Idaho Revenue Strategy- Fee Lock Concept

[robby denning]

Just got this in an email. Any thoughts? For more info, visit Idaho F&G website.

Goal: Create incentives to encourage more people to consistently buy licenses in order to generate revenue to maintain existing programs and meet budgets approved by the legislature.

Approach: Understanding that these are tough economic times for many Idahoans, Fish and Game is taking a new approach to a standard fee increase. The “Fee Lock” concept gives hunters and anglers an opportunity to exempt themselves from higher proposed fees by simply buying annual hunting and fishing licenses every year.

Strategy: Fish and Game will present two proposals to the legislature for consideration.
The first proposal seeks expanded authority for the Fish and Game Commission to discount license and tag fees via Commission Order.
The second proposal seeks to raise fees on most resident licenses, tags and fees from between 1 and 6 dollars beginning with sale of 2015 licenses.
If both proposals are approved, the Commission could then create a Fee Lock for Idahoans who consistently buy annual licenses.
Eligibility: Idahoans holding a valid annual license in 2014 including annual hunting and fishing licenses, lifetime licenses, sportsman packages and valid three-year licenses, would all be eligible for the fee lock, which wouldn’t take effect until 2015 licenses go on sale, meaning Idahoans would have many months to decide whether to purchase a license and exempt themselves from the fee increase.

The commission would review the fee lock concept in 3 to 5 years and determine if it is working and whether it should continue

License Funds: Forty percent of the Fish and Game budget comes from license funds. License funds are used to operate resident fish hatcheries, to pay for big game aerial surveys and to fund Fish and Game conservation officers. Since the last resident fee increase in 2005, Fish and Game fuel costs have doubled and the cost of fish food for hatcheries has increased approximately 140 percent.

Hunters and Anglers: In the last two years, 1 in 2 Idaho adults fished, and 1 in 3 hunted. But not everybody hunts and fishes every year. In fact, our data base indicates that in the last five years, 28 percent of license buyers purchased a license every year. If we can get more of the other 72 percent of license buyers to purchase more consistently, we can potentially solve our license revenue shortfall.

 

[Darren Best]

I have lots of thoughts, none of which are printable here.

Mostly angry that we are being attacked with yet another cost increase while these clowns who were supposed to have our backs continue to ignore the problem that is causing this.

 

[T43]

How are we being attacked. As residents we pay a very nominal fee to hunt and fish. The "clowns" are not ignoring the problem. The department is attempting to manage mulitple problems with a limited budget and constant public input. Perhaps one of the biggest problems is people who get up in arms about a fee increase that ammounts to less than a lot of peoples weekly beer budget.

 

[Mike7]

I sure wish that in Washington that we had something even close to Idaho's Fish and Wildlife Dept. As a non-resident hunter in Idaho, I have gotten far more and better communication in every fashion (more thoughtful and less vague surveys, comments, responses, etc.) from Idaho in the last 3 years, than I have gotten from Washington in the last 14 yrs.

 

[Darren Best]

License and tags were cheaper, gas was cheaper, gear and equipment were cheaper, taxes were lower, people made more money, housing and food expenses were lower.

All this adds up to less disposable income today. This means people have to set priorities on what they do with their spare time. In other words, do you pay the mortgage or get a license and elk tag. Back in 1980 any kid could afford a license and tag, it was cheap, even on $3.35 an hour payroll. You didn't have to break the bank to buy a rifle, scope, knife and some ammo to go hunting. My first rifle was a Rem 700 BDL 7 mag, I think I paid $200 for it, with a Redfield scope on it. That same rifle will cost you four times that now.

The next is the fees keep going up as they have gone in the last 30 years. It's really hard to entice people to buy into it when you keep raising the fees because of budget problems. Solve the budget problems instead of asking for more money. I don't feel much sympathy for supposed budget problems when I see a Fish and Game officer, BLM worker or a Forest Service worker driving a $40,000 truck.

