http://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/o...er-10943213.php

Maybe some good news for Military, LEO's and Firefighters in another Bill being proposed.

Thanks for posting this. This is definitely news to me and likely many other current MLD participants. Of course the bill has not been passed yet, however, I don't understand its need. The newly re-vamped MLD program that begins this year is supposed to reduce the costs and resources currently required to manage the MLD program, so is a new fee/tax necessary if they are streamlining and making the program more efficient?

I went and read the proposed bill, (SB 722) The content is very basic, and I could find no background on what would necessitate its proposal. The bill itself simply amends Section 11.032 of the Parks & Wildlife Code providing for the TPW commission to set a fee for each program participation option. The fee does not go specifically for the MLD program, but to the same general account as hunting & fishing license sales and a whole slew of other sources of revenue.

I'm all for and a proponent of consumptive taxes (and that is what this is being characterized as, a tax on MLD program participants to cover its cost), but 1) I am also a firm believer that any new tax must be proven to have fiscal necessity and 2) if it is being proposed as a fee (tax) to cover the cost of the MLD program specifically, the funds should be ear-marked for the MLD program.

The MLD and LAMPS programs have been highly popular and beneficial to the quality of white-tail and mule deer in the state. Participation already requires landowners and managers to spend a lot of time and money on required wildlife management practices in order to participate. If the bill passes and the commission imposes and inordinately high fee to those using the program, it may well backfire on them. I sure would prefer for this lawmaker to layout the facts as to why this is needed.

Anyone else have any background on this?

It sounded like a cost recovery fee to me but as you pointed out, it is not earmarked for the MLDP programs. The collections could exceed the additional overhead costs TPWD is describing and the people paying the fees would have no way of knowing. You raise good points and it is well written, maybe cut & paste to TP&WD.

There were some other proposed bills in that link that would be good for Military, Firefighters & LEO's. Well deserved IMO.

Couldn't have said it better. What's the problem with cutting costs?? Instead of raising funds? The proof that it's just another way to bleed the hunting community (specifically landowners), is the fact that they don't ear mark it and they don't detail the costs.

There's a lot of ways to cut costs. I'll bet the highest REAL cost is the cost of printing and mailing the permits. It would be simple to pass that cost to the landowner by sending a write protected document and letting us print the permits.

There already is a landowner paid tax that should cover this called the Lease License. In which the majority of west Texas falls into the highest bracket.

The biggest cost of the program is mailing and printing the tags on that special paper. With the new program starting next year, it will cut the biologist out nearly completely. As explained to me, next year I will log into TWIMS and enter my numbers, they will be calculated (by computer I assume), the biologist will log in and approve them, they will be mailed to me by Austin, and I will log in and fill in the harvest data at the end of the season. By my understanding of next year's program there will be no need for the biologist other than approval. That should be enough savings to cover the cost of printing and mailing.

Just like any other tax, the business/land owner will not pay. One of two things will happen.
1. Land owners will quit participating
2. Land owners will pass it along to the hunter in cost of the hunt increases

If we're completely honest about the program, hunters get the biggest benefit from it by being able to hunt more animals per yearly license. Land owners could calculate their own harvest recommendations and offer hunts based on their own calculations. But it's a big draw for hunters not to have to use their own tags, especially in the package hunt sector. In my experience, the land owner does all the field work and covers all the costs of the surveys, does all the data collection, and covers all the costs and work for meeting the program management practices. And a biologist hasn't set foot on our place in over eight years. (That is no fault of our new bio, we tried several times to get together but our schedules just didn't let that happen)

I'm sure the "fee" will not be so large as to warrant getting out of the program, but I for one am tired of paying every little nickel and dime government comes up with take from me.

PS: was just informed my property taxes may increase this year.

Sounds like a money-grab to me, but if you are using a service, you should be paying for the service.

You are absolutely right. I have no problem paying for a service. But tell me what service is paid for by the Lease License?

https://tpwd.texas.gov/business/licenses/media/PWD%20850%20Hunting%20Lease%20Info.pdf

Lease licenses and MLDP participation are not synonymous. Tons of ranches are in the MLD program but do not lease nor charge a fee to hunt on the private ranch.

Not trying to be argumentative, but in my experience on the two counties I cover not a single MLD participating land owner that I know does not lease or charge for hunts. Now I'm sure there are land owners that participate and only have family hunt their land, but not tons as you say. I know of only two ranches in my area that are only family hunting land and neither one participates in MLD.

