d-bone20917

You are right, I did say that. I should have been clearer. I was discussing why the bill was blocked, which was because of the duck stamp increase, and didn't mean to imply that that money would be used for anything other than what the stamp was intended for. Hopefully they can come to agreement and get this passed. I think to many people confuse pro-gun with pro-hunting and they are not the same. Although the Republicans are the pro-gun party they continue to show that they are also the anti-hunting party.

I disagree There is nothing in the bill that wants to change what the money from the duck stamp is earmarked for. It raises the fees to keep up with the cost of lands and habitat over the last 20 years. That is laid out pretty well in the bill. The hunting organizations that helped draft this have no interest in ruining this successful program. Subtitle B--Duck Stamps SEC. 221. FINDINGS. Congress finds that-- (1) Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamps (commonly known as ‘duck stamps’) were created in 1934 as Federal licenses required for hunting migratory waterfowl; (2)(A) duck stamps are a vital tool for wetland conservation; 98 percent of the receipts from duck stamp sales are used to acquire important migratory bird breeding, migration, and wintering habitat, which are added to the National Wildlife Refuge System; and C) those benefits extend to all wildlife, not just ducks; (3) since inception, the Federal duck stamp program-- (4)(A) since 1934, when duck stamps cost $1, the price has been increased 7 times to the price in effect on the date of enactment of this Act of $15, which took effect in 1991; and the price of the duck stamp has not increased since 1991, the longest single period without an increase in program history; and (5) with the price unchanged during the 20-year period ending on the date of enactment of this Act, duck stamps have lost 40 percent of the value of the duck stamps based on the consumer price index, while the United States Fish and Wildlife Service reports the price of land in targeted wetland areas has tripled from an average of $306 to $1,091 per acre. (A) has generated more than $750,000,000; has preserved more than 5,000,000 acres of wetland and wildlife habitat; and is considered among the most successful conservation programs ever initiated; (I can't remove the emoticons for some reason)

:biggrin:

Right, and of the $15 the federal government retains $14.70 for wetlands acquisition and conservation. It's been over 20 years since the price was raised. This bill would raise that by $10 and put that additional money towards conservation efforts.

So what kind of ticket do you get for having an open container in a vehicle?

And correction to my earlier post. It will raise the price from $15 to $25. http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/open-country/2012/11/biggest-anti-hunting-group-us-senate

The purpose of the duck stamp will not change. They are proposing the fee increase to allow an increase in the amount of conservation spending, which the duck stamp already funds. The cost of the stamp hasn't increased since 1991. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84305.html

It sucks. I need a job where I can work less and hunt more.

I can appreciate your concern on the lead issue and I give Boxer credit for breaking ranks and voting no based on that issue. However, all this bill does is allow the states to regulate the use of lead ammo vs the EPA. There will be no increase in the use of lead ammo or fishing tackle due to this bill, but most likely no reduction either. The issue Sessions brought up regarding the budget act was due to the increase in price of the duck stamp from $10 to $25 to pay for the bill, which was overwhelming supported by Sportsman. Sessions raised the issue that the increased revenue generated by the duck stamp was a tax and needed to originate in the House. Obviously, this was a political ploy because the duck stamp is a fee paid only by those that choose to buy one. However, once this issue was raised a procedural vote is required to move forward which requires 60 votes. The Republicans voted together to ensure that wouldn't happen. They knew the NRA was going to score the senators on the Sportsman Act vote, but the procedural votes do not get scored. This is politics at its worse and it makes me sick.

I bet you would be surprised if you actually had facts. Arizona isn't NY.

A call to action for all hunters by Outdoor Life. I emailed Senator Sessions yesterday to express my displeasure in him leading the charge to block this bill. http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/open-country/2012/11/tell-senate-pass-sportsmens-act-now

How do you figure that?

Good thread. I'm in the market for a new grinder right now and I want one that can also pack meat in the sausage casings. I'm currently looking at a Weston. As said above a good boning knife is key too. I prefer the Victorinox Forschner. It is the best I've used and under $20.

That looks like a good kit for a good price. I use mostly RCBS components, but Hornady stuff should be nice. Just remember to start at the low range of what the manual shows for powder requirements and work your way up. You'll love reloading.

Nice buck Lawdwaz. It looks like you can cover a lot of ground from that shooting hut. Congrats.

It takes awhile to smoke stuff. Better make it a 30 pack.

If the winds not in your favor your going to get busted, regardless of how many scent control methods you use. You can fool a deer's eyes and ears, but you can't fool it's nose.

Sweet setup there Gizmo.

Actually Mike the Sportsman's Act is the Senate version, the Sportsman's Heritage Act was the House version. The Sportsman's Heritage Act would have been bad for sportsman which is why Tester drafted the Sportsman's Act after a lot of prodding by conservation groups. I don't believe the opening of public lands to additional gas and oil drilling is in the senate version. Neither is the opening of roadless areas to motorized vehicles. Both of which were opposed by sportsman.

Voting down this bill is definitely "playing politics" if I've ever seen it. If they can't pass something that has overwhelming support then how are they going to handle all of these other unpopular issues? We need to get rid of these career politicians and get people in who want to do whats right for the American people. But of course I'm a realist and know that would only happen in some fantasy land.

So we have a bill that is overwhelmingly good for hunters and anglers, increases conservation spending, reduces the deficit by $5 million dollars, is overwhelmingly supported by hunting, fishing, and conservation groups as well as the NRA... and the Republicans block it. It shows you how much they support sportsman. How much you want to bet that I would already have a bunch of emails from the NRA calling for us to string up the Democrats if they were the ones that blocked this.

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/269443-gop-stops-sportmens-bill-on-budget-violation

The link above was the approval to debate the bill. I heard the bill was voted down by the senate. That's too bad. Other than the lead issue Mike is talking about I think it would have been a good thing overall.

Very nice bear. Congrats.

They are just like any law enforcement officers, some are going to be good and some are going to be a-holes. You just hope you run into the good ones.