Consider enclosing the "State Financial Impact Flyer", located in Thread 9a..


1. Dear Rep,A
The decision to raise sportsmen’s by 100% is painful to me. I am unemployed.
The “fee increase” is a regressive tax. It hits the unemployed, low income, middle income taxpayers.
And when I studied the enclosed flyer, I have to ask,” Was there a State Income study performed before the vote.”
We both loose. The state looses revenue and I am either forced to sit at home or break the law.
Please, advise me as to what you will do to change this wrong?

2. Dear Rep

The 100% sportsmen fee increase appears to be a revenue, 1-step forward and 2-steps backward.
In the past I bought a number of licenses for hunting and fishing. Some licenses I use often and others occasionally. Now, the state has double my cost of my licenses an tags from 225 to 400. I will have to cut back. A 100% fee increase is causing sportsmen to cut back on multiple licenses, which will be a cutback in sportsmen’s expenditures, a cut back in non-resident tourism dollars, on and on.

You have made a one size fits all fee increase. You hurt the little guy who is struggling to pay bills and get some enjoyment out of life. .

Please read and understand the enclosed flyer. The impact of the legislatures vote is a regressive tax, will cause unemployment and in the end be a net reduction in state revenue.

Please respond as to what you will do about fixing sportsmen’s fees to a level of sanity.

3. Dear Rep
The 100% sportsmen’s license increase is a regressive tax.
. The license increase hurts low income folks like me and those that obey the law. I will not be able to afford outdoor sports doors as much as I would like. These are sports that have been in my family for generations. If my sons miss out on our family traditions, there sons will never be introduced to our favorite outdoor sports.

How about increasing fines on non-law abiding citizens? At least you might end bad family traditions.
Please read the attached flyer. You hurt people like me and produced a net loss in state revenue.
Crazy, Crazy, crazy!!!
Please, reverse this fees increase.

4. Dear Rep,
Sportsmen’s fees protect our natural resources. General taxes are not allocated to conservation and/ or the protection of our natural resources and wildlife. Our beautiful natural resources are a source of pride and enjoyment to the public.
The 100% fee increase will result in fewer sportsmen participating in sports and fewer out of state sportsman fishing and hunting in CT.
The increase in fees and the resultant revenue is a small positive. The reduction of sportsmen is the real economic variable that impacts states revenue.
Please read the enclosed flyer. The legislature is moving our state backward in revenue.

I fear that the legislatures diversion of fees to the general fund along with a reduce sportsmen base will give the uniformed legislature further motivation to ignore our natural resources and kill a heritage that began form the birth of our country.
Please respond to me. What will do about this travesty?


5. Dear Rep,
I feel injured by the state legislature’s decision to impose a 100% increase on Sportsmen’s fees, while diverting that money to the General Fund. Sportsman fees are intended for conservation and the protection of our natural resources. The elitist and uniformed actions of the legislature are a throwback to early American history, “taxation without representation”.

Seems to me you have imposed a regressive tax that will drive away resident and non-resident licensees to nearby states. Not only are the legislatures actions an insult to sportsman but harmful to the public and the beautiful natural resources of CT. And for what, a net loss in state revenue!
The legislature’s actions benefit no one.

Please read the attached flyer. You hurt me and produced a net loss in state revenue.
Please, advise as to how you will correct this mess.


7. Dear Rep,

The 100% sportsmen’s fee increase is an outrage. The diversion of sportsmen’s fees to the general fund is a betrayal to sportsmen and the public. Our fees were intended to fund conservation programs to protect wildlife and CT’s beautiful natural resources.
Resident and non-resident sportsmen have choices. Study the relative fees structures in our neighboring state. A small example, in NJ firearm and bow hunting licenses for children are free and include free waterfowl stamps and pheasant stamps.

You force us to spend our money out of state and hurt tourism.

Please read the enclosed flyer, which concludes the legislator has foolishly meddled with the “economic output/impact of sportsmen’s expenditures”.

The conclusion, the legislature is “penny wise and dollar foolish”.

Please respond, will you help over turn this regressive tax.

The travesty of your actions is that you hurt your constituency and create a loss in net state revenue.

Please, respond as to how you can right this terrible wrong.

