# Funding for WMA's



## ForestNinja (Oct 6, 2008)

I've heard recently here of possible closings and cutbacks for many of Georgia's WMA's. I know a lot of the funds come through license sells but there is a larger resource that could be used to fund the upkeep of WMA's and prevent them being shut down. Many of these WMA's are used by campers, horseback riders, mountain bikers, and sight seers, just to name a few. I believe these people who use these areas, should have to buy a license also, with all proceeds to go to the DNR for funding of these projects. We who hunt on WMA's buy a WMA stamp. Shouldn't they also?


----------



## Rich Kaminski (Oct 6, 2008)

Yes they should buy a stamp also.


----------



## Randy (Oct 6, 2008)

yes.


----------



## Just John (Oct 6, 2008)

Yes  why should the hunters fund everone else's habit?


----------



## dixie (Oct 6, 2008)

Just John said:


> Yes  why should the hunters fund everone else's habit?



because we have the use of the wma's to hunt on without the other "users" there, start charging them then its their wma anytime also


----------



## SWbowhunter (Oct 6, 2008)

dixie said:


> because we have the use of the wma's to hunt on without the other "users" there, start charging them then its their wma anytime also



Right! Other users have a voice now, but make them buy license/stamp and the playing field is level. Guess who the minority is now---yup Hunters.  Currently, those footing the bills at least have a voice bigger that their numbers.


----------



## BirdNut (Oct 6, 2008)

I think  you would run the risk of say, horseback riders, deciding they want the WMA closed to hunting Oct15-Nov15 so they could view the leaves.


----------



## ForestNinja (Oct 6, 2008)

BirdNut said:


> I think  you would run the risk of say, horseback riders, deciding they want the WMA closed to hunting Oct15-Nov15 so they could view the leaves.



Hunting season is set in stone. They have the rest of the year to ride horses


----------



## Coastie (Oct 7, 2008)

ForestNinja said:


> I've heard recently here of possible closings and cutbacks for many of Georgia's WMA's. I know a lot of the funds come through license sells but there is a larger resource that could be used to fund the upkeep of WMA's and prevent them being shut down. Many of these WMA's are used by campers, horseback riders, mountain bikers, and sight seers, just to name a few. I believe these people who use these areas, should have to buy a license also, with all proceeds to go to the DNR for funding of these projects. We who hunt on WMA's buy a WMA stamp. Shouldn't they also?



And just what do those "Other" users take away from a WMA? Memories? Pictures? an outdoor experience that just might get some of them interested in hunting and or fishing? Yes hunters pay a $19.00 fee per year for the ability to hunt on, at this point, about 1 million acres of managed land, that fee spread across the entire system offsets the cost of maintenance of roads and food plots and the purchase of land and paying lease fees on some of those properties. Those WMAs that the state outright own have very few "Other" users, horse and bike riders are not allowed and about the only other uses are pretty non-invasive. Bird watchers, hikers, picnicers, fishermen, campers etc. don't have much impact on anything and are under the same restrictions as you are for using the resource other than having the right to hunt. Those management areas that could be closed are on USFS land, land that the "Others" help pay for every year that they pay federal taxes, they cannot be restricted from using that resource any more than you can. If you are truly concerned about the DNR budget and the future of hunting here in Georgia, then start by writing letters to your state representative, senator and to the governor. Let them know of your concerns and that you expect them to do something constructive about it. Join an organization that supports your point of view and be active with it, not just lip service and belly aching about how terrible things are. Do you really want horse and bike riders on state owned WMAs? by the wording of your argument, you would support that if they paid the WMA fee.


----------



## SWbowhunter (Oct 8, 2008)

ForestNinja said:


> Hunting season is set in stone. They have the rest of the year to ride horses



Public land seasons are reset every 2 years..they are regulation not law. Statewide season frameworks are law. 
Do you expect something in return for your WMA stamp? Guess what, so will they. Hunters will be out numbered. They will demand recreational improvements (horse trails, barns, paved parking, paved trails, bath houses) and could decide they want to use the areas in the hunting season as well. Vote on it and hunters loose again because they are the minority. All the extra money you made from the fees is now gone to improvements, maintenance, and management of a much larger user group now.


