TPWD Proposal to add fee for MLDP participants

[Aggieivy06]

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!

[150class]

https://discussions.texasbowhunter.com/forums/showthread.php?t=752304&highlight=MLD

[Dirtymike]

just another way to take another nickle

[ultrastealth]

IMHO, there should be a fee. The people who utilize these biologists time should pay for it. And I'm one of those people.

[txwhitetail]

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tdwinklr]

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

[txwhitetail]

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

[BTLowry]

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

[cattlelackranch]

TPWD Proposal to add fee for MLDP participants

.

[gtsticker]

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

[farlow]

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.

[Drycreek3189]

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.

[farlow]

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.

[BTLowry]

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

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

[deerwatcher51]

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.