over 65 no more free fishing

[captain cotton]

Personally, I would gladly pay the fees to continue enjoying the outdoors when I am a senior. In my view, almost every other hobby out there will cost you a lot more than $20 a year, so $20 is peanuts. Considering the future change demographics, it only makes sense this fee should be instituted. Bottom line: I enjoy the outdoors and I am willing to pay for this privilege. I know that regardless of the potential inefficiencies of our government and MNR, generally speaking, good comes from supporting them. Flawed as they may be, I think we can all agree we would be in dire straights if we didn't have them around.

I think most members on here would agree with me in that we all just want what is best for our resources. That being said it is the attitude of entitlement or "I want what is owed to me" that has decimated our resources in the past, not one particular demographic. I think collectively we need to get over the attitude of entitlement and start asking what can I do for our resources, not what can our resources do for me (sorry for the bad Kennedy speech reference). Lets not let politics, personal opinion of the MNR or specific incidents get in the way of what we are talking about here and that is our collective natural resources and the very realistic cost of $20 a year.

[captain cotton]

But that is just my opinion which I don't expect everyone to share. My apologies in advance if I have offended anyone.
Cheers
Al

[TurkeyRookie]

I personally have no issues with everyone requiring a license, regardless of age, you are using a resource that requires money to manage it, and it has to come from somewhere. That aside, the cost of a license for fishing is minimal, where else can you spend 20 bucks and have year round entertainment?

[manson]

I don't disagree with the need for money the cost for a license I find is minimal compared to everything else the whole post was based on the way the increase is not out in the open

[TurkeyRookie]

I don't see what the problem is with the way it is being done either? it is currently a posted proposal, same as the spring bear hunt was, etc.

Right on the main page

The proposed strategies and tactics focus on:

• Enhancing relationships with clients
• Increasing involvement by attracting new participants
• Diversifying revenues
• Improving cost recovery
• Modernizing fees and royalties
• Collaborating with partners to achieve shared goals

Those three I have bolded all shout out to me "more charges coming to the end user" and should be a cause to actually read the whole proposal in full. I don't see it being sneaky.

[sawbill]

The target group is seniors. How many are sitting around searching the web? Most can't fix their VCR when it flashing 12 and most have no idea of the existence of the EBR.
A 'proposal only' from the MNR is another phrase for 'forgone conclusion'.
Yes, its sneaky.

[manson]

I guess I will always disagree with some people the mnr could have publicized this a lot better they have no problem wasting money on other things ie moose meeting and then do what ever they want

[captain cotton]

Although I am a big supporter of OFAH, I am surprised OFAH has not updated their website with this information or that it wasnt added to the May Issue of the out of doors magazine. I know many people rely on the Magazine as a source of info on the politics of Natural resources in our province. I will be sending them a message to inquire I think.

[captain cotton]

Message sent to OFAH. I am sure many seniors rely on that magazine for updates and it seems like a ball drop that that wasn't in there.

[delmer]

Message sent to OFAH. I am sure many seniors rely on that magazine for updates and it seems like a ball drop that that wasn't in there.

Good move on your part. I agree that most seniors are likely to rely on printed media or tv for news rather than the internet.