----------



## win280 (Oct 9, 2008)

SWbowhunter said:


> Public land seasons are reset every 2 years..they are regulation not law. Statewide season frameworks are law.
> Do you expect something in return for your WMA stamp? Guess what, so will they. Hunters will be out numbered. They will demand recreational improvements (horse trails, barns, paved parking, paved trails, bath houses) and could decide they want to use the areas in the hunting season as well. Vote on it and hunters loose again because they are the minority. All the extra money you made from the fees is now gone to improvements, maintenance, and management of a much larger user group now.



Unless we can get the legislature to change the moneys collected from sportmans fees to stay in the DNR this would do nothing for us hunters.All monies collected go into the general fund and allocated to each dept.IMO


----------



## georgia_home (Oct 9, 2008)

i think there should be a user fee for ALL users, not just hunters like now... seems to discriminate when you only charge hunters to use the land.

while some wma's have longer seasons, many are limited to a week or two here/there. sharing wouldnt be so bad. as long as the rules were clear, gave hunters their time... and everyone else would have their time... the rest of the year.

dawson forest, near my house, is shared well. non hunter use is limited at certain times. seems to work well. just need to have the free-riders share the cost. they benefit too.


----------



## bany (Oct 14, 2008)

I voted yes, I think there should be some deal like the state park pass at least.Those that really "use" it will really help funding and it may keep some from desecrating the areas.


----------



## Nicodemus (Oct 14, 2008)

dixie said:


> because we have the use of the wma's to hunt on without the other "users" there, start charging them then its their wma anytime also




I agree with Dixie. I don`t want them to have a sayso.


----------



## crackerdave (Oct 14, 2008)

Some good points have been brought up - I agree that something will have to be done to avoid conflict among users,but I voted yes because I know personally how tight the state budget is,and it's gonna get worse before it gets better.
I'd rather have the land and have to share it than not have it at all.With no money coming in,they will keep closing WMA's.


----------



## BPR (Oct 14, 2008)

I don't support them buying a WMA stamp, because then they then have the same rights.  However there should be a day use fee like at many of the parks.  At these pay stations should be a bill board explaining seasons and rules regarding when they can and can't be there.


----------



## crackerdave (Oct 14, 2008)

BPR said:


> I don't support them buying a WMA stamp, because then they then have the same rights.  However there should be a day use fee like at many of the parks.  At these pay stations should be a bill board explaining seasons and rules regarding when they can and can't be there.



That would probably work,but it would cost money for the pay stations,and you'd have folks stealing the money.


----------



## bany (Oct 15, 2008)

Nicodemus said:


> I agree with Dixie. I don`t want them to have a sayso.



Don't they already?, or atleast try to. Hunting season is a part of the year and i see people not hunting but at the wma's. Why does charging them a fee open the door for anyone to change the definition of a WMA? Okay,I'm an idiot!


----------



## Coastie (Oct 16, 2008)

bany said:


> Don't they already?, or atleast try to. Hunting season is a part of the year and i see people not hunting but at the wma's. Why does charging them a fee open the door for anyone to change the definition of a WMA? Okay,I'm an idiot!



It dos not change the definition of a WMA, it changes the perception of the users of WMAs. It goes from them being a "guest" to being a paid up member of the club with voting rights and a vested interest in the day-to-day management. It goes from  being illegal to ride horses and bicycles on state owned WMAs to the possibility of them have as much right to ride as you do to hunt. It means that those bird watchers have as much interest in the management of the habitat for the ever elusive "Bachmans Sparrow" as you do for Turkey. At this point, non hunting users of WMAs have limited rights to use and an even more limited right to demand that changes be made to their ability to access the areas in question. I hate to sound like a broken record, but the areas where most of those complaining about "other users" being involved at any time of the year and at any level of activity are on management areas where they already have a paid up interest in using those areas (WMAs on National Forest as an example) those WMAs that are outright owned by the state have very limited use by anybody other than hunters. There are certain exceptions such as Charley Elliot of course, which is managed more as an educational facility than are most management areas. Those WMAs which are operated on leased land are operated on a different set of rules than those on state owned land, the actual property owner retains the right to say who can and cannot use the property and just what their level of use may be.


