DMP Plan thread

[BIGTOM]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard  this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

[WNYBuckHunter]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

They havent done away with the either sex tags yet. If you want to argue the proposal, go to that thread and do it.

[Dave]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

[WNYBuckHunter]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

[Dave]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

[gjs4]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Love how Hurst quoted DMPs being such a tool....good thing we charge for them then.....think the only tool here is someone who believes ti isnt about license sales (lol)

[Dave]

Didn't you mean FOOL instead of TOOL.

Dave

[WNYBuckHunter]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Sure they would look at the increased money, why wouldnt they? Is it the reason they are making the proposal? I dont think so.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Love how Hurst quoted DMPs being such a tool....good thing we charge for them then.....think the only tool here is someone who believes ti isnt about license sales (lol)

Cant provide proof, so the personal shots begin huh?

[Dave]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Love how Hurst quoted DMPs being such a tool....good thing we charge for them then.....think the only tool here is someone who believes ti isnt about license sales (lol)

Cant provide proof, so the personal shots begin huh?

Ok Buck, then prove us wrong, where is your proof we are wrong. Is your opinion based on fact or do you just like to disagree?  I don't see any personal shots here. Just people stating their opinion and we don't have to agree.

Dave

[WNYBuckHunter]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Love how Hurst quoted DMPs being such a tool....good thing we charge for them then.....think the only tool here is someone who believes ti isnt about license sales (lol)

Cant provide proof, so the personal shots begin huh?

Ok Buck, then prove us wrong, where is your proof we are wrong. Is your opinion based on fact or do you just like to disagree?  I don't see any personal shots here. Just people stating their opinion and we don't have to agree.

Dave

You are the one making the claim that its all about the money, and I asked you to back up your claim. Dont try to spin it, like I said if you cant back it up, you are talking out of your ass. Youre right, we dont have to agree, but dont whine about it when someone calls you out and asks for proof that you are basing your opinion on.

Calling people names isnt a personal shot? Really?

[Dave]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Love how Hurst quoted DMPs being such a tool....good thing we charge for them then.....think the only tool here is someone who believes ti isnt about license sales (lol)

Cant provide proof, so the personal shots begin huh?

Ok Buck, then prove us wrong, where is your proof we are wrong. Is your opinion based on fact or do you just like to disagree?  I don't see any personal shots here. Just people stating their opinion and we don't have to agree.

Dave

You are the one making the claim that its all about the money, and I asked you to back up your claim. Dont try to spin it, like I said if you cant back it up, you are talking out of your ass. Youre right, we dont have to agree, but dont whine about it when someone calls you out and asks for proof that you are basing your opinion on.

Calling people names isnt a personal shot? Really?

Who called you a name not me. Why do you have to stoop to offensive language. This is usually the point where the thread starts to go down hill. Be a bit more civil. It must be about the money because they are now charging for something that had been free for as long as I can remember. If it weren't about the money than they then they could have just issued  Bow/Ml tags and no DMP would be issued in Bow or ML season.  The DEC could issue DMP for gun season only and could control the DMU take especially in areas that have low deer counts. Respectfully Dave

[WNYBuckHunter]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Love how Hurst quoted DMPs being such a tool....good thing we charge for them then.....think the only tool here is someone who believes ti isnt about license sales (lol)

Cant provide proof, so the personal shots begin huh?

Ok Buck, then prove us wrong, where is your proof we are wrong. Is your opinion based on fact or do you just like to disagree?  I don't see any personal shots here. Just people stating their opinion and we don't have to agree.

Dave

You are the one making the claim that its all about the money, and I asked you to back up your claim. Dont try to spin it, like I said if you cant back it up, you are talking out of your ass. Youre right, we dont have to agree, but dont whine about it when someone calls you out and asks for proof that you are basing your opinion on.

Calling people names isnt a personal shot? Really?

Who called you a name not me. Why do you have to stoop to offensive language. This is usually the point where the thread starts to go down hill. Be a bit more civil. It must be about the money because they are now charging for something that had been free for as long as I can remember. If it weren't about the money than they then they could have just issued  Bow/Ml tags and no DMP would be issued in Bow or ML season.  The DEC could issue DMP for gun season only and could control the DMU take especially in areas that have low deer counts. Respectfully Dave

The person that I was replying to, whom, btw wasnt you. Offensive language? Thats your new deflection? Still no answer or proof to what I asked about.

[Dave]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Love how Hurst quoted DMPs being such a tool....good thing we charge for them then.....think the only tool here is someone who believes ti isnt about license sales (lol)

Cant provide proof, so the personal shots begin huh?

