|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 7, 2009 9:04:30 GMT -5
Looks like the Lifetime License holders are pretty well evenly split on this....so far.
Would the Lifetime License holders (of which I am one) be more receptive to this IF it was voluntary instead of a mandatory fee tacked on?
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 7, 2009 9:06:03 GMT -5
Ok...say the mandatory proposal was aimed only at over-the-counter licenses. The Lifetimers can always purchase the Sportsmens pins if they so desire. Anyone want to change their vote either way? What if the program was entirely voluntary? Jack Sorry Jack.. You're a tad faster typer than I am..
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Oct 7, 2009 9:09:54 GMT -5
I'd like it to be voluntary Jack..... sorta like when you check out at a grocery store and they ask if you want to donate $1 to Riley or something. You could have that "solicitation" come up on the screen when you are filing out your license either on-line or otc since it's the same system basically anyway. After reading some of the comments I agree that the guys that have LTL's should not be forced to pay more, because of the slippery slope that could be created.
|
|
|
Post by mullis56 on Oct 7, 2009 9:15:55 GMT -5
Looks like the Lifetime License holders are pretty well evenly split on this....so far. Would the Lifetime License holders (of which I am one) be more receptive to this IF it was voluntary instead of a mandatory fee tacked on? Yes!
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Oct 7, 2009 9:55:35 GMT -5
I'd like it to be voluntary Jack..... sorta like when you check out at a grocery store and they ask if you want to donate $1 to Riley or something. You could have that "solicitation" come up on the screen when you are filing out your license either on-line or otc since it's the same system basically anyway. After reading some of the comments I agree that the guys that have LTL's should not be forced to pay more, because of the slippery slope that could be created. What about when we fill out the computer screen for special hunts?
|
|
|
Post by johnc911 on Oct 7, 2009 10:33:57 GMT -5
I think it could work both ways. $1 mandatory or make it voluntary and a guy could donate more that $1 if he wants to. I would give either way. But voluntary may be the way to start just to see what it generates.
|
|
|
Post by lefty on Oct 7, 2009 10:38:45 GMT -5
LL and vote no! But I do support the cause, not the means. I would prefer the ability to donate via my Indiana Tax Return to this cause. Similar to the past when you could elect to donate $1 to Wildlife Fund. Ask the entire indiana Tax payers to participate.
|
|
|
Post by bschwein on Oct 7, 2009 10:45:23 GMT -5
I buy annual licenses and voted no. However i'd be happy to donate a $1 if it was optional
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Oct 7, 2009 11:00:44 GMT -5
It would make more sense for everyone, not just hunters, to have a stake in this. The legislators think we need to increase the harvest in certain counties to prevent deer vehicle collisions. Why not add the $1 to the cost of the insurance premiums? We pull our weight as hunters controlling the population and helping to ensure a healthy ecosystem. It may be time for the rest of the state to chip in a little.
|
|
|
Post by coalbrnr on Oct 7, 2009 11:21:13 GMT -5
I am not a lifetime license holder and I would gladly give this extra amount if it were voluntary. We all get, what we genuinely give in life, it's just not the same when your being forced against your will. And if it madatorily continued to go up too much, I could be on the other side of the fence with the rest of the needy masses. One less provider and one more family in need. I don't care to make that transition, and what does that do to the deer management in the state then? Certainly I couldn't be the only hunter living on the cusp of provider or family in need! This is only the pin hole leak that sinks our ship if not taken seriously.
|
|
|
Post by HuntMeister on Oct 7, 2009 11:21:51 GMT -5
I voted yes and I think the voluntary option of whatever amount one chooses is a great idea.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Oct 7, 2009 11:26:29 GMT -5
no, I have a ltl, but still wouldn't do it
|
|
|
Post by gmundy on Oct 7, 2009 14:58:26 GMT -5
I have a lifetime license and voted yes. $1 is a small cost to get food to those who truly need it.
How can it be an activity if it isn't outdoors? ;D
|
|
|
Post by evolutionsthunder on Oct 7, 2009 16:22:26 GMT -5
im all for helping the less fortunate than myself. but there are alot of good points against it being mandatory. whose to say that it would not keep increasing. in my oppinion we need to find a better way to support this cause. for that reason i have to vote dont know
|
|
|
Post by whitetaildave24 on Oct 7, 2009 19:02:36 GMT -5
I was just assuming this was voluntary from the beginning. If it was to be mandatory I would say no. Not that I would not donate the $1 anyways, but I don't want to be told that I have to donate that money.
|
|
|
Post by vortex100 on Oct 7, 2009 19:09:11 GMT -5
I voted yes! A dollar is not to much to ask for a resident tag, but I think non- residents should pay and extra $10. If a non-resident is going to hunt in our state I think they can contribute extra to our programs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2009 20:08:39 GMT -5
I'm non-resident......already give $150 for each tag ( X 3 or 4 ) so, no on another $1. Fix the whole tag fiasco and it would be no problem for an extra $buck$ here.
|
|
|
Post by steiny on Oct 7, 2009 20:12:45 GMT -5
I voted NO. If you want to feed the hungry, that should be a personal choice, not mandated by the government. The government needs no involvement in this.
Also $24 apiece is already too high for bonus tags, in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Oct 7, 2009 20:26:07 GMT -5
I have a feeling if this poll allowed us to change our votes, there would be a lot less yes votes after this discussion. I know I'd change mine. I don't like the whole "forced to do it" aspect.
|
|
|
Post by elmo on Oct 7, 2009 20:43:47 GMT -5
I voted yes, but was under the impression that it was a voluntary contribution. If this is a mandatory contribution I think that it ought to be added on to our drivers license fees. At least that way everyone in the state will be supporting the program.
|
|