----------



## Public Land Prowler (Oct 16, 2008)

I think fishermen,birdwatchers,and hikers should have to buy a WMA stamp as well.Why should hunters be the only ones to pay?If these people are enjoying the areas as well,and want to see them stay around,and benefit from them themselves,they should help by buying a WMA stamp.

WMA stamps have been $19 for as long as I can remember.I would gladly pay $50,but I know most people wouldn't.I don't think that $25 would be too much to ask though.

I say bump WMA stamps from $19 to $25,Anyone who steps foot on one should have a stamp,and Take WMA/DNR funding out of the general fund,and let them use the money for what it is inteded to be used for!

Don't y'all agree licenses,game law related fines,and WMA stamps should go towards WMA's and DNR,not in a general fund where it is used for other things,and our DNR personell,and WMA's suffer?


----------



## Rich Kaminski (Oct 16, 2008)

Yes, absolutely! Hunters pay all the fees for WMS's, starting with the purchase of the land through the high taxes on all hunting products and then the cost of the annual hunting licenses and then the WMA stamps.
I think anyone using a WMA needs to have purchased an annual hunting license and the WMA stamp. There is no such thing as a free lunch.


----------



## bowbuck (Oct 19, 2008)

This is a question I often wonder.  But for Coastie I have a question. You say that everyone that pays federal taxes already pays for use of WMA's on federal land.  I agree with this, however, why is it that hunters are the only federal tax payers that have to pay twice to use the property?  I think the price should actually be dropped to say 10 dollars and make everyone over 16 have to have a license to use the area.  I'm not good at math but if you figure up how many more people use an area other than hunters you would still be making money.  Of course if all of this was changed and went to a fund for wmas and not the general fund.  My two cents.


----------



## fishbone2149 (Oct 19, 2008)

The warden on Lake Russell in Stephens County, told me that it was on the list to be closed.  He said he hated for it to happen because he put so much work into the food plots and such.  He told me that it was close to the top of the list, because it was small and didn't get much funding anyway.


----------



## Coastie (Oct 20, 2008)

bowbuck said:


> This is a question I often wonder.  But for Coastie I have a question. You say that everyone that pays federal taxes already pays for use of WMA's on federal land.  I agree with this, however, why is it that hunters are the only federal tax payers that have to pay twice to use the property?  I think the price should actually be dropped to say 10 dollars and make everyone over 16 have to have a license to use the area.  I'm not good at math but if you figure up how many more people use an area other than hunters you would still be making money.  Of course if all of this was changed and went to a fund for wmas and not the general fund.  My two cents.



Quite simply because your WMA stamp money pays for the enhancements to the WMA that supports your usage. It pays for the construction and maintenance of the food plots and the salaries of those that do the maintenance and the year round law enforcement. 
And now a question for you, why is it that, for the most part, the complaints heard about other users are primrily about those areas that are not fully owned by the DNR? Why is it that people have such a hard time understanding that all WMAs are not created equal and that those not outright owned by the DNR must necessarily be operated, at least in part, under rules set by the property owner. Any of you that have ever been a member of a hunt club lease should be able to understand that. The property owner retains the right to do other things with his property than letting a group of hunters hunt there. Properties outright owned by the DNR are managed entirely differently than those leased or operated under memorandums of understanding and co-managed by several agencies. It's a fact of life, get over it. On the other hand consider this, in a few months with the budget considerations proposed by the governor you may no longer have to worry about it. Those WMAs on federal property will be closed as WMAs and those that are leased may no longer be leased and all you will have to worry about are those outright owned and the problem will go away, then what will you find to complain about??


----------



## wareagle228 (Jan 5, 2009)

I am all for everyone buying a WMA stamp. Here is my question? How many of you been out in your hunting stand or in the woods and has had a Mountain Biker or anyone else not hunting come across your hunt?? How many other hunters have you come across?? I hunt, fish, and yes ride mountain bikes on WMA'S. I have never nor have I seen a biker ride thru the woods that was not a Forest Service Rd. You have this thing thinking that something is being taken from you because someone that is not hunting is on the WMA. How does and Mountain biker benefit from the fees paid by hunters and fishermen for the support of game food plots.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Jan 5, 2009)

wareagle, you make an excellent point.

