance and associated costs. Negotiating higher but fixed grain prices along with yield limiting incentives. Providing crop/yield insurance. Things of this nature) and putting constraints on how the money from each lease is to be appropriated is the only way for the sportsman to remotely gain level ground.

 

 

Some good well-thought out points right there Swamp!!  Sounds like we are halfway there with having 6 sportsmen on the Council compared to 3 farmers and in a normal democracy, 6 outnumbers 3, and you would figure sportsmen would be better represented.....but you nailed it when $$$ is on the line for farmers and the Division.  But we should raise hell and demand nothing but the highest diversified wildlife biological carrying capacities for our WMAs, because we deserve it for paying top dollar in user fees, we deserve the highest of professionalism in the wildlife management field in a state that should be at the forefront of wildlife management due to all of the issues presented in our cultural carrying capacities. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently was informed that farmers get 3 free buck tags valid for any zone in the state!! Wtf!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typing with one eye Patched ( Cataract  Removed ) 1 to go.  

What happened to Reciprocal License state to state My brother years ago had to pay in Nj for small game Lic, for what it cost in AK. 

While AK charges with no regards to other States. 

As I remember once again it was the NJ Federation of Sportsman that proposed an increase and was responsible for a Licence Hike. 

As far as Farmers getting 3 tags that is a drop in the bucket to the many Killed and Buried Wasted that many get permits for and yes I saw it personally in Freehold as an observer on an Orchard Farm now Mc Mansions  off Rt 537 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarified.....the 3 free farmer buck tags ($84 value) are valid in any zone that they would have an antlerless permit in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now