Archive for Wednesday, January 18, 2012

State officials trying to hook senior citizens for fishing, hunting licenses

January 18, 2012


— For more than seven decades, older Kansans have been getting a break on fishing and hunting licenses.

Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism Secretary Robin Jennison wants to end that.

Jennison told the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday he will introduce legislation to end the license fee exemption that currently exists for Kansas residents 65 and over.

Charging older Kansans the $18 fee for a fishing license and $18 fee for a hunting license will help the parks agency maintain its finances, Jennison said.

Because of the aging Baby Boomers, Jennison said, "We're going to have a tremendous number of hunters and anglers that are not going to have to buy a license in the next 10 years. It is going to be a significant problem," he said.

Jennison said the state started exempting fishing and hunting fees in 1937 to Kansans 70 and older. In 1971, that age exemption was reduced to 65.


WilburNether 6 years, 5 months ago

Good for Jennison. There is no justification whatsoever for providing this freebie based solely on a person's age.

irvan moore 6 years, 5 months ago

so kids should have to have a paid license also?

oldvet 6 years, 5 months ago

Yeah, kinda like the reduced fees for kids at the swimming pool or the Topeka zoo... it's time to charge them the full adult price.

That being said, either free or $18, I'll still have hunting and fishing licenses.

irvan moore 6 years, 5 months ago

mr. jensen wants to take my fishing and hiunting license away, i would prefer that mr. jensen went away

geekin_topekan 6 years, 5 months ago

I hope my lifetime free Native American license will not be challenged.

Randall Barnes 6 years, 5 months ago

i am guessing that Jennison is a republican.

somedude20 6 years, 5 months ago

"$18 fee for a fishing license"

What body of water around here is clean enough to even entertain the thought of eating anything that comes from it? Yuck! Eating a fish from the KAW would be just as gross as bedding down one of those dirty hippie "females" I see around town, gross, you'll need a few shots or something if you do either

Randall Uhrich 6 years, 5 months ago

dirty hippie "females"? Sounds like you're both a christian and a republican.

somedude20 6 years, 5 months ago

nope, believing in ghosts and schmucks is not my thing, baby!

CLARKKENT 6 years, 5 months ago




kufan1146 6 years, 5 months ago

God forbid you have to pay $18 for an entire years worth of hunting (not sure how much fishing license is) in Kansas. You all realize that the hunting licenses pay for wildlife management, game wardens, etc right?

Ridiculous. I can't believe they DIDN'T have to pay before.

skinny 6 years, 5 months ago

I'll fish and hunt on my own property. I won't buy a license to do so!

riverdrifter 6 years, 5 months ago

Geezers should've bought a lifetime license (hunt, fish or both). I bought mine in 1988 and made payments on it over two years. It has since paid for itself and now it looks like an even better deal -now that geezeritis is about to set in.

blindrabbit 6 years, 5 months ago

skinny: Good tough stand you take; just remember that according to the law, the fish and game on private property are really the property of The State. A couple of ways around this are privately stocked fish ponds on non-navigatable waters (any free running stream is considered to be navigatable), so be careful here. For hunting, it is even more risky, especially if you are hunting migratory birds (doves, ducks, geese) that are controlled by the Feds. You can get a private controlled hunting license, but my guess that a lot of red tape. Many have taken your position and have paid the price! Good luck!

Richard Heckler 6 years, 5 months ago

Another tax increase from the no taxes phonies.......

Sam Brownback claims to dislike government yet he has not been off the big government tax dollar payroll for decades.... sounds like a bogus dude.

Flap Doodle 6 years, 5 months ago

"...sounds like a bogus dude..." You're channeling Bill & Ted now? {snort}

Joe Hyde 6 years, 5 months ago

For this age-specific regulatory change to be fair -- if hunters and fishers age 65 and over will soon be required to continue purchasing licenses -- then the cost of those licenses should be less than the price paid by people under the age of 65.

A sliding fee scale could be instituted -- the older you are (past the age of 65) the less your annual license will cost. This sliding scale could be broken down into 5-year increments.

Point being: Yes, losing out on monies collected from Baby Boomer license sales obviously threatens a future revenue loss that will negatively impact the Kansas Dept. of Wildlife, Parks and Storm Door Repair.

But on the other hand, it's unreasonable to assume a crippling loss of revenue will result. That's because not every Kansas Boomer over the age of 65 hunts and fishes. And of the Boomers still afield, how many still hit it as hard as they did back in their 30s and 40s?

Also, are Boomers annually harvesting the same numbers of fish and game as the younger crowd is harvesting? Finally, as time goes by isn't it natural that the Boomer impact on the state's resource will dwindle as health issues begin taking a toll?

So I can appreciate the argument for changing the law to make folks 65+ keep buying licenses. But it is not fair-minded to make 65+ folks buy licenses that cost the same as what folks, say, in their 20s will pay.

prairie_rattler 6 years, 5 months ago

The KDWPT's budget comes from the the sale of licenses and park entry fees. I have had a lifetime hunting license for 20 years, yet I buy an annual license each year to support the great work they do in providing outdoor activities on both public and private lands. I am also in favor of creating a general revenue source (sales tax, vehicle registration add on) that would directly support the KDWPT.

lkg 6 years, 5 months ago

As a 70 year old who takes advantage of the "entitlements" that I receive from the government, I recognize that they are not really "entitlements" but gifts from special interest groups. Having hunted and fished Kansas for 56 years, I will give up my "gift" willingly and buy both a hunting and fishing license gladly. The health and longevity of the KDWF and all of the good that they do is much more important to me than $36.00 annually. I get to hunt Perry several times a season, and take advantage of the walk-in hunting lands often. Having gotten to live in good health for 70 years and still look forward to fishing and hunting each season, goes way beyond political party lines and the pettiness that seems to overlook the reason we hunt and fish. Would any of you REALLY stop hunting and fishing in protest, if we "over 65's" end up having to buy licenses?

Commenting has been disabled for this item.