Reply
Go Back   TexasBowhunter.com Community Discussion Forums > Topics > Game Management/Age & Score/Trailcam Pics
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-11-2019, 02:13 PM   #1
Aggieivy06
Six Point
 
Aggieivy06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Nacogdoches
Hunt In: South Texas
Default TPWD Proposal to add fee for MLDP participants

What are all of the other MLDP folks who spend countless dollars to comply with MLDP (surveys, independent biologists, predator control, brush manipulation, etc.) thinking about this proposal? I will say for myself that I thought the creation of the Conservation and Harvest levels was to allows herd managers who don't really need help choose the Conservation option to free up state biologists to help folks who truly need it. While the fee is a drop in the bucket when it comes to managing a deer herd on large acreage, it also opens Pandora's box to continue to increase the fee over the time. Let's (not) cuss and discuss!
Aggieivy06 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-11-2019, 02:15 PM   #2
150class
Pope & Young
 
150class's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Uvalde, Boerne
Default

https://discussions.texasbowhunter.c...&highlight=MLD
150class is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-11-2019, 02:16 PM   #3
Dirtymike
Pope & Young
 
Dirtymike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Hunt In: granger, victoria
Default

just another way to take another nickle
Dirtymike is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-11-2019, 02:25 PM   #4
ultrastealth
Ten Point
 
ultrastealth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Katy
Hunt In: Camp Wood, TX
Default

IMHO, there should be a fee. The people who utilize these biologists time should pay for it. And I'm one of those people.
ultrastealth is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-12-2019, 07:10 PM   #5
txwhitetail
Pope & Young
 
txwhitetail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion Co
Default

If you use the program you should be paying for the program.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
txwhitetail is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-13-2019, 03:05 PM   #6
tdwinklr
Ten Point
 
tdwinklr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Leonard, TX
Hunt In: N. Central and N. East TX
Default

I'm pretty sure we're paying for it already, one way or another, and the biologists aren't hurting either. Why would you want to pay more, or feel the need to?
lol
tdwinklr is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-13-2019, 08:18 PM   #7
txwhitetail
Pope & Young
 
txwhitetail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion Co
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdwinklr View Post
I'm pretty sure we're paying for it already, one way or another, and the biologists aren't hurting either. Why would you want to pay more, or feel the need to?

lol


We’re all paying for the program that few are using. If it’s not worth the $300 to you it’s time to get off.

Yes I have been off and on MLD at several ranches and never understood why it wasn’t funded by those using it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
txwhitetail is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-14-2019, 09:03 AM   #8
BTLowry
Pope & Young
 
BTLowry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Lindale
Hunt In: Behind the house and public in Texas; Kansas Unit 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txwhitetail View Post
We’re all paying for the program that few are using.
That is my understanding

Kind of like a gated subdivision wanting the county or state to pave roads behind the locked gates

I don't know the difference in Harvest and Conservation but fees do not seem unreasonable if those are yearly

But I don't use either and therefore have little knowledge
BTLowry is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-14-2019, 09:21 AM   #9
cattlelackranch
Ten Point
 
cattlelackranch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Rockwall
Hunt In: South Texas and Panhandle
Default TPWD Proposal to add fee for MLDP participants

.
cattlelackranch is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-18-2019, 04:26 PM   #10
gtsticker
Ten Point
 
gtsticker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jarrell Texas
Hunt In: Lee and Fayette Counties. New Mexico
Default

The program was developed to assist landowners with management. Then all the ranches got on it just for the extended season. The biologist get a pay check every month to assist landowners that is their JOB. We are on MLD and do not do a single paid hunt. The permits allow us to harvest the needed number of deer with out exposing the ranch to the liabilities of outside hunters. I do all the surveys and counts. The biologist just enters it in a formula. I think it is BS to have to pay for a service that is part of their job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gtsticker is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-18-2019, 08:45 PM   #11
farlow
Nubbin' Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Default