Ok Buck, then prove us wrong, where is your proof we are wrong. Is your opinion based on fact or do you just like to disagree?  I don't see any personal shots here. Just people stating their opinion and we don't have to agree.

Dave

You are the one making the claim that its all about the money, and I asked you to back up your claim. Dont try to spin it, like I said if you cant back it up, you are talking out of your ass. Youre right, we dont have to agree, but dont whine about it when someone calls you out and asks for proof that you are basing your opinion on.

Calling people names isnt a personal shot? Really?

Who called you a name not me. Why do you have to stoop to offensive language. This is usually the point where the thread starts to go down hill. Be a bit more civil. It must be about the money because they are now charging for something that had been free for as long as I can remember. If it weren't about the money than they then they could have just issued  Bow/Ml tags and no DMP would be issued in Bow or ML season.  The DEC could issue DMP for gun season only and could control the DMU take especially in areas that have low deer counts. Respectfully Dave

The person that I was replying to, whom, btw wasnt you. Offensive language? Thats your new deflection? Still no answer or proof to what I asked about.

What deflection are you talking about? Read my post again I think it addresses my opinion about the $10 fee .

Dave

[WNYBuckHunter]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Love how Hurst quoted DMPs being such a tool....good thing we charge for them then.....think the only tool here is someone who believes ti isnt about license sales (lol)

Cant provide proof, so the personal shots begin huh?

Ok Buck, then prove us wrong, where is your proof we are wrong. Is your opinion based on fact or do you just like to disagree?  I don't see any personal shots here. Just people stating their opinion and we don't have to agree.

Dave

You are the one making the claim that its all about the money, and I asked you to back up your claim. Dont try to spin it, like I said if you cant back it up, you are talking out of your ass. Youre right, we dont have to agree, but dont whine about it when someone calls you out and asks for proof that you are basing your opinion on.

Calling people names isnt a personal shot? Really?

Who called you a name not me. Why do you have to stoop to offensive language. This is usually the point where the thread starts to go down hill. Be a bit more civil. It must be about the money because they are now charging for something that had been free for as long as I can remember. If it weren't about the money than they then they could have just issued  Bow/Ml tags and no DMP would be issued in Bow or ML season.  The DEC could issue DMP for gun season only and could control the DMU take especially in areas that have low deer counts. Respectfully Dave

The person that I was replying to, whom, btw wasnt you. Offensive language? Thats your new deflection? Still no answer or proof to what I asked about.

What deflection are you talking about? Read my post again I think it addresses my opinion about the $10 fee .

Dave

I read it. I asked you earlier to provide some numbers to back up the idea that its all about money.

[Dave]

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom, that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting. Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

Buck, don't you think that they factored in the increased revenue that the extra $10 would bring in? Remember this is just opinions no need to provoke anyone.

Dave

Love how Hurst quoted DMPs being such a tool....good thing we charge for them then.....think the only tool here is someone who believes ti isnt about license sales (lol)

Cant provide proof, so the personal shots begin huh?

Ok Buck, then prove us wrong, where is your proof we are wrong. Is your opinion based on fact or do you just like to disagree?  I don't see any personal shots here. Just people stating their opinion and we don't have to agree.

Dave

You are the one making the claim that its all about the money, and I asked you to back up your claim. Dont try to spin it, like I said if you cant back it up, you are talking out of your ass. Youre right, we dont have to agree, but dont whine about it when someone calls you out and asks for proof that you are basing your opinion on.

Calling people names isnt a personal shot? Really?

Who called you a name not me. Why do you have to stoop to offensive language. This is usually the point where the thread starts to go down hill. Be a bit more civil. It must be about the money because they are now charging for something that had been free for as long as I can remember. If it weren't about the money than they then they could have just issued  Bow/Ml tags and no DMP would be issued in Bow or ML season.  The DEC could issue DMP for gun season only and could control the DMU take especially in areas that have low deer counts. Respectfully Dave

The person that I was replying to, whom, btw wasnt you. Offensive language? Thats your new deflection? Still no answer or proof to what I asked about.

What deflection are you talking about? Read my post again I think it addresses my opinion about the $10 fee .

Dave

I read it. I asked you earlier to provide some numbers to back up the idea that its all about money.

Do you want me to name them too? Remember this is part of the 5 year plan. This is a proposal and is not in affect yet and we are just voicing our OPINIONS on the Plan. Maybe the numbers you want are all the hunters who will be paying an extra $10 for a DMP to be used during bow season.  Don't know how to explain it any better than that. Who knows the numbers ?no body, until the 5 year plan is passed and bow hunters apply for the DMP's in 2012. So you may get your numbers next year. Asking for numbers to back up an opinion when there are no real numbers is not a valid question.