Back in the early 90's when they first started making noises about reintroducing the wolves, did the F&G get up and arms and say hell no? No, they jumped right into bed with them and believed every lie they were told and they completely ignored us. So after the wolves were introduced and knocked the hell out of the elk herds and people couldn't find elk as easily as they used to, guess what they did. That's right, they stopped buying a license and tag every year. It's called the expectation of getting some value for the dollar you spend.

The non resident hunters really put the light on this as this was where most of their funds through elk tags were coming from and now we can't even sell the non resident tags out anymore. Isn't anyone smart enough to figure out why this is. The license and tags are not the only expense that non resident hunters incur on a hunt. My first year hunting elk was 1978 and I remember the guys camped next to us were from Pennsylvania. Every year they would all pile into a motor home and drive out to Idaho non stop and hunt their asses off. Why would a bunch of guys spend thousand of dollars, driving thousands of miles to find no elk today.

I know a few guys like this, my father being one of them. They refuse to hunt in Idaho because of what the F&G and by extension the Idaho government allowed to happen.

Why is it so few people understand economics, especially people in the government. You want more people to buy something, lower the fees. Does it really take a genius to figure this out?

Raising revenue is a combination of providing a quality service or merchandise, keeping your costs down and getting as many customers as possible to buy it.

Trashing the hell out of your service or product, allowing your budget costs to get out of control and driving your customers away through lousy service and higher costs equals less money made.

Even Joe weekend warrior six pack can see there are a hell of lot less elk in the Idaho mountains and they don't need a multi thousand dollar survey to tell them that.

Raise your hand if you were in the Panhandle for the winter of 96/97. Remember sportsman telling the F&G that the elk were in trouble? Do you remember what the F&G response was? I do. I'm talking about guys that were volunteering their time and money to help the elk and the government turned them away and said no. Afterwards when the totality of what happened fully came to light, the F&G said oops, we messed up, sorry about that. So now they whine and complain because people stopped buying tags because over 60% of the elk are gone!

No, the F&G needs to own up to their mistakes instead of continually coming to us for more money because fewer and fewer people are buying tags because of their inept mistakes and refusal to listen to us.

I don't know what your your weekly or monthly beer budget is, but it costs a whole lot more money to get my tags and license than what I spend on beer now.

 

[Ryan Avery]

My question to the fish and game is what did you do with the wolf tag money? Should be able to use that to offset low tag purchases!??

 

[T43]

License and tags were cheaper, gas was cheaper, gear and equipment were cheaper, taxes were lower, people made more money, housing and food expenses were lower.

All this adds up to less disposable income today. This means people have to set priorities on what they do with their spare time. In other words, do you pay the mortgage or get a license and elk tag.

They are talking about a maximum increase of $6. If they increased every tag and license $6 and you got a hunting/fishing license and 10 tags it would cost you an extra $6 a month. How can anyone claim $6 would keep them from paying their mortgage unless they live in a cardboard box. We are posting on a forum that is geared toward some of the best equipment money can buy. People talk about $2000 optics $4000 guns $800 packs $400 boots and complain about the cost of an elk tag possibly going up to $36.75? That is ass backwards.

Back in 1980 any kid could afford a license and tag, it was cheap, even on $3.35 an hour payroll. You didn't have to break the bank to buy a rifle, scope, knife and some ammo to go hunting. My first rifle was a Rem 700 BDL 7 mag, I think I paid $200 for it, with a Redfield scope on it. That same rifle will cost you four times that now.

Exactly the price/cost of everything has gone up why would the price/cost of hunting tags and licenses not go up as well?

The next is the fees keep going up as they have gone in the last 30 years. It's really hard to entice people to buy into it when you keep raising the fees because of budget problems. Solve the budget problems instead of asking for more money. I don't feel much sympathy for supposed budget problems when I see a Fish and Game officer, BLM worker or a Forest Service worker driving a $40,000 truck.

Once again the price/cost of everything has gone up why would you think the cost of game management would not increase? Add to that the increased costs associated with managing non game species and it is pretty simple math. As for the $40,000 truck comment I wish I had a dime for every time I have heard that BS. For starters they don't pay the same for their trucks because they buy in bulk at a fleet price. Knock about 10-15 thousand off that price. Then explain to me what you would replace those vehicles with. I have yet to see a F&G truck up for auction that hasn't been used to or past it's serviceable life.