I have to agree with gtsticker. And some of the above posters need to familiarize themselves with the requirements as well as understand exactly what the biologists do, but even more importantly, don't do anymore.
We have been on MLD since its inception in a county that has a moderate/light density population. Our place is adjacent to a large lake with thousands of acres of utility company land that is not hunted. Our density even with a liberal harvest is 1 deer to 12 acres and that is down from 1/9.8 two decades ago.
Up until '99, my biologist was a dream. Turnrow meetings to analyze antlers, jawbones, do controlled burns, etc. He retired and a guy from the King Ranch area took over and I saw the guy 1 time in 15 years. A couple of years ago another was assigned and he is a good guy but I don't see him either and rarely hear from him other than to remind us of deadlines and ask for CWD tissue. I am ok with that.
We don't charge to hunt. I take 2 families from our church each year to help with harvest. Kids are around 11 or so when they are invited and eventually roll off the list around 16. They help with chores if they have time.
Since we opted for the Conservation Option last year when it was initiated, we have to do more 'management practices' than the Harvest Option. Also we do our survey in Aug/Sept instead of go with the HO's countywide survey which is much lower than our numbers. We don't even have to turn in pics anymore. Just email the biologist our numbers and his program spits out the Dept's recommended harvest numbers. And then we have to print off our own permits instead of the state sending them to us.
So what will I get for $300 a year? You tell me.
We will most likely keep our Wildlife Mgmt plan in place but drop off the MLDP program. I can just as easily let hunters use their own tags and take more deer off the property than we are now, just not very far into January and not February. I am already spending enough on management.
farlow is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-18-2019, 09:10 PM   #12
Drycreek3189
Pope & Young
 
Drycreek3189's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Troup
Hunt In: Cherokee, Rusk, Trinity Counties
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by farlow View Post
I have to agree with gtsticker. And some of the above posters need to familiarize themselves with the requirements as well as understand exactly what the biologists do, but even more importantly, don't do anymore.
We have been on MLD since its inception in a county that has a moderate/light density population. Our place is adjacent to a large lake with thousands of acres of utility company land that is not hunted. Our density even with a liberal harvest is 1 deer to 12 acres and that is down from 1/9.8 two decades ago.
Up until '99, my biologist was a dream. Turnrow meetings to analyze antlers, jawbones, do controlled burns, etc. He retired and a guy from the King Ranch area took over and I saw the guy 1 time in 15 years. A couple of years ago another was assigned and he is a good guy but I don't see him either and rarely hear from him other than to remind us of deadlines and ask for CWD tissue. I am ok with that.
We don't charge to hunt. I take 2 families from our church each year to help with harvest. Kids are around 11 or so when they are invited and eventually roll off the list around 16. They help with chores if they have time.
Since we opted for the Conservation Option last year when it was initiated, we have to do more 'management practices' than the Harvest Option. Also we do our survey in Aug/Sept instead of go with the HO's countywide survey which is much lower than our numbers. We don't even have to turn in pics anymore. Just email the biologist our numbers and his program spits out the Dept's recommended harvest numbers. And then we have to print off our own permits instead of the state sending them to us.
So what will I get for $300 a year? You tell me.
We will most likely keep our Wildlife Mgmt plan in place but drop off the MLDP program. I can just as easily let hunters use their own tags and take more deer off the property than we are now, just not very far into January and not February. I am already spending enough on management.
Your story sounds like mine. My first biologist took an interest, even walked the woods with me and identified preferred browse, less preferred, etc. He asked to visit the place when he was in the area and I put a combination lock on the gate just for him. He identified some noxious weeds that were not native that must have came from purchased seed. In other words, he earned his paycheck.

