I will gladly pay a user fee to gain more access to more places. But it's a
bit short sighted from my perspective. Yes, we birders and other
naturalists don't pay a direct fee to NC WRC.
In reviewing their fiscal 2023 budget posted online, vessel registrations,
boating safety and license receipts account for 35% of the annual revenue
of WRC's $109.5 million budget. The remainder come from indirect non-user
sources, such federal funds, general appropriations and even gas tax
transfers. Law enforcement accounts for 29% of expenditures with wildlife
management, "gamelands" (however defined), and habitat conservation
comprising 11%, 15%, and 8%, respectively.
I posit hunters, fishermen and boaters don't pay their "fair share" in
return for the exclusive access they've been given. Further, I argue that
we birders and naturalists likely spend more in gas tax, and sales and
occupancy taxes as we criss-cross the state in search of that next lifer or
just for the enjoyment our nature pursuits provide.
Al Hooks
Smithfield, NC
Current Lifetime NC Fishing License Holder
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:16 AM Ann Robertson <carolinabirds...>
wrote:
> Dear Carolinabirders,
>
> In this morning's Coastal Review, I read about an exciting proposal from
> the NC Wildlife Resources Commission to offer a "Conservation Access
> Pass". This would be the birder equivalent of a hunting / fishing license,
> and would renew annually. The pass would provide entry to 2 million acres
> of gameland, boating access areas, and more. It is not limited to birders;
> a range of recreational uses are mentioned
>
> There are three public meetings across the state, coming up soon. There's
> also a VIRTUAL meeting on March 4th, for which you may register.
>
> I was told a while back by a politically experienced birder that one
> reason birders don't carry as much weight with state officials as hunters
> is that we don't contribute to the public till with special taxes,
> licenses, etc. Apparently, at one time a "birders' tax" was proposed on
> items such as binoculars, birdseed, etc., that would have fed into
> conservation. Our flock apparently did not endorse this, sadly.
>
> I may be wrong, and wiser heads may weigh in, but I believe this
> Conservation Access Pass would be a win-win. It would provide access to
> wonderful birding areas while funding our under-resourced NCWRC. Here's a
> link to the article so you may consider this issue:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://coastalreview.org/2025/02/state-seeks-feedback-on-proposed-conservation-access-pass/__;!!OToaGQ!uinKLpMQwDh1TXg9M3bRmWem4p9unQwuN74vx4ZjH96RwoIL9LyzjF6sKel_AVSpckyPSNzQX02Z649P4Knjpg$ > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://coastalreview.org/2025/02/state-seeks-feedback-on-proposed-conservation-access-pass/__;!!OToaGQ!sQbft_AcXNQj8ledwFhYKky5NbZn7hca1wSaI14YgPSug_57wpicBzaStZZ4T4YPmUX3aRzPCYnXvYK17yBxJIbgMXyGXw$> >
> Best regards,
> Ann Blue Robertson
> Winston-Salem
>
