An example of how another state handles birder representation on state land

[Eric Hynes]

Hello Colorado Birders:

Many of us support wildlife conservation in a variety of ways but as a whole (birding community), our birding activities are "free."  Of course we spend thousands of dollars doing what we love but we don't have a direct fee/permit process to be doing what we love, therefore our numbers are poorly represented or misunderstood. 

Many of the places we love to go birding were purchased/preserved by hunting and fishing organizations. Most state wildlife agencies are funded entirely or mostly from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses and the national trend for these activities is on the decline, particularly hunting. It makes perfect sense to me that CPW is asking visitors to the properties they manage to help pay for the work they do. I am happy to buy a fishing license, though I have no intention of ever going fishing.

Wouldn't it be great if we could "show" our numbers? Almost a decade ago now, the state of Maine started a program like this. It is called the Maine Birder Band. A nominal fee gets you a bird band and the money goes to support the non-game fund for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Learn more about the program here: https://www.maine.gov/ifw/fish-wildlife/wildlife/support-wildlife/birder-band.html

Wouldn't it be great if Colorado had a program like this. Anybody have any contacts at CPW?

Sincerely,

Eric

 

.....................

Eric Hynes

Placerville, CO

---------------------

Field Guides Birding Tours

www.fieldguides.com

http://fieldguides.com/guides/eric-hynes

[Adrian Lakin (adrianlakin1@gmail.com)]

Hi Eric,

Great idea. I posted a question suggesting something similar to this to the CPW contact page right before I saw your post here. Maybe we can all send suggestions to the below page to try to rattle their cage? The $20 annual fee that Maine has for this is a lot better than us youngsters having to pay $45 for Habitat and Fishing License.

https://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/Pages/AskCPW.aspx

Thanks,

Adrian Lakin

Mead, CO

[Kyle Medina]

Little side information for you. The Roberston Pittman Act is where states fish and game get their funding, states submit approved projects which are approved by the Department of Interior. Then the states pay upfront the cost and then are reimbursed 75% from the RPA and 25% comes from hunting and fishing licenses.

Kyle Medina

Westminster, CO

[Michael T]

The states get a portion of their overall funding from Pittman-Robertson(hunting) and Dingell-Johnson. The formal act is the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (1937) and the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (1950) The funding comes from a federal excise tax placed on certain sporting goods pertaining to hunting and fishing.Firearms,ammunition, bows, sportfishing tackle, fish finders, trolling motors,etc.

All wildlife benefits from the habitat conservation efforts that have been funded by these taxes, so I view the requirement of purchasing a license for the use of the properties as logical and reasonable.

Michael Tincher

Loveland, CO

[Mary Geder]

Many years ago, when I worked for the Fish and Wildlife Service, I worked in Federal Aid Division that handles the PR and DJ funds.   If memory serves correctly,  the dollars  are allocated based

upon the land area of the state (50%) and the number of paid hunting/fishing licenses sold (50%).  I believe the population of the state was factored in there somewhere as well, but I think that was only for funds that went to Hunter Safety programs.  

Mary Geder

Lakewood, CO

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/60da01d6-d2f9-4809-9ad6-6c149ae3c4c0%40googlegroups.com.