Dave

[WNYBuckHunter]

Do you want me to name them too? Remember this is part of the 5 year plan. This is a proposal and is not in affect yet and we are just voicing our OPINIONS on the Plan. Maybe the numbers you want are all the hunters who will be paying an extra $10 for a DMP to be used during bow season.  Don't know how to explain it any better than that. Who knows the numbers ?no body, until the 5 year plan is passed and bow hunters apply for the DMP's in 2012. So you may get your numbers next year. Asking for numbers to back up an opinion when there are no real numbers is not a valid question.

Dave

Man, you just dont stop trying to deflect this way and that. I asked a pretty specific question of you.

I was the one in this thread to point out that the 5 year plan isnt in effect, remember?

[Dave]

Do you want me to name them too? Remember this is part of the 5 year plan. This is a proposal and is not in affect yet and we are just voicing our OPINIONS on the Plan. Maybe the numbers you want are all the hunters who will be paying an extra $10 for a DMP to be used during bow season.  Don't know how to explain it any better than that. Who knows the numbers ?no body, until the 5 year plan is passed and bow hunters apply for the DMP's in 2012. So you may get your numbers next year. Asking for numbers to back up an opinion when there are no real numbers is not a valid question.

Dave

Man, you just dont stop trying to deflect this way and that. I asked a pretty specific question of you.

I was the one in this thread to point out that the 5 year plan isnt in effect, remember?

Explain, If you can, you seem dazed and confused. I think you respond to so many threads you don't know if you are coming or going. You can't reason with unreasonable people who refused to listen to others points of view. And doesn't accept any answers to the questions . BUT SAY YOU DIDN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION. Buck this is the end of a tedious exchange with a person who has a problem listening to rational OPINIONS.

Dave

[BIGTOM]

Do you want me to name them too? Remember this is part of the 5 year plan. This is a proposal and is not in affect yet and we are just voicing our OPINIONS on the Plan. Maybe the numbers you want are all the hunters who will be paying an extra $10 for a DMP to be used during bow season.  Don't know how to explain it any better than that. Who knows the numbers ?no body, until the 5 year plan is passed and bow hunters apply for the DMP's in 2012. So you may get your numbers next year. Asking for numbers to back up an opinion when there are no real numbers is not a valid question.

Dave

Man, you just dont stop trying to deflect this way and that. I asked a pretty specific question of you.

I was the one in this thread to point out that the 5 year plan isnt in effect, remember?

Arn't you the one that said the reason the DEC is planing on doing away with the either sex tag so they can better control the heard? If so show us where they state that. If they did then it's just a smoke screen because do you really think they would say where doing away with the either sex tag to increase $$$!! They will tell say alot of BS to those who are dumb enough to buy it!! I don't think they are dumb enough to come out and say were doing away with the either sex tag because we need the money there for I dought what you are asking is in writing!!

[Doc]

Lol ..... I think the only number that's needed to show the role that money plays in their decision is : "$10". That's a good number .... lol. It's obvious that they have finally recognized that there's money to be made in selling permits rather than giving them away. Now where that mentality leads them, well I'm not sure. Will it taint their management decisions and influence their quotas. Who knows ..... It certainly is a possibility isn't it? Will it cause them to start trying to find ways to force as many hunters as possible to have to pay the cash? ....... I think I would be surprised if that didn't factor into some of their decisions. I would guess you would have to be pretty darn naive to not at least question it. I suppose it wouldn't exactly be the first government activity that was driven by cash. Ah but then maybe I am a bit cynical to have such a suspicious mind ..... lol.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Do you want me to name them too? Remember this is part of the 5 year plan. This is a proposal and is not in affect yet and we are just voicing our OPINIONS on the Plan. Maybe the numbers you want are all the hunters who will be paying an extra $10 for a DMP to be used during bow season.  Don't know how to explain it any better than that. Who knows the numbers ?no body, until the 5 year plan is passed and bow hunters apply for the DMP's in 2012. So you may get your numbers next year. Asking for numbers to back up an opinion when there are no real numbers is not a valid question.

Dave

Man, you just dont stop trying to deflect this way and that. I asked a pretty specific question of you.

I was the one in this thread to point out that the 5 year plan isnt in effect, remember?

Explain, If you can, you seem dazed and confused. I think you respond to so many threads you don't know if you are coming or going. You can't reason with unreasonable people who refused to listen to others points of view. And doesn't accept any answers to the questions . BUT SAY YOU DIDN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION. Buck this is the end of a tedious exchange with a person who has a problem listening to rational OPINIONS.