He retired, the replacement didn’t even know what was growing in my food plots. He lasted about a year, I got a different one and only spoke to him on the phone. About that time I asked myself the question: “What are my benefits ?” The answer was: “None” I was gonna do what I did without their oversight anyway and the extra season I didn’t need, so I got out. I’m glad I did, because after they changed the program to “Harvest” and “Conservation” the property that they wanted me to take five does off of magically became the property that I was only allowed to take one doe off of. Same property, more deer, less “harvest” just doesn’t make any sense. I’m thinking, and did at the time, that the reason they changed the program was a money issue, and not a management issue. Seems like the “proposed fee” bears this out.
Drycreek3189 is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-18-2019, 09:21 PM   #13
farlow
Nubbin' Buck
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Default

The thing about the proposed fee is, it will take legislative approval for them to be able to keep the money for the program, otherwise it will go into the general fund. We just had an election about this very thing that the general fund was raiding every year pertaining to the hunting/fishing license fees. I think the legislature won't let any new income go very easily.
farlow is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-19-2019, 06:43 AM   #14
BTLowry
Pope & Young
 
BTLowry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Lindale
Hunt In: Behind the house and public in Texas; Kansas Unit 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtsticker View Post
The program was developed to assist landowners with management. Then all the ranches got on it just for the extended season. The biologist get a pay check every month to assist landowners that is their JOB. We are on MLD and do not do a single paid hunt. The permits allow us to harvest the needed number of deer with out exposing the ranch to the liabilities of outside hunters. I do all the surveys and counts. The biologist just enters it in a formula. I think it is BS to have to pay for a service that is part of their job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by farlow View Post
I have to agree with gtsticker. And some of the above posters need to familiarize themselves with the requirements as well as understand exactly what the biologists do, but even more importantly, don't do anymore.
We have been on MLD since its inception in a county that has a moderate/light density population. Our place is adjacent to a large lake with thousands of acres of utility company land that is not hunted. Our density even with a liberal harvest is 1 deer to 12 acres and that is down from 1/9.8 two decades ago.
Up until '99, my biologist was a dream. Turnrow meetings to analyze antlers, jawbones, do controlled burns, etc. He retired and a guy from the King Ranch area took over and I saw the guy 1 time in 15 years. A couple of years ago another was assigned and he is a good guy but I don't see him either and rarely hear from him other than to remind us of deadlines and ask for CWD tissue. I am ok with that.
We don't charge to hunt. I take 2 families from our church each year to help with harvest. Kids are around 11 or so when they are invited and eventually roll off the list around 16. They help with chores if they have time.
Since we opted for the Conservation Option last year when it was initiated, we have to do more 'management practices' than the Harvest Option. Also we do our survey in Aug/Sept instead of go with the HO's countywide survey which is much lower than our numbers. We don't even have to turn in pics anymore. Just email the biologist our numbers and his program spits out the Dept's recommended harvest numbers. And then we have to print off our own permits instead of the state sending them to us.
So what will I get for $300 a year? You tell me.
We will most likely keep our Wildlife Mgmt plan in place but drop off the MLDP program. I can just as easily let hunters use their own tags and take more deer off the property than we are now, just not very far into January and not February. I am already spending enough on management.
Like I said, I don't know much about the program

Based on these 2 responses above I think I am more swayed to the no fee side.
It is one thing if you are getting some benefit out of it but sounds like you do the work and pay the fee for nada.
Maybe if everyone that is in these programs decided to take a couple of year and opt out the message might get to TPWD
BTLowry is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 12-19-2019, 07:02 AM   #15
deerwatcher51
Ten Point
 
deerwatcher51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Brenham & Richland Springs
Hunt In: Richland Springs & Washington on the Brazos
Default

I’m MLD conservation option and $300 is not a lot in comparison to what I spend on everything else. My objection is that I will pay the same for my 330 acres as someone who has 30,000 acres. I think that those who benefit more should pay more.
deerwatcher51 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 12:34 AM   #16
RWNJRB
Spike
 
RWNJRB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: san marcos
Hunt In: lockhart
Default

I think they should reimburse me for feeding ect.. their deer on MY!!!!! high fence property!! I don't want their deer on my land but I'm in a 1 buck only county.
RWNJRB is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 06:56 AM   #17
BTLowry
Pope & Young
 
BTLowry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Lindale
Hunt In: Behind the house and public in Texas; Kansas Unit 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RWNJRB View Post
I think they should reimburse me for feeding ect.. their deer on MY!!!!! high fence property!! I don't want their deer on my land but I'm in a 1 buck only county.
Do like other small acreage leases/landowners do, invite all of your buddies and kin out to kill a deer