I believe before we even begin to consider clamoring for an expansion of user fees it would be more than judicious to quantify the new potential income from such an action.

I doubt seriously that it would be the windfall of income some folks seem to believe.

I know there is a WMA that hang gliders use and couple where horseback riders can be encountered but all told? Do we have a clue at how much would be gained in return for giving up our position as the 'voice'?

I also believe that discouraging the use of 'our WMA's' sends a poor message and that we should encourage those who do not share our enthusiasm for the outdoors to become more connected with Mother Nature whether it be with a firearm,  camera, bicycle, horse or merely a walking stick.


----------



## PWalls (Jan 5, 2009)

I have no problem with hunters paying the way for everyone on a WMA as long as hunters are given the "priority". I would be hesitant to make everyone have to purchase a stamp because then hunters may no longer have that priority then. 

What happens when the horeback rider wants to ride through the woods during deer season. It wouldn't be safe for them would it. So, you would end up with hunters saying they should stay out during deer season. You would end up with riders saying to modify deer season dates. Since both were paying for the stamp, both would be on equal footing with respect to priority. Then it comes down to legislature pressue and a simple vote. Hunters have been known to lose those battles.

So, no, let hunters keep paying for everyone else's use but only on our terms. Do not give them a foot hold.


----------



## MSU bowhunter (Jan 5, 2009)

Yes, I think physical presence should dictate a license.

I also believe that resevoirs should also have some sort of use license (maybe in place of the parking permit/fee).


----------



## Twenty five ought six (Jan 6, 2009)

You all who believe that non-consumptive users don't have a voice now are misinformed.  Try closing a WMA to one of these uses and see how much "voice" they have.  Truth is that DNR as a whole is probably more in tune with these non-consumptive users than with hunters.

For example, I don't hunt Redlands much, mostly small game, but at any time of the year, it's not unusual to find people who are obviously not hunters using the campsites.  There is an "interpretative area" right in the middle of a prime hunting section that has non-hunters using it all days of the week, and all times.

We live in an age where the squeaky wheel get the grease, and no one gets too concerned about who is actually paying the bill.

I don't remember exactly, but wasn't there a WMA in the Albany area where deer hunting was curtailed because some of the neighbors objected?  That shows you how much "voice" hunters have.


----------



## THREEJAYS (Jan 6, 2009)

charge all users the 19.00


----------



## jettman96 (Jan 6, 2009)

Twenty five ought six said:


> You all who believe that non-consumptive users don't have a voice now are misinformed.  Try closing a WMA to one of these uses and see how much "voice" they have.  Truth is that DNR as a whole is probably more in tune with these non-consumptive users than with hunters.
> 
> For example, I don't hunt Redlands much, mostly small game, but at any time of the year, it's not unusual to find people who are obviously not hunters using the campsites.  There is an "interpretative area" right in the middle of a prime hunting section that has non-hunters using it all days of the week, and all times.
> 
> ...



I think you are correct in what you say here.  

I think the WMA stamp should be your written permission to be on the WMA property.  The extra funds would be extremely helpful.


----------



## Rich Kaminski (Jan 6, 2009)

If they don't pay a fee, then they should not be allowed on the land at all. We hunters paid for the purchase of most of the WMA lands through the voluntary taxes imposed on all hunting items that we purchase... Most all of these WMA lands have been paid off for years (with the exception of the lands that are privately owned and leased by the state as WMA accessable properties; but those lands are still leased with our hunter tax money. So my point is, with these lands paid for and the hugh hunter taxes we pay each year, we should be able to purchase more lands each year - right? Well, why isn't this happening???
And keep the non-payers off the WMA's. It's just like a club membership - if you pay, you are entitled to use the property.
And even if the non-hunters pay an entry fee to go on WMA's the owners of the WMA properties (the tax paying hunters) need to have it written into law that the WMA's will always be used for hunting during any of the hunting seasons.
Petition your Senators, Congressmen and Governor.


----------



## tv_racin_fan (Jan 6, 2009)

Funny as I recall the WMA I hunted is closed to hikers bikers horse riders and such during the hunts.


