# New WMA use fee. "GORP"



## pnome (Nov 3, 2011)

Was wondering when they would pull the trigger on this.  Looks like the horse riders are going to have to start paying too.

Also noticed the Pine Log WMA was not included.  



> This message is coming to you from the Georgia Wildlife Resources Division because of your interest in wildlife, nature and outdoor recreation. Please forward this message to anyone who may be interested.
> 
> Beginning January 1, 2012, a Georgia Outdoor Recreational Pass will be required to use 32 properties owned by the Wildlife Resources Division (list below).
> 
> ...


----------



## Gumbo1 (Nov 3, 2011)

Interesting about Pine Log........I just kind of figured it was now all WMA's and such.


----------



## Nicodemus (Nov 3, 2011)

That is not good news, and definatley not a good thing.


----------



## pnome (Nov 3, 2011)

Gumbo1 said:


> Interesting about Pine Log........I just kind of figured it was now all WMA's and such.



I'm guessing it's because Pine Log is leased, not owned.


----------



## pnome (Nov 3, 2011)

Nicodemus said:


> That is not good news, and definatley not a good thing.



Yeah, all the horseback riders and mountain bikers are going to want a say in things.  If they are anti-hunting, then things might go bad for us hunters.


----------



## Nicodemus (Nov 3, 2011)

pnome said:


> Yeah, all the horseback riders and mountain bikers are going to want a say in things.  If they are anti-hunting, then things might go bad for us hunters.





Yep, since they now pay, they have a sayso.


----------



## georgia_home (Nov 3, 2011)

agree with nic, to some extent. they get a say, but then again, i think they've had one for a while. but, now they are paying and may want to be more vocal about it. 

regarding pine log and MAYBE not GROP'ing folks because they don't own it, wouldn't it seem logical that you DON'T NEED a WMA pass for the same reason? oh wait, you do, so maybe that isn't the reason, or maybe it is. (pnome, i ain't busting you, please don't take it that way... just observing the difference, or possible difference, in the logic.  )



pnome said:


> I'm guessing it's because Pine Log is leased, not owned.


----------



## Cadcom (Nov 3, 2011)

Didn't they have a say anyway? I mean the DNR meetings are open to the public and i don't believe they check to see if you have a WMA stamp before you voice your opinion. I think it's great - finally getting some of the freeloaders to pay a share.


----------



## deadend (Nov 3, 2011)

The area managers I've spoken with at several WMA's felt it would mean the beginning of the end.  A good example coming to mind is the mountain bike groups wanting to take over Paulding Forest.  Not a hard stretch to see hunting being curtailed in the name of "safety." Walk near some mtn. bikers in Cohutta while carrying a rifle during hunting season and see what kind of reaction you get.  It'll only get worse.


----------



## feathersnantlers (Nov 3, 2011)

I think Pine Log's not on there b/c DNR leases the land. GORP land must be owned by DNR.



> owned by the Wildlife Resources Division (list below).


----------



## ridgestalker (Nov 3, 2011)

I dont know what the long term outcome will be but i am glad to see them have to pay.The way i see it is they are just paying for what has already been giving to them.They already got bike trails,walking trails,horse trails,shooting ranges,campsites,canoe launches,boat ramps an other things an did not have to pay a use fee.


----------



## deadend (Nov 3, 2011)

ridgestalker said:


> I dont know what the long term outcome will be but i am glad to see them have to pay.The way i see it is they are just paying for what has already been giving to them.They already got bike trails,walking trails,horse trails,shooting ranges,campsites,canoe launches,boat ramps an other things an did not have to pay a use fee.



I'd have no problem keeping paying for it all and wouldn't even mind an increase in fees as long as hunting remains the focus.  The long term outcome of the fee system is exactly what I fear.


