Author Topic: 3 days to speak up about duck stamp - info  (Read 699 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike rossi

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
3 days to speak up about duck stamp - info
« on: March 13, 2020, 12:23:18 AM »
Subject: New Rule Proposed
Revision of Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp) Contest Regulations
ID: FWS-HP-MB-2019-0105-0001
Federal Register Number: 2020-01497

 Position: SUPPORT this new rule.

 Introduction: Every year, hunters lose some ground. Occasionally, some entity actually offers a proposal to regain some ground. Surprisingly, right now, there is a proposal by a Federal Government agency that would actually bolster and celebrate the nation’s hunting heritage. Unfortunately, the anti-hunters are more interested and engaged in this matter than are the hunters. That Federal Agency is the Fish and Wildlife Service.  The FWS is responsible for managing and conserving all migratory wildlife, including game species. They administer the Pitman Robertson Act program as well as the Duck Stamp Act Program.
 Instructions: Deadline to speak up is March 16, 2020. Read this document, then visit the web-page indicated below and follow the instructions for commenting. If you would like to tell the FWS that you support their proposal to require art that is to be judged as suitable for the Federal Duck Stamp to be relevant to hunting and to require the people doing the judging to have some background with hunting waterfowl you can do so online. However, we urge that you read the background information about the proposed changes on the web page before submitting your comment so that you know what you are talking about. The deadline to speak up is March 16, 2020. To do so visit this link > https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0105-0001


Background: The Duck Stamp is a hunting permit that has been required since 1934; and the junior duck stamp is also a hunting permit, but for hunters up to age 16. The Duck Stamp costs $25 and the revenue is put in the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund. Some people claim that in recent years; non-hunters are beginning to buy Duck Stamps, and if less emphasis is put on hunting, they will buy more, and would then outspend hunters, especially since the hunting population is shrinking and bird watching is growing. However, in a proposed new rule, the opposite would occur – greater, not less, emphasis on hunting would be put in the Duck Stamp. In this proposed rule, artists would be required to use a “celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage” theme and a mandatory inclusion of an appropriate hunting element beginning with the 2020 Contest. There would also be a permanent change to the qualifications of the judging panel that would ensure judges have a background in waterfowl hunting.
                I.       Culture, which is doubly deprived of the support of the nation and of the state, falls away and dies.
•       The cultural significance of hunting to millions of people is, by itself, sufficient to justify the support of state and federal governments.
•       The goal of the opposition; is just that – to make hunting and hunters fall away and die.
•       The metaphor "colonization of the mind;" highlights the following characteristics: Eradicate not only its surface manifestations and the connected "colonial system", but its epistemic roots as well.
 
II.    Recognizing hunting by the Federal Government as desirable is not novel. Here are two examples:
 
1.    On October 9, 1997, President Clinton signed the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 into law. Two of the stipulations of this law are:
 a)    Recognition that wildlife-dependent recreational uses involving hunting and fishing are legitimate and appropriate public uses of the Refuge System.
 b)    Declaration that these compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses (hunting and Fishing) are the priority general public uses of the Refuge System.
 
2.      National Hunting and Fishing Day, held the fourth Saturday of each September, celebrates the outdoor activities of hunting and fishing while emphasizing conservation. It was first established by President Nixon in 1972.
 
III. The cultural significance of hunting to millions of people is, by itself, sufficient to justify the support of state and federal governments. However, there is also an economic justification. Since 1934 a variety of programs collect fees from people who desire to go hunting.
 
•       One of those programs is the  "Duck Stamp Act," enacted on March 16, 1934, since then requires each waterfowl hunter 16 years of age or older to possess a valid Federal hunting stamp, which was/is essentially an endorsement added to a basic hunting license to allow the holder of both to pursue ducks, geese, and swans (“waterfowl). Receipts from the sale of the stamp are deposited in a special Treasury account known as the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund and are not subject to appropriations.
 