----------



## Rich Kaminski (Jan 6, 2009)

*Hey tv, your correct*

but what was mentioned previously in the thread is that is non-hunters are going to have to pay to enter the WMA's that they will probably want to use the WMA property for other purposes during the hunting seasons. Got it?


----------



## PWalls (Jan 6, 2009)

Rich Kaminski said:


> but what was mentioned previously in the thread is that is non-hunters are going to have to pay to enter the WMA's that they will probably want to use the WMA property for other purposes during the hunting seasons. Got it?



Yep. That is the concern. All the influence they already have without paying a fee, now make them pay one and see what else we might lose.


----------



## wareagle228 (Jan 6, 2009)

tv_racin_fan said:


> Funny as I recall the WMA I hunted is closed to hikers bikers horse riders and such during the hunts.



got this from http://www.georgiawildlife.com/huntingregulations_hunting.aspx  I belive it is page 15 in the hunting regulations

GENERAL: Camping, hiking and other
recreational uses are allowed year-round,
unless otherwise posted at the WMA check
station or at a specific recreation site. All WMA
visitors are encouraged to wear hunter orange
during the hunting seasons. Specific recreation
sites may be closed as needed for management
purposes by posting at the site.

CAMPING: All camps must be in designated
campgrounds, unless otherwise indicated
or posted at the WMA check station.
Camping is allowed anywhere on WMAs
on National Forest Lands, except where
posted otherwise. Forest Service regulations
govern outdoor recreation on WMAs located
on National Forest Lands. Camping or
driving motor vehicles on wildlife openings
is prohibited. Carving, cutting, chopping or
damaging of live trees is prohibited. Camping
or establishment of a campsite shall be
limited to a period of time not to exceed 14
consecutive days unless the campsite is
vacated and all personally owned property
is removed for a period of not less than 7
days. A new campsite may not be established
within 1 mile of the vacated campsite. Loaded
firearms are prohibited in camping areas,
except that any person possessing a license
to carry a concealed firearm that is valid in this
state pursuant to O.C.G.A.§§ 16-11-126(f) or
16-11-129 may carry such firearm subject to
the limitations of O.C.G. A. §§ 16-11-126 and
16-11-127, except where prohibited by federal
law. Campers are responsible for their own
trash. No person shall unreasonably disturb
or annoy others through abrasive, insulting,
or threatening words or actions, or disobey
any lawful order of a law enforcement official,
or act in a manner resulting in a breach of the
peace. No generators, musical instruments,
radios, televisions, or other noise-making
devices may be used after 10PM or before
7AM, in such a manner that they may be
heard by other WMA visitors.

HORSES AND BICYCLES are restricted to
open improved roads, designated trails, or
designated areas. Bicycles may be used on
closed improved roads for hunter access.
Horses may be used off roads and trails during
permitted field trials. Horses and bicycles
may be used on National Forest Lands not
otherwise closed. Horses and bicycles are
prohibited on the Appalachian Trail.

FIREWOOD: Only trees that are dead and
down may be cut and used for firewood by
visitors while staying on WMAs.

FISHING: Unless otherwise posted, fishing
is allowed on WMAs according to statewide
regulations. When fishing on a WMA, only a
Fishing License is required. However, a Fishing
License and a WMA License is required to fish
on state Public Fishing Areas (PFAs) and Waters
Creek Trophy Trout Stream on Chestatee WMA
(see fishing regulations). Anglers possessing
a One-Day Fishing, Honorary, Disability,
Sportsmen’s, or Lifetime License are not
required to have a WMA License.

ORGANIZED GROUPS: Any organization
or individual sponsoring an event (field trials,
etc.) involving more than 10 persons on a WMA
may be required to obtain a “Right of Entry”
agreement from the DNR. The appropriate
Game Management office (see page 3) should
be contacted for details. Events which conflict
with primary uses of a WMA may be prohibited.
For WMAs on National Forest Lands, special
use permits issued by the U.S. Forest Service
shall satisfy the requirements for a “Right of
Entry” agreement.