----------



## ON_ROPE (Nov 3, 2011)

*Gorp*

If you look at the GORP list it is one entire WMA (Pigeon Mtn.), Half a WMA (upper Dawson Forest) and a bunch of shooting ranges and fishing areas. The number of hunters on these two places is total less than 6 thousand. The total number of visitors on these two areas is well over 100 thousand. GORP is all about the money. In Georgia there are 10 million citizens, there are 400 thousand hunters. Most people in this state not only do not hunt, they do not know anyone who does. When it comes to making land use decisions in the future these people better stay happy with us or we are doomed.


----------



## georgia_home (Nov 3, 2011)

that is kind of interesting... the points you make.

they are more focused, in most cases, on further hitting hunters and fishers more then the general public.

as you note, MUCH of the GROP-ing is on the shooting ranges.. ~30+%, only 2 are specificially campgrounds.

some explicitly EXCLUDE the more non-hunter heavily used areas... of the ones i am familiar with anyway... dawson forest... the south area is horse'd pretty heavily, and it could generate some good revenue.

makes it even more interesting.



ON_ROPE said:


> If you look at the GORP list it is one entire WMA (Pigeon Mtn.), Half a WMA (upper Dawson Forest) and a bunch of shooting ranges and fishing areas. The number of hunters on these two places is total less than 6 thousand. The total number of visitors on these two areas is well over 100 thousand. GORP is all about the money. In Georgia there are 10 million citizens, there are 400 thousand hunters. Most people in this state not only do not hunt, they do not know anyone who does. When it comes to making land use decisions in the future these people better stay happy with us or we are doomed.


----------



## FVR (Nov 3, 2011)

Also John's Mountain and Blue Ridge are not included.  I'm kind of glad about Pine Log.   I think it's a way to start loosing hunting rights on the public land.


----------



## Etoncathunter (Nov 3, 2011)

Unless I'm mistaken the reason you don't see John's or blue ridge, or places like Cohutta/ cedar creek are because they aren't state owned. They are "owned" by the USFS as part of the National Forests. They already have USFS fees in some areas. You'll notice that Rich Mtn is excluded except for the Carticay tract that I think falls outside the NF. I am by no stretch familiar with all the names listed, but none of them jump out at me as being on NF or CoE lands.


----------



## pnome (Nov 4, 2011)

Doesn't look like Paulding Forest or Sheffield are on their either.


----------



## pnome (Nov 4, 2011)

georgia_home said:


> some explicitly EXCLUDE the more non-hunter heavily used areas... of the ones i am familiar with anyway... dawson forest... the south area is horse'd pretty heavily, and it could generate some good revenue.
> 
> makes it even more interesting.



Yeah, why exclude the Atlanta tract of Dawson Forest?


----------



## Jranger (Nov 4, 2011)

DNR Biologist was telling me about this a few weeks ago. He said it had good things and bad things. One of the good things he mentioned was where the funds go from the GORP. If I recall correctly, the GORP fund stayed with the Ga DNR and away from the general fund. Many of the non-hunters using the land have been and will continue to use the land; might as well get something out of them if they are there. The bad thing IMO, some new folks will come out to play and I'm sure they will want a say so in how the land is being used.


----------



## ON_ROPE (Nov 4, 2011)

*Gorp*

The Dawson Forest Atlanta tract is just that, owned by the city of Atlanta. They already collect a user fee from the horse riders for trail maintenance. 
    None of the WMA's on federal land, (forest service, Corps of Engineers) can charge a state fee for use. 
    Collecting the GORP for private land leased by DNR would require money to be shared with the private landowner. 
     The real nightmare is there will be no point of entry sales of GORP permits. So a family out for a pic nic in the woods must turn around when they see the new sign just before they get to where they always go. Drive back to the house, get on the computer, purchase the GORP, drive back to their spot, then eat cold chicken. Or they can chance getting a ticket, eat warm chicken, grumble about excessive government, and if they do get a ticket, they will forever more be a wonderful friend of Georgia DNR. Yeah right. Some will even be so upset that they will certainly contact their legislators in an attempt to change the WMA to a Park! Then their annual park pass they already buy from DNR will work for their favorite pic nic place. The nightmare begins!


