Correct. So the way I read that is the ODNR doesn't want the increase due to other hands dipping into the pot.
In other words, the increases wouldn't help the sportsman.
Am I the only one seeing it this way? Am I wrong?
Not technically. The ODOW is a subordinate organisation under the ODNR. The ODOW wants the fee increases, their boss the ODNR said no you need to make cuts and learn to operate within your budget. And If you can't manage your orgnisation effectively then we will absorb you into the DNR. The ODNRs stance is the ODOWs budget is fine they need to look for cuts and optimize their operations, the ODOW has historical proof that a raise in fees results in a drop in sales. In short people quit hunting and fishing. At a time when both are at their lows raising fees and running people off is not a good business plan. The ODNR wants the ODOW to keep the fees the same and work on attracting more sportsmen to increase sales. However as we have seen through the ODNRS effort to decimate the deer population they could really give a crap less about offering a better product to sportsmen. Instead they would rather reduce deer harvest numbers by 30% and then charge you more for the remaining 70% to make up for the loss, which is exactly what they're doing. Appease the insurance companies by reducing the deer population, raise fees on sportsmen to make up for the loss in revenue.
The ODOW set about on a mission to cry to anyone that would listen about it and spreading doom and gloom rumors about how the ODNR wanted to steal the Sportsman's money. They also set about reducing the things they knew people would care about like Warden school to grab headlines and poor mouth their agenda.