SHOOTING RANGES: DNR provides
shooting ranges on several WMAs statewide.
Range rules are posted at all ranges. Hearing
and eye protection are required at all firearms
ranges. Clay targets are prohibited except in
areas specifically designated for this activity.
Most ranges are not staffed; use ranges at
your own risk. The following WMAs have
firearms shooting ranges: Beaverdam, Big
Hammock, Big Lazer Creek, Bullard Creek,
Clybel (Charlie Elliott), Cohutta, Dixon
Memorial, Hannahatchee, John’s Mountain,
Mayhaw, Ocmulgee, Richmond Hill, West
Point, Wilson Shoals and Yuchi. Archery
ranges are located on Clarks Hill, Clybel
(Charlie Elliott), Rich Mountain (Cartecay
Tract), Tallulah Gorge State Park, and Walton
Dove Field. Hours and days of operation
vary. Please visit gohuntgeorgia.com or call
the appropriate Game Management office
(see page 3) for hours, rules, and other
information.


----------



## Razor Blade (Jan 6, 2009)

I think all that use wma's should buy a stamp . If you use the shooting range , ride horses , ride bikes , anything that has to do with using a wma , should require a stamp . SCOTT


----------



## reylamb (Jan 6, 2009)

No.  Equal pay equal access.  I can hear the PETA freaks now........we want exclusive access to _________ WMA during October and November to see peak leaf colors, migrating birds, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah..........


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jan 6, 2009)

I say yes with conditions. So called non-consumptive users ( horse riders, hikers etc. ) should not pay as much as hunters. That gives us hunters the edge in a voice on use  and management. Equal pay gives anti-hunters an equal voice in use and management. We don't want that. Maybe charge them half what hunters pay ??????


----------



## tv_racin_fan (Jan 6, 2009)

"GENERAL: Camping, hiking and other
recreational uses are allowed year-round,
unless otherwise posted at the WMA check
station or at a specific recreation site."

Interesting there wareagle but as I recall Dawson Forest is posted that these activities are closed during the hunts.

Might not be that way should these people get charged for a WMA stamp same as the hunters. AND there are very few hunt days as it is, I'm not interested in losing any that's for sure.

Rich I perfectly well understood the point about not charging non hunters because if you do then they get as much voice as the hunters.  Alot of WMA land belongs to someone else not DNR. For example, the City of Atlanta tract of Dawson Forest.


----------



## Coastie (Jan 8, 2009)

Rich Kaminski said:


> If they don't pay a fee, then they should not be allowed on the land at all. We hunters paid for the purchase of most of the WMA lands through the voluntary taxes imposed on all hunting items that we purchase... Most all of these WMA lands have been paid off for years (with the exception of the lands that are privately owned and leased by the state as WMA accessable properties; but those lands are still leased with our hunter tax money. So my point is, with these lands paid for and the hugh hunter taxes we pay each year, we should be able to purchase more lands each year - right? Well, why isn't this happening???
> And keep the non-payers off the WMA's. It's just like a club membership - if you pay, you are entitled to use the property.
> And even if the non-hunters pay an entry fee to go on WMA's the owners of the WMA properties (the tax paying hunters) need to have it written into law that the WMA's will always be used for hunting during any of the hunting seasons.
> Petition your Senators, Congressmen and Governor.



To carry your line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, then those hunters buying a WMA stamp should be restricted to using the WMAs only when they are actually hunting as well. No scouting, no pre-season camping, no casual drives through the open roads whenever you decide it would be a neat thing to do. No more hikes beyond the closed gates during the off season to check on the food plots on your favorite area and certainly no other frivolous usage of any kind allowed. It is far easier for a bueracracy(sp?) to say no to something than it is for it to say yes, what you are suggesting is an ever more restrictive usage for a resource that should by all rights be shared. On our State Parks, there is already a day use fee required to visit a property that has been purchased with tax dollars, an annual pass costs more than our WMA stamp and there is less received for the dollar than what we get from our WMA stamp. I really don't know how many WMAs allow horse to be ridden or bicycles for that matter other than those on Forest Service land, Charley Elliot, McGraw Ford and Dawson Forest. I'm sure there may be others, but those are the ones I know for sure. On at least some of those controlled by the USFS there is already a day use fee, Dawson Forest, City of Atlanta tract the daily fee is $5.00 per rider over the age of 16 or an annual fee of $50.00 I don't know about the rest, do you?


