• Help Support TNDeer:

Prices going up?

East TN Bowhunter said:
How do you know what fields they lease? Is there a way to get this info? I haven't seen anything like this at the WMAs I hunt.
Click to expand...
Afaik there isn't, we just ran across these while scouting. I'd like to hear from the farmer, about how widespread the damage was.
From what I saw it looked like maybe a third of what was planted was eaten recently.
 
JeepKuntry said:
Just wait 15-20 years from now when less license revenue comes in. Lifetime will come back to bite TWRA. I bought mine. Should have bought it years before I did when it was $1200! Had my lifetime for about 7 years.
Click to expand...
absolutely amen!! twra lost a couple of puplic huntting grounds in smt this yesr because of funds. im sure they will make up for it with bogas fees like wearing realtree instead of mossy oak. its coming!! watch and see.
 
trkhunter said:
absolutely amen!! twra lost a couple of puplic huntting grounds in smt this yesr because of funds. im sure they will make up for it with bogas fees like wearing realtree instead of mossy oak. its coming!! watch and see.
Click to expand...
trkhunter said:
absolutely amen!! twra lost a couple of puplic huntting grounds in smt this yesr because of funds. im sure they will make up for it with bogas fees like wearing realtree instead of mossy oak. its coming!! watch and see.
Click to expand...
no one??
 
Here is my complaint and who I am. I have worked in LE for over 29 years and still counting. I have watched so much wasted tax dollars on both the state and federal side as I have worked both. I am a tax payer and a sportsman too and have no problem rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's but take a few minutes and look at every state that surrounds Tennessee all the way to Florida. Virginia is the only state that is close to what Tennessee charges their residents for license. So we already pay substantially more than most and factually the increase doesn't get it for me, and doesn't add up either. I do know that the sportsman of Tennessee shouldn't have to contribute to lawsuits brought on by agencies that abuse their authority ( I have written a lot of search warrants and view the constitution as my guide to protect everyone equally and the debacle of placing cameras on personal property should never have happened and it cost a lot to defend… and rightfully they lost… because they were 100% wrong. Now they have to increase revenue somehow. There are other lawsuits currently pending as well but bottom line, the hunters and fisherman of TN shouldn't have to fund rogue behavior and what I mentioned above is exactly that. Two cents from a cop of almost 30 years that tries to be a good guy.. not a bully.
 
marty d said:
Here is my complaint and who I am. I have worked in LE for over 29 years and still counting. I have watched so much wasted tax dollars on both the state and federal side as I have worked both. I am a tax payer and a sportsman too and have no problem rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's but take a few minutes and look at every state that surrounds Tennessee all the way to Florida. Virginia is the only state that is close to what Tennessee charges their residents for license. So we already pay substantially more than most and factually the increase doesn't get it for me, and doesn't add up either. I do know that the sportsman of Tennessee shouldn't have to contribute to lawsuits brought on by agencies that abuse their authority ( I have written a lot of search warrants and view the constitution as my guide to protect everyone equally and the debacle of placing cameras on personal property should never have happened and it cost a lot to defend… and rightfully they lost… because they were 100% wrong. Now they have to increase revenue somehow. There are other lawsuits currently pending as well but bottom line, the hunters and fisherman of TN shouldn't have to fund rogue behavior and what I mentioned above is exactly that. Two cents from a cop of almost 30 years that tries to be a good guy.. not a bully.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen the figures. How much did TWRA spend to defend that lawsuit?
 
scn said:
I haven't seen the figures. How much did TWRA spend to defend that lawsuit?
Click to expand...
I've got a lot of connections in the state and I can't get a definitive answer, which tells me a lot. We all know what the cost of attorneys fees are, and this went through several processes before they finally just let it go. I have heard that the individual that was the victim of the allegations only sued them for a dollar because he did not believe that the citizens should have to pay for their wrongdoing, which says a lot about his character.
 
