04-13-2004, 08:39 PM
I hadn't heard anything on the new policy, but I can see a lot of arguments for the Dec. 31 expiration. Most of them are about cost and administration.
For example, when writing up any changes in the regulation it would be a lot easier to administer those changes based on an annual basis, especially when it comes to changes in the cost of the license.
Another argument would be making the licenses and enforcement by fish and game officers. It would be a lot easier for them to look at a licence, see what color paper it was printed on, and easily recognize if it was the current year. This is much easier than reading through the print on the license to see when it was issued. Also, the annual license would be a lot harder to forge or change the date on it to give you a couple of months free.
Just some ideas.......I really don't care which way it goes as long as the change doesn't end up costing us more in the long run.
[signature]
For example, when writing up any changes in the regulation it would be a lot easier to administer those changes based on an annual basis, especially when it comes to changes in the cost of the license.
Another argument would be making the licenses and enforcement by fish and game officers. It would be a lot easier for them to look at a licence, see what color paper it was printed on, and easily recognize if it was the current year. This is much easier than reading through the print on the license to see when it was issued. Also, the annual license would be a lot harder to forge or change the date on it to give you a couple of months free.
Just some ideas.......I really don't care which way it goes as long as the change doesn't end up costing us more in the long run.
[signature]