----------



## DannyW (Jan 8, 2009)

I think this is a classic case of you better be careful of what you wish for.


----------



## Razor Blade (Jan 8, 2009)

I guess after thinking about it , and reading some of the post , i can see the hunters paying a bit more , because we are actuaully taking a resource off the property . Whereas a rider , bike or horses , are just using the property . SCOTT


----------



## jsanders1965 (Jan 9, 2009)

I believe they should pay a "non" hunting users fee,maybe not the 19.00 but 10.00. If they enjoy the WMA as much as it appears then they wouldn't have a problem with paying the 10.00. From the 10 or so WMA's Ive been to I also believe that 25.00 isnt a bad price to be able to hunt what, A million acres? My only problem with the License fee is that I live and mostly hunt in North Ga. Our season is now over but South Ga is still going. Extend our season to the middle of Jan. or something. I know that doesnt pertain to WMA's  but wanted to throw that out there.


----------



## Coastie (Jan 11, 2009)

jsanders1965 said:


> I believe they should pay a "non" hunting users fee,maybe not the 19.00 but 10.00. If they enjoy the WMA as much as it appears then they wouldn't have a problem with paying the 10.00. From the 10 or so WMA's Ive been to I also believe that 25.00 isnt a bad price to be able to hunt what, A million acres? My only problem with the License fee is that I live and mostly hunt in North Ga. Our season is now over but South Ga is still going. Extend our season to the middle of Jan. or something. I know that doesnt pertain to WMA's  but wanted to throw that out there.



How about all of those "non" hunters that purchase the so called Wildlife tags for their vehicles. That money is supposed to go for habitat acquisition and management for non-game species yet at least some of it is used on WMAs for support of those critters and it benefits hunters and game species as well. What if all of those people started demanding equal rights for access on those areas the same as hunters get for their $19.00, the tags cost $25.00.


----------



## SwampMoss (Jan 12, 2009)

Dosen't matter now I hear the state is going to cutback some of the leased lands not just the national forest lands.


----------



## yellowhammer (Jan 14, 2009)

*wma*

I`ve already had one female,non-hunting,yankee transplant,horseback rider complain to me that she wanted to start a petition to ban hunting on Sunday so that she could ride without fear of being shot.She rides for free.Don`t make her buy a $19 tag and give her clout.Most of these horse,bike riders don`t hunt.Neither do hikers.Give them clout and they`ll weed us out.


----------



## steph30030 (Oct 8, 2009)

*Funding's for wma's*

I Do think that with the funds they get from us hunters should also go towards " A SMALL CLEANING STATION, A SOLID METAL ONE AT THAT"This would be for the people who camp,And travel a ways to hunt, AND KEEPING THE FOOD PLOTS UP! LIKE AT MAYHAW WMA! It wouldn't take much at all! So to all that Agree with me! Please reply back!  Mayhaw has some good potential, the plots are there, there's just nothing in them. I dont know if anyone will agree with me on this, But it's worth a shot! COME ON DEERHUNTERS!


----------



## chunt115 (Oct 9, 2009)

Something should be done to generate revenue.  I work for a state agency.  With all the cut backs that are proposed each year, you won't have to worry about the non-hunters telling you when to hunt and not, cause there won't be any land to hunt.  If you use it then you must pay.  WMA's in north ga this time of year have a lot of people camping cause it's free.  Charge a camping fee.  Charge a parking fee.  USFS does and the facilities are limited.  Go to Tullulah and fish in the summer.  Those campgrounds are full.  And nobody is complaining.  That extra $5 to $8 a night can go a long way.  If you posses the WMA stamp fees should be waved.


----------



## hillbilly waterfowler (Oct 9, 2009)

The only way we can impose a fee on non-hunters is if it is a fee that we pay as well.  Meaning that in order to ensure that we maintain hunting priveledges we would have to pay a separate WMA hunting fee.  I voted yes, because I feel that all users should have to pay for whatever they use the WMA for.  I say the state should impose a $15 yearly WMA use fee to anyone who uses the WMA lands for any reason.  In addition, hunters would pay an additional $20 WMA hunting fee.  The only special priveledges hunters get is during big game hunts.  During small game and turkey season the WMAs are open to all visitors/users.  This means that only a few weeks a year are they reserved for hunters.  I think this is the only logical solution that will protect what rights we have on these WMAs as well as keeping them open for years to come.