----------



## pnome (Nov 4, 2011)

ON_ROPE said:


> The Dawson Forest Atlanta tract is just that, owned by the city of Atlanta. They already collect a user fee from the horse riders for trail maintenance.



That's right!  Forgot about that.  It's not WRD owned.


----------



## steelhorses (Nov 8, 2011)

*Other states*

Has this been implemented in any other states?  And what kind of impact did it have on hunters there?


----------



## steelhorses (Nov 8, 2011)

Aside from hunting - this might keep the ranges less crowded, but a major pain and expense because bringing your family out shooting will mean everyone has to have the gorp pass


----------



## pnome (Nov 9, 2011)

steelhorses said:


> Has this been implemented in any other states?  And what kind of impact did it have on hunters there?



No idea.  But that's a good question.



> Aside from hunting - this might keep the ranges less crowded, but a major pain and expense because bringing your family out shooting will mean everyone has to have the gorp pass



I think it will mean you'll be seeing a lot more folks just shooting wherever they can on public land that doesn't require a GORP.  I imagine Dawson Forest Atlanta tract is going to see a big increase in people target practicing.


----------



## C.Killmaster (Nov 9, 2011)

steelhorses said:


> Aside from hunting - this might keep the ranges less crowded, but a major pain and expense because bringing your family out shooting will mean everyone has to have the gorp pass



There's a family pass available. $10 for 3 days and $35 annual.


----------



## fflintlock (Nov 9, 2011)

pnome said:


> Doesn't look like Paulding Forest or Sheffield are on their either.


Isn't Paulding Forest leased from the city of atlanta ?


----------



## deadend (Nov 9, 2011)

fflintlock said:


> Isn't Paulding Forest leased from the city of atlanta ?



No.  Paulding county bought it.


----------



## michael_M (Nov 10, 2011)

I've said all along anyone using it should have to pay that goes for the gun ranges and hikers horseback riders we have to pay as a hunter they should to it will help pay for more land instead of loosing it


----------



## Pineyrooter (Nov 15, 2011)

deadend said:


> No.  Paulding county bought it.



No, Paulding County only bought a small portion of the Jones Property (Paulding Forest) the same time the state bought their portion. The state actually doesnt own all that much of PF. I think Paulding County bought something like 2,500 acres. The City of Atlanta still owns 10,000 of Paulding Forest with most being south of Hwy 278.


----------



## ridgestalker (Nov 15, 2011)

Pineyrooter said:


> No, Paulding County only bought a small portion of the Jones Property (Paulding Forest) the same time the state bought their portion. The state actually doesnt own all that much of PF. I think Paulding County bought something like 2,500 acres. The City of Atlanta still owns 10,000 of Paulding Forest with most being south of Hwy 278.



Here is how it went down an who has what


Paulding Forest WMA

6,873 Acres — $45,866,156

The 6,873 acres to be purchased at Paulding Forest WMA will be owned in  three separate parcels by DNR (4,350 acres), Paulding County (2,500  acres) and The Nature Conservancy (320 acres). The Nature Conservancy is  holding the 320-acre parcel until additional federal funding can be  appropriated, at which point it will be turned over at no additional  cost to DNR.

The acreage is part of a larger 15,700 acres owned by the Jones Co.  which was previously leased by DNR and the Georgia Forestry Commission  as part of the 25,700-acre WMA.


----------



## Pineyrooter (Nov 16, 2011)

The only correction I would add is that GFC has never leased any of the PF property. GFC has an agreement with the City of Atlanta (COA) to manage their portion ONLY. DNR inturn has an agreement with GFC to include the COA portion as part of the WMA similair to the agreement they have with the Jones Company.


----------



## JimDraper (Nov 16, 2011)

I guess I am confused because you say they can implement the GORP because it is leased land but I have to have a WMA stamp to hunt there so why is that?


----------



## Pineyrooter (Nov 17, 2011)

My understanding is DNR can not charge/enforce the fee on property the state doesnt own. This is the reason you see sections of WMA's that do not require the fee.


----------