marty d said:
I've got a lot of connections in the state and I can't get a definitive answer, which tells me a lot. We all know what the cost of attorneys fees are, and this went through several processes before they finally just let it go. I have heard that the individual that was the victim of the allegations only sued them for a dollar because he did not believe that the citizens should have to pay for their wrongdoing, which says a lot about his character.
Click to expand...
I have done a lot of business with several state agencies over the years and without any lawsuits but with contracts and compliance I have always dealt with staff lawyers or state general counsel. I am not aware they needed to "hire" an attorney, that cost should be built in and that would explain why it's not an available piece of info
 
marty d said:
I've got a lot of connections in the state and I can't get a definitive answer, which tells me a lot. We all know what the cost of attorneys fees are, and this went through several processes before they finally just let it go. I have heard that the individual that was the victim of the allegations only sued them for a dollar because he did not believe that the citizens should have to pay for their wrongdoing, which says a lot about his character.
Click to expand...
You obviously don't have great connections, or you wouldn't be so far off in virtually everything you posted.

1. If you do an analysis of the license costs and what the various licenses actually cover, you will find that TWRA is about in the middle of the pack in license costs like they have been for the past 30 years. They certainly aren't the cheapest, but they aren't the most expensive, either. And, you would also find that the states with the cheapest costs are getting directed funding from their state's General Funds. TWRA gets zero from the TN General fund.

2. I don't know the associated costs for defending the lawsuit. But, since it was done by the State Attorney General's office rather that private counsel, I suspect it is much less than you are thinking.

3. And, finally, contrary to your hit piece, there was zero "rogue" behavior on the part of the TWRA officers. They had the statutory authority to be on the property without warrant that was in effect since 1974. It passed TN constitutional muster when it was passed, and had not been challenged prior to this case. And, your US constitutional knowledge is pretty suspect. Under the US Constitution and the Open Fields Doctrine upheld by the US Supreme Court, there was zero legal requirement for the officers to obtain a warrant for that surveillance since it was well outside of any curtilage. When cases like this are worked, they are done with the assistance of state or federal attorney generals. From sitting in a pile of discussions with them on similar cases, there was not a legal reason at the time to obtain a warrant. The officers followed both statutes and court decisions that were in effect at that time.
 
Last edited:
scn said:
You obviously don't have great connections, or you wouldn't be so far off in virtually everything you posted.

1. If you do an analysis of the license costs and what the various licenses actually cover, you will find that TWRA is about in the middle of the pack in license costs like they have been for the past 30 years. They certainly aren't the cheapest, but they aren't the most expensive, either. And, you would also find that the states with the cheapest costs are getting directed funding from their state's General Funds. TWRA gets zero from the TN General fund.

2. I don't know the associated costs for defending the lawsuit. But, since it was done by the State Attorney General's office rather that private counsel, I suspect it is much less than you are thinking.

3. And, finally, contrary to your hit piece, there was zero "rogue" behavior on the part of the TWRA officers. They had the statutory authority to be on the property without warrant that was in effect since 1974. It passed TN constitutional muster when it was passed, and had not been challenge prior to this case. And, your US constitutional knowledge is pretty suspect. Under the US Constitution and the Open Fields Doctrine upheld by the US Supreme Court, there was zero legal requirement for the officers to obtain a warrant for that surveillance since it was well outside of any curtilage. When cases like this are worked, they are done with the assistance of state or federal attorney generals. From sitting in a pile of discussions with them on similar cases, there was not a legal reason at the time to obtain a warrant. The officers followed both statutes and court decisions that were in effect at that
scn said:
You obviously don't have great connections, or you wouldn't be so far off in virtually everything you posted.

1. If you do an analysis of the license costs and what the various licenses actually cover, you will find that TWRA is about in the middle of the pack in license costs like they have been for the past 30 years. They certainly aren't the cheapest, but they aren't the most expensive, either. And, you would also find that the states with the cheapest costs are getting directed funding from their state's General Funds. TWRA gets zero from the TN General fund.

2. I don't know the associated costs for defending the lawsuit. But, since it was done by the State Attorney General's office rather that private counsel, I suspect it is much less than you are thinking.