7. Dear Rep,

The 100% sportsmen’s fee increase is an outrage. The diversion of sportsmen’s fees to the general fund is a betrayal to sportsmen and the public. Our fees were intended to fund conservation programs to protect wildlife and CT’s beautiful natural resources.
Resident and non-resident sportsmen have choices. Study the relative fees structures in our neighboring state. A small example, in NJ firearm and bow hunting licenses for children are free and include free waterfowl stamps and pheasant stamps.

You force us to spend our money out of state and hurt tourism.

Please read the enclosed flyer, which concludes the legislator has foolishly meddled with the “economic output/impact of sportsmen’s expenditures”.

The conclusion, the legislature is “penny wise and dollar foolish”.

Please respond, will you help over turn this regressive tax.

8. Dear Rep,
A 100% in sportsmen’s fees harms everyone: sportsmen, the public and net state revenue.
Fortunately, cheaper options exist for sportsman. Compare sportsman’s fess in states with in driving distance of CT: Maine to Ohio; West VA to MD. CT is a small state. Travel distance to other states is short.
I live in western CT the 100% fee increase is forcing me and my dollars out of state and will keep non-residents from coming in.

Please read the enclosed flyer. Your actions will produce a net loss of state revenue. Please respond to legislature thought process that is behind this uniformed legislation.

9. Dear Rep
I can’t express how strongly I am upset that my state representatives are doubling sportsmen’s fees, while sending the fees to the general fund. Are you aware, that our fees not, general taxes, are suppose to support the Conversation Fund and our natural resources. Our natural resources and wildlife attracts millions of tourist dollars.
Your actions will reduce sportsmen’s participation in outdoor sports.

In a very direct way, sportsmen’s expenditures contributes to tourism, sales taxes, tackle business employment, etc., all of which generate state income

Please read the enclosed flyer. Your actions will produce a net loss of state revenue and put our natural resources at risk.

10. Dear Rep,
Please support the reinstatement of the Conservation fund and establishment of a Marine Fishing Account through the fees generated by sports fees. The protection and enhancement of our natural resources drives increased licenses, increased tourism, increased sales taxes revenue, sustain employment form our local tackle dealers. Conversely, a diversion of conservation funds to the general fund, coupled with a 100% fee increase is a 2-edged destructive sword.
Please read and try to understand the attach State Revenue Impact flyer.
The legislature demonstrates no understanding of their actions consequences..


11. Dear Rep,
I am upset that my state representatives are doubling sportsmen’s fees.
I am outrage that my fees increase then goes to the general fund. Our fees, not general taxes, protect our natural resources and wildlife.
Furthermore, sportsmen’s expenditures nation-wide would rank as the 47th largest in corporate output. We are economic drivers of tourism, tackle sales taxes & tackle business employment, all of which generates state income.
Please read the enclosed flyer. Your actions will produce a net loss of state revenue and put our natural resources at risk.

12. Dear Rep,
The legislature is meddling with unknown and far reaching economic factors.

The most important factor to consider is the elasticity of demand in the fees to revenue relationship. The doubling of fees and permits will reduce the purchasing of certain licenses that sportsman and women only occasionally use and drive some out of state. For, example I will eliminate the following licenses for both spring and fall: turkey License $84; deer tags $56. I will delay buying the licenses I do use until the day before I need them, which will reflect a loss in time value of money. Bottom line is that the state will receive less fees form me in 2010 than 2009.
Further more, if sportsmen’s national gross expenditures are ranked against corporations revenues, the expenditures would be 47th. Tampering with that economic engine will dwarf any fees increase revenue when compared to a loss in net state revenue.
Read the attached flyer.
The impact of the fees increase is a loose-loose-loose. Lost revenue to the state, lost enjoyment to sportsmen & the public, lost funds to wildlife conservation and our natural resources.
Please reply: What is the thinking of the legislature?

13. Dear Rep,
The 100% sportsmen’s fee increase is forcing some of us into civil disobedience. Many will decide to be like the Robin Hood of old and just hunt the KINGS land without a license. Hunting and fishing should not be a rich man’s sports.
Please, read and understand the enclosed flyer.
The travesty of your actions is that you hurt your constituency and create a loss in net state revenue.

Please, respond as to how you can right this terrible wrong.