In your case most would not object
BTLowry is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 07:03 AM   #18
Philip-TX
Ten Point
 
Philip-TX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RWNJRB View Post
I think they should reimburse me for feeding ect.. their deer on MY!!!!! high fence property!! I don't want their deer on my land but I'm in a 1 buck only county.
Don't you have gates? open 'em up!!
Philip-TX is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 07:04 AM   #19
Greenheadless
Ten Point
 
Greenheadless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Hunt In: Liberty County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RWNJRB View Post
I think they should reimburse me for feeding ect.. their deer on MY!!!!! high fence property!! I don't want their deer on my land but I'm in a 1 buck only county.
I am going to be devil advocate here.

You could also have the state’s deer herd removed from your high fence property and pay to have it populated with your own, paid for whitetail.
Greenheadless is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 07:08 AM   #20
Greenheadless
Ten Point
 
Greenheadless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Hunt In: Liberty County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deerwatcher51 View Post
I’m MLD conservation option and $300 is not a lot in comparison to what I spend on everything else. My objection is that I will pay the same for my 330 acres as someone who has 30,000 acres. I think that those who benefit more should pay more.
From an MLD paperwork/biologist resource perspective, is there any more work done by the state when it comes to 300 acres or 30,000 acres?

The arguement is resource reimbursement. On either sized property, all the work is performed by the payer of the program. The state merely reviews the plans and puts a yearly report together.
Greenheadless is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 11:56 AM   #21
RWNJRB
Spike
 
RWNJRB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: san marcos
Hunt In: lockhart
Default

I "m just grumpy over the proposed fee. I am in a 1 buck county high fenced. Put 10th generation "pen" deer (which state says they own and control) in to improve the genetics, which it has. But, I am forced to be in the MLD program to control my numbers, culling ect… because of 1 buck county. I cant even pay to bring in captive pen raised deer in from out of state without them becoming TX state property on MY property! If TX claims they are their deer. I can decide what I want to do on MY property, like high fence it, so if I'm feeding your deer on my property shouldn't I get reimbursed? Just makes no sense, common anyways, other than revenue for the state, I get it but don't charge me anymore to be forced to participate in a program.

Last edited by RWNJRB; 01-22-2020 at 11:59 AM.
RWNJRB is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 12:56 PM   #22
txwhitetail
Pope & Young
 
txwhitetail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Angelo
Hunt In: Irion Co
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RWNJRB View Post
I "m just grumpy over the proposed fee. I am in a 1 buck county high fenced. Put 10th generation "pen" deer (which state says they own and control) in to improve the genetics, which it has. But, I am forced to be in the MLD program to control my numbers, culling ect… because of 1 buck county. I cant even pay to bring in captive pen raised deer in from out of state without them becoming TX state property on MY property! If TX claims they are their deer. I can decide what I want to do on MY property, like high fence it, so if I'm feeding your deer on my property shouldn't I get reimbursed? Just makes no sense, common anyways, other than revenue for the state, I get it but don't charge me anymore to be forced to participate in a program.


I understand the complaint but everything you are complaining about you knew about before heading down that road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
txwhitetail is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 02:06 PM   #23
RWNJRB
Spike
 
RWNJRB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: san marcos
Hunt In: lockhart
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txwhitetail View Post
I understand the complaint but everything you are complaining about you knew about before heading down that road.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are 100% correct I knew everything except the added MLD fee. Now I'm invested, so I have no other logical choice except to bend over to whatever TX thinks is appropriate. Would be a lot easier to bend over to them if TPWD could 100% guarantee me that 100% of my tax is going to manage/improve the MLD program.
RWNJRB is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 05:06 PM   #24
JeffK
Ten Point
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RWNJRB View Post
I "m just grumpy over the proposed fee. I am in a 1 buck county high fenced. Put 10th generation "pen" deer (which state says they own and control) in to improve the genetics, which it has. But, I am forced to be in the MLD program to control my numbers, culling ect… because of 1 buck county. I cant even pay to bring in captive pen raised deer in from out of state without them becoming TX state property on MY property! If TX claims they are their deer. I can decide what I want to do on MY property, like high fence it, so if I'm feeding your deer on my property shouldn't I get reimbursed? Just makes no sense, common anyways, other than revenue for the state, I get it but don't charge me anymore to be forced to participate in a program.
Will the state allow you to cut a hole in the fence? Seems like an easy fix.
JeffK is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 09:14 PM   #25
Greenheadless
Ten Point
 