3. And, finally, contrary to your hit piece, there was zero "rogue" behavior on the part of the TWRA officers. They had the statutory authority to be on the property without warrant that was in effect since 1974. It passed TN constitutional muster when it was passed, and had not been challenge prior to this case. And, your US constitutional knowledge is pretty suspect. Under the US Constitution and the Open Fields Doctrine upheld by the US Supreme Court, there was zero legal requirement for the officers to obtain a warrant for that surveillance since it was well outside of any curtilage. When cases like this are worked, they are done with the assistance of state or federal attorney generals. From sitting in a pile of discussions with them on similar cases, there was not a legal reason at the time to obtain a warrant. The officers followed both statutes and court decisions that were in effect at that time.
Click to expand...
Google is free.. please show me all the states that surround Tennessee that charge their residents more than Tennessee does currently ( and Tennessee wants to go up more?) As far as my comment about TWRA officers acting in a manner that wasn't legal…. I guess that is why they lost their case. See the real issue here is some of us in law enforcement actually took our oath to the constitution at heart while others do things that never passed a simple smell test because that is the way we have always done it. That my friend is the bigger problem. They were 100% wrong and the courts got it 100% correct in the end and the TWRA lost end of discussion. Let me find a camera on my property and you charge me with theft when I take it down and lock it in MY safe and I will own you when we are done….As should every citizen of this great state or this nation. As far as the state attorney representing the TWRA and this costs from such representation. Sure, it is much cheaper than some big firm no doubt but at the end of the day it wasn't free and cost a pretty penny. A penny that should never have been spent nor passed on to those that are forced to pay for it. Listen, I have no idea what you do for a living…By your comments I could guess but will hold those in reserve but you put a lot of words down and proved nothing. Remember, anyone on here can do what I did and look up another state's hunting and fishing license cost…. I did long before making the first statement so I knew I was correct. You should do the same next time.
Click to expand...
 
I am well aware of what the license cost represent. You don't have a clue by just looking at a price off the internet. There is more to it than comparing apples to oranges.

Since you, like me, don't have any figures, you again don't have a clue about what the actual costs have been in dealing with the lawsuit. Since it was done "in house", I seriously doubt it cost a pretty penny.

And, they were not 100% wrong with the statutes and court decisions in play at the time. The case hinged on a new interpretation of the Tennessee Constitution. It will be case law from this point forward, but was not case law at the time.

So, you are wrong on most counts again.
 
Again for all the new people to TN. TWRA gets no money from the state on TN general fund. Why that's because the sportsman of TN did not want our hunting and fishing rights to be dictated by the state. Imagine if you got a rogue governor of TN. Now you get the drift. Most states get money from the state. So all the moneys TWRA gets is from license sales and a little from Pittman-Roberson. Maybe some from logging. And raffles they do. I don't want to pay more as money is tight right now. I wish they would acquire more land in N East TN before it's all gone. you have a right to complain. And I'm not saying there is zero merit in it. Money only go's so far
 
killingtime 41 said:
Again for all the new people to TN. TWRA gets no money from the state on TN general fund. Why that's because the sportsman of TN did not want our hunting and fishing rights to be dictated by the state. Imagine if you got a rogue governor of TN. Now you get the drift. Most states get money from the state. So all the moneys TWRA gets is from license sales and a little from Pittman-Roberson. Maybe some from logging. And raffles they do. I don't want to pay more as money is tight right now. I wish they would acquire more land in N East TN before it's all gone. you have a right to complain. And I'm not saying there is zero merit in it. Money only go's so far
Click to expand...
Thanks for better describing that.

And, the raffles you reference are actually the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Foundation, not TWRA. They are a private foundation that raises money to support TWRA. There are times that they can purchase land with a lot less red tape than going through the state building commission and then donate the land to TWRA. They are a major help to TWRA, but aren't the same.

I haven't paid much attention to this increase since I bought the fourth lifetime license they sold when they first came out. It hurt financially at the time, but, I saw the hand writing on the wall. It turned out to be one of the few financial decisions I have made that worked.