Back in the early 90's when they first started making noises about reintroducing the wolves, did the F&G get up and arms and say hell no? No, they jumped right into bed with them and believed every lie they were told and they completely ignored us. So after the wolves were introduced and knocked the hell out of the elk herds and people couldn't find elk as easily as they used to, guess what they did. That's right, they stopped buying a license and tag every year. It's called the expectation of getting some value for the dollar you spend.

This is 2014 the F&G of the 90's is gone the F&G of today is stuck with the wolves just like the rest of us and they are doing what they can to deal with them. They took a lot of heat for putting the "Hired Gun" in the Frank Church to "wipe out wolves" but they did it anyway regardless of the enviro lawsuits.

Why would a bunch of guys spend thousand of dollars, driving thousands of miles to find no elk today.

Why is it so few people understand economics, especially people in the government. You want more people to buy something, lower the fees. Does it really take a genius to figure this out?

Raising revenue is a combination of providing a quality service or merchandise, keeping your costs down and getting as many customers as possible to buy it.

Even Joe weekend warrior six pack can see there are a hell of lot less elk in the Idaho mountains and they don't need a multi thousand dollar survey to tell them that.

There are fewer elk in a lot of places so why would we want to lower the cost to increase hunter numbers? More hunting pressure doesn't usually equate to more elk.

Raise your hand if you were in the Panhandle for the winter of 96/97. Remember sportsman telling the F&G that the elk were in trouble? Do you remember what the F&G response was? I do. I'm talking about guys that were volunteering their time and money to help the elk and the government turned them away and said no. Afterwards when the totality of what happened fully came to light, the F&G said oops, we messed up, sorry about that. So now they whine and complain because people stopped buying tags because over 60% of the elk are gone!

Once again we are not talking about the F&G in 1996/1997. This is the winter of 2013/2014 we are just as close to the winter of 2030/2031 as we are to the winter of 96/97 and I know for a fact time will not go backwards. People need to worry a lot less about 15 years ago and worry alot more about 15 years from now!

No, the F&G needs to own up to their mistakes instead of continually coming to us for more money because fewer and fewer people are buying tags because of their inept mistakes and refusal to listen to us.

So we should defund the organization that manages our wildlife because you didn't like what they did? How about supporting them and providing the funding they need to keep better track of game populations, improve predator controls, study, protect and improve habitat, decrease crop loss and landowner conflicts, improve roadside mortality rates, decrease poaching and increase recruitment?

I don't know what your your weekly or monthly beer budget is, but it costs a whole lot more money to get my tags and license than what I spend on beer now.

Ok you got me I do spend more than $12 a month on beer. $124.25 (Sportsman's Package) + 11.50 (extra wolf) = $135.75 / 12 months = 11.32 I will add an antelope tag to that total but I can skip a few pints between now and then to save up.

Cheers

 

[Zbowman1]

I tend to agree with all that T43 said above.

 

[tstowater]

Seems like there was a similar discussion last year when Wyoming was proposed fee increases. Fewer hunters in the field equate to fewer licenses being sold and less money in the F&G coffers. What is going to get more hunters in the field?

 

[CentennialELK]

I agree with T43 also. The IDF&G of the nineties did not want the wolves though, the USFWS were the ones doing the reintroducing. It is what it is now. For residents it is cheap to hunt elk and our other game species, for non residents it is a bit different but not unreasonable. They don't increase their prices every year unlike my beer prices...

 

[bobhunts]

Are the woods less full of non resident hunters in Idaho today? Just asking. There never seems to be a shortage of them here in Colorado even with the price increases in everything from fuel to tags. One thing you can always count on is change. Maybe with some help from the sportsman we can guide the change to be less damaging to our own way of doing things. Bob.

 

[Darren Best]

Up until the reduction in elk numbers, Idaho sold out it's quota of non resident tags every year, now there are left overs.