Dave

Here is what I asked, and you havent answered.

Thats alot of cash the state just made off the backs of bow/mzl hunters by doing away with the either sex tag's!! >

Don't  go blowing smoke up my A$$ by telling me that the state can better  manage the heard better this way!! All they had to do is write in the  regs that the either sex tags are not valid in the zones where they  don't want does takin, and stated those zones buck only!!!

Tom,  that makes sense so don't expect the DEC to do anything that makes  sense. You are right it's about the $10 DMP fee they will be getting.  Increase revenue reduce hunter opportunity.

Dave

Ok  then, please tell me the number of hunters that get the bow/ml license  and do not currently apply for DMPs. If you guys have this theory that  its all about an extra $10 per hunter, then back your claims up with  numbers. Otherwise, you are just talking out of your you know what.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Do you want me to name them too? Remember this is part of the 5 year plan. This is a proposal and is not in affect yet and we are just voicing our OPINIONS on the Plan. Maybe the numbers you want are all the hunters who will be paying an extra $10 for a DMP to be used during bow season.  Don't know how to explain it any better than that. Who knows the numbers ?no body, until the 5 year plan is passed and bow hunters apply for the DMP's in 2012. So you may get your numbers next year. Asking for numbers to back up an opinion when there are no real numbers is not a valid question.

Dave

Man, you just dont stop trying to deflect this way and that. I asked a pretty specific question of you.

I was the one in this thread to point out that the 5 year plan isnt in effect, remember?

Arn't you the one that said the reason the DEC is planing on doing away with the either sex tag so they can better control the heard? If so show us where they state that. If they did then it's just a smoke screen because do you really think they would say where doing away with the either sex tag to increase $$$!! They will tell say alot of BS to those who are dumb enough to buy it!! I don't think they are dumb enough to come out and say were doing away with the either sex tag because we need the money there for I dought what you are asking is in writing!!

Yep, I said it almost immediately after reading the plan. You obviously havent read the clarification that the DEC came out with. I suggest reading it.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Lol ..... I think the only number that's needed to show the role that money plays in their decision is : "$10". That's a good number .... lol. It's obvious that they have finally recognized that there's money to be made in selling permits rather than giving them away. Now where that mentality leads them, well I'm not sure. Will it taint their management decisions and influence their quotas. Who knows ..... It certainly is a possibility isn't it? Will it cause them to start trying to find ways to force as many hunters as possible to have to pay the cash? ....... I think I would be surprised if that didn't factor into some of their decisions. I would guess you would have to be pretty darn naive to not at least question it. I suppose it wouldn't exactly be the first government activity that was driven by cash. Ah but then maybe I am a bit cynical to have such a suspicious mind ..... lol.

Doc, nobody is saying that the added revenue was not thought about when they were developing the plan. However, if this new plan causes guys to quit hunting, or to stop buying the licenses that carry a higher price, then the added revenue through the newly proposed DMP process would have to cover those losses. I asked dave to come up with the numbers and what the DEC could expect to gain, but he doesnt seem to want to come up with any of that. Something showing a significant gain in funds would at least be something to show that such an opinion is not completely unfounded.

[BIGTOM]

Do you want me to name them too? Remember this is part of the 5 year plan. This is a proposal and is not in affect yet and we are just voicing our OPINIONS on the Plan. Maybe the numbers you want are all the hunters who will be paying an extra $10 for a DMP to be used during bow season.  Don't know how to explain it any better than that. Who knows the numbers ?no body, until the 5 year plan is passed and bow hunters apply for the DMP's in 2012. So you may get your numbers next year. Asking for numbers to back up an opinion when there are no real numbers is not a valid question.

Dave

Man, you just dont stop trying to deflect this way and that. I asked a pretty specific question of you.

I was the one in this thread to point out that the 5 year plan isnt in effect, remember?

Arn't you the one that said the reason the DEC is planing on doing away with the either sex tag so they can better control the heard? If so show us where they state that. If they did then it's just a smoke screen because do you really think they would say where doing away with the either sex tag to increase $$$!! They will tell say alot of BS to those who are dumb enough to buy it!! I don't think they are dumb enough to come out and say were doing away with the either sex tag because we need the money there for I dought what you are asking is in writing!!

Yep, I said it almost immediately after reading the plan. You obviously havent read the clarification that the DEC came out with. I suggest reading it.

I did read it and the state is pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining!! It's all about the money plain and simple!!!

[bubba]

three pages of quotes to make 5 statements.  I love it.