My point was to go along with the main idea of the thread that this new "fee" was just one more way to get revenue for the state where they are already collecting revenue that should cover the cost incurred by any programs TPW puts in place. Besides, the MLD program has operated this long without the need of fees. What has happened that suddenly it is needed yet the work load of TPW is now going to decrease this next year?

With this new MLD program that starts this year participants will print out their own permits---they will no longer be mailed out:

"The program participant will be responsible for printing and distributing MLDP tags issued for the enrolled property (tags are no longer mailed from TPWD). A PDF document that contains the tags will be created upon acceptance of the harvest recommendation by the program participant. Program participants may access their online account and print the tags at any time after acceptance of the harvest recommendation.
o MLDP tags may be printed on any type of paper but the hunter must maintain the tag in legible condition until tagging requirements cease.

Waterproof paper, plain copy paper, card stock, colored paper, or other
paper types are some options participants may use. MLDP tags should
be printed on 8 ½ x 11 paper and will fit 6 tags to a page"

They should have been paying for MLDP permits since the start of the program. The program takes a lot of state resources to run and those choosing to join should be paying some fees to help offset costs.

Our ranch is MLDP Level 3. We are required to meet the certain criteria in order to qualify for the permits. This in itself costs us (the landowner) a significant amount of time and money each year. Remember, this program is to help landowners better manage the STATE's deer. Therefore I am opposed to any increase in cost.

You know, if you'd spend some time reading before posting you wouldn't so easily be deemed talking straight from your nether regions.

It's well noted above that the state is more than well compensated for their services by the lease license, the services they provide are inefficient and more costly than they need to be because of the states poor management protocol, and that we improve the states resource at already great cost to ourselves.

MLD and lease licenses have 0 to do with each other. Try again.

I pay for lease licenses on non MLD property just like those on MLD do.

The MLD program has been abused and over used to the point I think some fees to cover the program are needed.

Are you participating in the MLD program?

How has it been abused and over used?

See, there you go again. Not reading and comprehending. Totally ignored the second half pointing out that they really aren't doing anything with MLD that isn't worthless and inefficient. From the start MLD could have been virtually costless to the state, and now it CAN be totally digital. State doesn't even have anyone smart enough to build a spread sheet. A guy from my neighbors ranch built them their first one.

AND.. the money a rancher pays in lease fees is vastly more than MLD implementation costs.

Worthless huh? Didn't you have your properties on MLD for a while? Guess it wasn't too worthless then...

"Worthless huh? Didn't you have your properties on MLD for a while? Guess it wasn't too worthless then..."

Their efforts were worthless, archaic, and invalid. I certainly don't need them telling me what and how many to harvest. I have infinitely more invested than they do, know better how to manage the resource than they do, and have infinitely more at risk than they do.

I certainly don't have a dog in this fight. I just do not see any benefits other than making the season longer. And for me the season is plenty long already. I may be missing something but why would you need extra time to harvest the deer you think need to be taken? And why would a person who has an hunting license not have to use his tags and what is the benefit of that? Why would a ranch owner need the state to tell him how many deer need to be taken? I would think that any responsible ranch owner should be able to figure that out without the states help. But there must be something in it for folks to get so riled up about it.

For you the season is long enough Don. That is because you are retired and live on the same place you hunt. For all the hunters on our lease this is not the case. We work and have to travel several hours to get back and forth to the lease.

The extra hunting days are very important to us to keep up with the harvest goals.

Don, good questions. First of all, lets address the extended season. With MLD properties, it is not uncommon for large acreage ranches to harvest 50, 100 or more deer (I've known some that have to remove 300 deer). This cannot be done in a typical hunting season. For those that have to take the upper end of the spectrum, they often have to resort to trapping as well (but that is a whole other discussion). As far as tag use, it coincides with the number of deer that have to be taken (to a point). Let me explain. A typical MLD ranch has to take more deer than is allotted on a hunting license. We still have to tag the deer, however we use another tag(s) provided by the state. As far as the state telling us how many deer to take, they do and they don't. Not all landowners are management savvy. Overtime they may become that way, but in the beginning they need help. The state will help develop a plan and can continue to help over the years. After a while, the landowner will see a pattern develop with harvest records and will get to know about how many deer need to be taken year after year. We still have to provide a management plan that does need to be approved by the state. As I mentioned earlier, we (the landowner) do not get reimbursed by the state for the resources we use to fulfill our obligations (i.e. seed cost, feed, implement cost, fuel cost, time etc.). That is why I am opposed to adding fees to be MLD permitted.