Greenheadless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Hunt In: Liberty County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RWNJRB View Post
You are 100% correct I knew everything except the added MLD fee. Now I'm invested, so I have no other logical choice except to bend over to whatever TX thinks is appropriate. Would be a lot easier to bend over to them if TPWD could 100% guarantee me that 100% of my tax is going to manage/improve the MLD program.
You could also drop out of the MLD program and bring more hunters onto your property to reduce the population. It is one buck per hunter, not per property.
Greenheadless is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 09:37 PM   #26
eastex56
Eight Point
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Longview
Hunt In: Irion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenheadless View Post
I am going to be devil advocate here.

You could also have the state’s deer herd removed from your high fence property and pay to have it populated with your own, paid for whitetail.
I don't think it works that way. From what I understand, you can go buy deer from a sale barn or wherever you want and put them on your property but when you release them on your property they then become property of the State of Texas.

Someone please correct me if I am wrong on this.
eastex56 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-22-2020, 10:04 PM   #27
Greenheadless
Ten Point
 
Greenheadless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Hunt In: Liberty County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eastex56 View Post
I don't think it works that way. From what I understand, you can go buy deer from a sale barn or wherever you want and put them on your property but when you release them on your property they then become property of the State of Texas.

Someone please correct me if I am wrong on this.
So, all the deer breeders deer in their pens are ultimately owned by the state? That doesn’t seem right.
Greenheadless is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-23-2020, 07:29 AM   #28
gingib
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Central Tx
Hunt In: NTX
Default

It would be $30 fee to anyone currently in a WMA. Which would be me. Which is pay $25 to our WMA also
gingib is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-23-2020, 12:55 PM   #29
FVR JR
Six Point
 
FVR JR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Houston
Hunt In: San Saba County, Colorado County
Default

IMO its another catch all implementation that works in some places, and doesn't in others. Our place in San Saba County is a great example of the MLD program. The WMA and biologist are heavily involved. In Colorado County its a bit different, most join MLD just to get doe tags. You have to if you want to shoot them during general season. It made some sense when there were few deer. Now there's doe days where non mld can shoot off their tags, mld is stuck with whatever was issued. Add a $30 fee for the privilege. Those who really want to manage or have longer seasons should pay for the extra work. Give everyone an equal starting point is all I'm saying.

Last edited by FVR JR; 01-23-2020 at 01:06 PM.
FVR JR is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-26-2020, 09:09 PM   #30
Arrow-Tek
Four Point
 
Arrow-Tek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default

Do you hunters not know how to manage your property/deer yourself? I own property myself and manage it myself, yes very expensive but I knew that going in to it.
Arrow-Tek is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-27-2020, 07:00 AM   #31
stx
Six Point
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Default

Our biologist has never stepped foot on any of our ranches and has no idea what’s going on.
stx is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-27-2020, 11:43 AM   #32
gingib
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Central Tx
Hunt In: NTX
Default

It has been approved
gingib is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 01-28-2020, 08:34 PM   #33
No-Tox
Eight Point
 
No-Tox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Rockwall County
Hunt In: Ellis County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eastex56 View Post
I don't think it works that way. From what I understand, you can go buy deer from a sale barn or wherever you want and put them on your property but when you release them on your property they then become property of the State of Texas.



Someone please correct me if I am wrong on this.
Within a HF it doesn't matter if it is in a pen or out playing reindeer games in the field TPWD has ultimate power over any wildlife in the State of Texas.
No-Tox is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1999-2012, TexasBowhunter.com