IV. There have already been several prior actions to engage bird watchers / non-hunters in the duck stamp program, as well as the Pitman Robertson and Dingell Johnson Programs. One of these actions is spending One Million Dollars to promote the duck stamp. Following are a few examples relating only to the Duck Stamp Program:
 
•       In 1976 the title of the federal duck stamp was changed by adding the wording “and conservation”; changing the original title (Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp) to the current title Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp.
 
•       Another change to the Duck Stamp Program that was enacted in 1976 was to allow nongovernmental entities, such as the American Bird Watching Association, to sell the federal duck stamp.  Birding organizations, particularity the American Birding Association (ABA) actively encourage bird watchers to purchase duck stamps to “make bird watcher's voices heard” in federal habitat conservation efforts. However, there is neither tracking of the number of duck stamps purchased by non-hunters nor data to estimate the proportion of birders who buy it. The ABA reported that it sold $17,000 worth of duck stamps to birders in 2015. This is a welcomed, but minuscule contribution to the Federal Migratory Bird Conservation Fund.
 
•       Another effort to increase sales of the Federal Duck Stamp was Public Law 105-269 (111 Stat.2381), enacted October 19, 1998; which authorized the FWS to divert from conservation uses; up to $1,000,000 of Duck Stamp sale receipts to promote additional stamp sales, subject to approval of the marketing plan by the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission.
 
V.     There will always be arguments by anti-hunting and/or nature organizations to (any) proposals which involve hunting, no matter what the issue is. A few examples, which are of a similar nature to this matter and reflect a mindset and set of goals.
•       Under the Refuge Improvement Act authorized by Congress and former President Bill Clinton, the FWS is to expand hunting opportunities across the refuge system. Individuals and organizations, a good number who declare they are not against hunting; fight every single proposal to add hunting programs on refuges.
•       Opposition was voiced in 2018, to the FWS proposal to for that year only, require the art submitted into the Federal Duck Stamp Contest include a hunting element and/or theme.
•       The title of the duck stamp was changed to accommodate non-hunters. Specifically, the original title was the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp. That was changed to the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp.
•       Anti-hunters have filed numerous lawsuits and lobbied to obtain seats on Fish and Wildlife Advisory Bodies for the purpose of obstructing policies that would advance or expand hunting programs. I am not going to list every instance, but two examples are the New Jersey Fish and Wildlife Council and the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Board.
•       In 2008, there was a proposal to feature non-game birds on the duck stamp. This made no sense and clearly underscores the point being made under this section.
VI.   Quid Pro Quo narrative of non-hunters is not credible
•       We will buy duck stamps, en masse, but not if the migratory bird HUNTING and conservation stamp depicts hunting…
•       I buy duck stamps, but I will stop purchasing them if hunting is depicted…
VII.    Hunting Themed Duck Stamps will generate interest in hunting.
•       Some non-hunters who buy duck stamps may gain an appreciation of hunting, a subset of which that might take up hunting.
•       Sporting Art strengthens interest and ethics in existing hunters.
 
VIII. The topic of the impact of non-hunters on Duck Stamp Revenue was the subject of research in 2018. The investigators concluded the following, and I quote:
 "Our research examined whether the duck stamp is an effective tool for engaging birders in wildlife conservation. Our results suggest that, at least currently, the answer to that question might be “no. ”Only 14% of birders in our sample were non-hunters who purchased duck stamps. Logistic regression models indicated, perhaps not surprisingly, that the best predictor of duck stamp purchasing was purchasing a hunting license".
 Citation:
Do birdwatchers buy the duck stamp?
Nathan J. Shipley, Lincoln R. Larson, Caren B. Cooper, Kathy Dale, Geoff LeBaron & John Takekawa (2018): Do birdwatchers buy the duck stamp?, Human Dimensions of Wildlife
 Read Online: https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2018.1517227
 
 VIIII. In 2018, the art contest rules for that year only, required art submissions to include hunting elements and be hunting themed.
 •       I have not found any information that indicates that Duck Stamp sales were depressed during 2018.


 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal