Paying the "crown" to fish and hunt...

This is a topic that might draw some sharp differences in opinion. Is the government, by government I mean state's department of fish and wildlife entitled to fine citizens for hunting and fishing without a license? Can government dictate who may and may not fish and hunt on public land? May they dictate who may or may not conduct such activities on private land?

I understand the need for conservation efforts... but to pay the state "crown" to fish and hunt?


Why do we accept this as normal? Why do I have to pay the state of Kentucky $20 to fish?

a reply to: EternalSolace

as far as i know for my state, if its private land then u dont need a license for fishing. i dont hunt so i cant say how that works.

Being a person who did a lot of hunting and fishing in my life, I do agree with people having to have a hunting and fishing license. The revenues of the licenses go to improve things and create parks. I have no problem with that. As far as hunting, I believe the young now should be required to have a hunters safety course, parents do not teach their kids like they used to teach kids when I was young.

There needs to be rules, there needs to be DNR officers out there. If there wasn't, there would be people shooting ten to twenty deer a year and wasting half of it. I am a member of a gun club, have been for twenty six years now. We do need regulations, the five to seven percent of the population that would abuse the fishing and hunting would wipe out all the fish and wildlife. I have seen what a few people could do in the past,

Because you don't own the land or resources.

Research the difference between allodial title and fee simple title.

Possession is only 9/10 of the law.

a reply to: TheScale

Each state is different in its laws and regulations. So every outdoors'man need's to be familiar with the laws and regulations of the states in which they intend to hunt and fish.

2. License Required
Hunters using private property still need a valid hunting license in order to legally practice the sport. Furthermore, hunters must have the right type of license, as there are special permits required for waterfowl, amphibians, and turkeys. Also, landowners need a license to hunt on their own property, unless they live on a farm. A license exemption exists for owners of active farmlands, their spouses, and children who live with them. This exemption does not apply to businesses, residences, or corporation

Hunting in

Indiana: 4 Things for Landowners to Know About Hunting on Private

This is an excerpt taken from Indiana. If these laws and regulations are wrong; I encourage anyone to share and engage in this conversation and correct the information.

If anyone privately owns property... why should that property be subject to any law or regulation?

a reply to: rickymouse

So does the lack of education from parents and adults from you and I who grew up fishing and hunting mean that our offspring and tutelage should suffer the "crown" in the future parents who do not teach such things?

I hunt and fish for on a regular basis, and I don't mind paying the fees for licenses and tags to do so. That money does alot for wildlife conservation. Those funds are necessary to the survival of wildlife and protection of habitat. It takes alot of effort to conduct census's and biological research on top of the paying of game wardens to ensure that hunters, anglers, and other outdoor enthusiasts are licensed and legal to do what they're doing. Without that, anyone can go out and shoot animals whenever they want and how many they want, and the same goes for fishing, as well as ATV'ers riding off the trails and destroying the land. In most states the Game and Fish agencies recieve a majority of their funds from the purchase of tags and licenses.

We all have to do our part, and buying a license is a small price to pay to enjoy the outdoors. I believe that one should be fined for not following the rules and being free riders.

Granted, some game wardens can be a pain in the butt, and write a ticket to someone who forgot their license in the truck 100 yards away or had a simple lapse in judgement. But the good they do outweighs the bad.

originally posted by: rickymouse
Being a person who did a lot of hunting and fishing in my life, I do agree with people having to have a hunting and fishing license. The revenues of the licenses go to improve things and create parks. I have no problem with that. As far as hunting, I believe the young now should be required to have a hunters safety course, parents do not teach their kids like they used to teach kids when I was young.

There needs to be rules, there needs to be DNR officers out there. If there wasn't, there would be people shooting ten to twenty deer a year and wasting half of it.

Looks like I was writing mine as you posted. I couldn't agree with you more, sir.

originally posted by: cynicalheathen
Because you don't own the land or resources.

Research the difference between allodial title and fee simple title.

Possession is only 9/10 of the law.

And good luck securing an allodial title. You have a better chance of walking on water.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Just another tax.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: EternalSolace

Just another tax.

Agreed. Tax fishing lures, bait, rods, and reels. If I go out with a hand crafted rod, line, and lure, I'm still subjected to the "crown" for fishing the "kings" fish! Natural resources? My ass...

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: EternalSolace

Just another tax.

Agreed. Tax fishing lures, bait, rods, and reels. If I go out with a hand crafted rod, line, and lure, I'm still subjected to the "crown" for fishing the "kings" fish! Natural resources? My ass...

Rules and limits, sure to protect the resource, but a license that you have to buy? I have always thought that was nothing but a money grab.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Can government dictate who may and may not fish and hunt on public land?

For practical legal purposes, the government is the owner of "public land" (whatever theoretical ideals people have about it), so they have the same rights that private land-owners have over their own land.

a reply to: D8Tee

It's not a money grab, it's the primary source of revenue for the agency. It's only $37 for adults and $5 for a 365 day permit for residents where I am. If you can afford the tackle, gas, meals and free time, you should be able to afford a license.

a reply to: 1MrMarc

Here, all the licensing fees go into general revenue. I stand by my claims, it's just another tax.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: 1MrMarc

Here, all the licensing fees go into general revenue. I stand by my claims, it's just another tax.

Sorry to hear that. I can see what you're saying.

a reply to: 1MrMarc

Here you need a Wildlife Identification Card which is 8 bucks, a fishing license which is 28 bucks, and if you wish to catch walleye on certain waters, you have to buy special walleye license for 11 dollars. National parks require yet another license, not sure how much that one is. To qualify for walleye in certain waters you have to buy tags for 11 dollars each after qualifying in a draw. It's an excess of regulations and keeps getting worse each year. Right now senior fish for free, but I hear that will be clawed back right quick.

originally posted by: rickymouse
Being a person who did a lot of hunting and fishing in my life, I do agree with people having to have a hunting and fishing license. The revenues of the licenses go to improve things and create parks. I have no problem with that. As far as hunting, I believe the young now should be required to have a hunters safety course, parents do not teach their kids like they used to teach kids when I was young.

There needs to be rules, there needs to be DNR officers out there. If there wasn't, there would be people shooting ten to twenty deer a year and wasting half of it. I am a member of a gun club, have been for twenty six years now. We do need regulations, the five to seven percent of the population that would abuse the fishing and hunting would wipe out all the fish and wildlife. I have seen what a few people could do in the past,

A Licence makes legal something that would otherwise be illegal. What would have the licence be for? hunting and fishing on private lands or hunting and fishing on public lands.

When you apply for a licence you accept the status of slave and the jurisdication of the other party. I.E when you apply for a licence you are not a free man.

Hope this helps

a reply to: D8Tee

Dang, looks like they're squeezing you guys pretty good over there.

The long and the short of it is "yes". The law is the law.