If they don't get the increase, some cuts will have to be made in future years. I know some I would probably make.............
 
killingtime 41 said:
Again for all the new people to TN. TWRA gets no money from the state on TN general fund. Why that's because the sportsman of TN did not want our hunting and fishing rights to be dictated by the state. Imagine if you got a rogue governor of TN. Now you get the drift. Most states get money from the state. So all the moneys TWRA gets is from license sales and a little from Pittman-Roberson. Maybe some from logging. And raffles they do. I don't want to pay more as money is tight right now. I wish they would acquire more land in N East TN before it's all gone. you have a right to complain. And I'm not saying there is zero merit in it. Money only go's so far
Click to expand...
When real inflation is flirting with 30% over the last 2+ years all around us why do we want to believe it shouldn't effect TWRA, their costs of operations and that effect on their funding sources…
 
Ski said:
What does a landowner get from "loaning" ground to TWRA for public hunting use? What does TWRA get? Are landowners being generous with the impression that TWRA will make improvements and manage their ground on TWRA's dime? I'm not sure I understand how these arrangements go.
Click to expand...
I can tell the landowner that let the TWRA use the land for the Cumberland Springs WMA, thought the TWRA was a joke and should be replaced with an agency that actually did something.
 
scn said:
You obviously don't have great connections, or you wouldn't be so far off in virtually everything you posted.

1. If you do an analysis of the license costs and what the various licenses actually cover, you will find that TWRA is about in the middle of the pack in license costs like they have been for the past 30 years. They certainly aren't the cheapest, but they aren't the most expensive, either. And, you would also find that the states with the cheapest costs are getting directed funding from their state's General Funds. TWRA gets zero from the TN General fund.

2. I don't know the associated costs for defending the lawsuit. But, since it was done by the State Attorney General's office rather that private counsel, I suspect it is much less than you are thinking.

3. And, finally, contrary to your hit piece, there was zero "rogue" behavior on the part of the TWRA officers. They had the statutory authority to be on the property without warrant that was in effect since 1974. It passed TN constitutional muster when it was passed, and had not been challenged prior to this case. And, your US constitutional knowledge is pretty suspect. Under the US Constitution and the Open Fields Doctrine upheld by the US Supreme Court, there was zero legal requirement for the officers to obtain a warrant for that surveillance since it was well outside of any curtilage. When cases like this are worked, they are done with the assistance of state or federal attorney generals. From sitting in a pile of discussions with them on similar cases, there was not a legal reason at the time to obtain a warrant. The officers followed both statutes and court decisions that were in effect at that time.
Click to expand...
So placing cameras on the property, no identification, and then when the landowners see the cameras and take them down because they have no clue who the cameras belong to, the TWRA shows up and arrests them for stealing the cameras? Really?

And so glad the courts corrected a wrong that any one with a shred of dignity and common sense would have know it was wrong. If the TWRA had stated that when an officer thinks a law is being broken, someone reports a probable violation, etc. some sort of probable cause then we investigate.

But for the TWRA to say ALL we have to assume is that someone is hunting, then the TWRA can go anywhere they want, anytime, conceal themselves however they feel they need to and not tell anyone anything about it, THAT IS WRONG!
 
marty d said:
I've got a lot of connections in the state and I can't get a definitive answer, which tells me a lot. We all know what the cost of attorneys fees are, and this went through several processes before they finally just let it go. I have heard that the individual that was the victim of the allegations only sued them for a dollar because he did not believe that the citizens should have to pay for their wrongdoing, which says a lot about his character.
Click to expand...
SCN was assistant chief of law enforcement at TWRA, or I believe that is what was under his name on here. We talked a lot. I remember telling him that there were several things wrong with the TWRA and they should be taken to court, I was positive the TWRA would lose, SCN was positive the TWRA would not lose. I believe I was right. I have talked to a few judges who have little respect or care for the TWRA.

I do believe the TWRA has become a crooked agency who has lost care about conservation and is becoming a leftist, liberal bunch of idiots.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top