----------



## NGxplr22 (Oct 9, 2009)

I use my local WMA, Pigeon Mtn, for hiking, biking, climbing and caving year round. I do occasionally hunt it, but only if I can sneak in a day during the work week on one of the firearms hunts.
Even the years that I have no intention of hunting there I buy the stamp. I (and my family) get a lot out of WMAs, even if we don't take anything "physical".

I believe if hunters have to pay for access then every user should have to pay. 

Unfortunately the state isn't going to separate the funds received from a usage fee from the general fund. You would have more going into the coffers, but WMAs would still be on the block everytime there is a financial issue.

The only way public lands like WMAs are going to survive is if all user groups are able to work together to protect them. 

Two weeks ago when the access road to Pigeon Mountain washed away I was contacted almost immediately by a friend who wanted to get a group of climbers together to go see what help we could be in repairing the damage. Less than an hour later one of my caving friends called to say he had been contacted about his caving group going up there that weekend to see what they could help with. Both groups spend a good amount of time throughout the year doing cleanups.
As a caver and climber I am proud of this. As a hunter I appreciate it.

We can either learn to co-manage and share the cost through all groups or one day we will wake up and wish we did. 
I don't want to tell my grandchildren about the places I've explored and the things I've seen, I want to show them.


----------



## steph30030 (Oct 9, 2009)

I strongly agree with ya Hillbilly waterfowler! If this were to happen, There would'nt be much pressure put on the game we're trying to hunt I don't think, just for the fact that most people dont want to pay that extra dollar or two!


----------



## steph30030 (Oct 9, 2009)

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

I strongly agree with ya Hillbilly waterfowler! If this were to happen, There would'nt be much pressure put on the game we're trying to hunt I don't think, just for the fact that most people dont want to pay that extra dollar or two!


----------



## dc410n1 (Oct 10, 2009)

I think WMA hunters should get together with other hunters that hunt the same WMA and pull together and help DNR with the up keep during this hard economic time. I worked with a group of hunters on the WMA I hunt; we took chainsaws and cleared roads, had a 4-wheler with a mowing attachment and mowed side roads, repaired gates and sign-in boxes. We treated the WMA like our own hunting club, it’s were we hunt so we might as well pitch in and help out. Being a state employee I know that DNR has no budget to work with and wont until 2012. Just my opinion I could be wrong.


----------



## NGxplr22 (Oct 11, 2009)

dc410n1 said:


> I think WMA hunters should get together with other hunters that hunt the same WMA and pull together and help DNR with the up keep during this hard economic time. I worked with a group of hunters on the WMA I hunt; we took chainsaws and cleared roads, had a 4-wheler with a mowing attachment and mowed side roads, repaired gates and sign-in boxes. We treated the WMA like our own hunting club, it’s were we hunt so we might as well pitch in and help out. Being a state employee I know that DNR has no budget to work with and wont until 2012. Just my opinion I could be wrong.



Good posting.
I've been a part of or seen cleanups by cavers, climbers and hikers on state land. Everytime my little ragtag group comes out of the woods we've gained a couple of bags of garbage, cans, etc. I don't recall ever seeing any hunters outside of hunting season on the local WMAs. Not saying it doesn't happen, I've just not seen it.



> I know that DNR has no budget to work with and wont until 2012


Yeah, they'll have enough budget for about a month.
Locally, the DNR are lucky if they get to finish a single project before they must go address something else.
Simple tasks like keeping roads clear of trees are something that a small group of volunteers could do in a few hours while it may take the state guys a few weeks to get to it.


----------



## FVR (Oct 11, 2009)

I voted yes because I think both horse and bike riders should have to purchase  a stamp to use the wma.

I don't think that the riders stamp should be the same cost as the hunting stamp, because hunters still want the control.  To do that they have to pay the most money or the riders will throw tizzy fits and continue to be a thorn in our side.


----------

