new license increases

[ringtail]

See in the Register that they are trying to raise the fees for all licenses. whats everyones thoughts on this?

[Griz]

In one sentence in the Des Moines Register article they say "This year, licenses generated $30 million of the state's.....". Later in the article they state that "But the department projects $22 million a year in sales with the new fee package.". Either there is something wrong in the article or the DNR uses funny economics. If you project that raising prices reduces the number of hunters, fishermen, and trappers enough to lower revenue from $30 million to $22 million, why would one recommend raising prices. That seems a lot like buying hammer handles at $1.00 each and selling them for $0.50 each and attempting to make it up with volume sales.

Besides if you reduce the number of hunters, fishermen, and trappers there is less need for DNR.

[iayogi17]

we need it bad! The dnr is in the hole by millions. ether we do a license increase or sustainable funding. hunter numbers are going down every year. I think the sustainable funding is the way to go, let All Iowans pay for the outdoors not just the hunters. they all enjoy it in some form
2008-2009 Hunting, Trapping and Angling License Fee Increase
By Ken Herring, Division Chief
Conservation & Recreation Division
Iowa Department of Natural Resources

Often referred to as the original conservationists, anglers, hunters, and trappers are great supporters of Iowa’s natural resources and, through their license purchases, provide the lion’s share of funding for fish and wildlife conservation.

In 2008, hunting and fishing license fees generated $30 million of a $50.7 million budget for the Fish and Wildlife Trust Fund, a constitutionally protected fund that is 100% dedicated by Iowa law exclusively for fish and wildlife conservation. Fisheries, Wildlife, and the Law Enforcement bureaus do not receive general fund dollars from the state and are dependant upon the license fees paid by hunters and anglers.

As normal license increases occur every 5-6 years, the DNR had projected the next increase to be by 2010. However, in 2008, the Department was hit by the “perfect storm” - floods, reduced license sales, and rising costs. The cool, wet spring and summer flooding reduced license sales by anglers by almost $1 million. The floods reduced agricultural lease revenues on state wildlife lands by another $1 million. They also caused extreme damage, in the millions of dollars, to important infrastructure such as roads, dams, water control structures, fish hatcheries, boat ramps, and trails which are vital to fish and wildlife management. High fuel and land costs have affected land management and the operation budget. This perfect storm has left the Department with making intensive budget cuts to maintain the very basic service. For fiscal year 2009, Department operations will be cut 7%, many capital improvement projects will be tabled, and new land acquisition efforts will need to be curtailed.

The DNR will seek an increase in hunting and fishing license fees in this upcoming legislative session.

“The importance of these funds to hunters and anglers is well documented by the many examples of fish and wildlife restoration which cannot be overstated,” said Ken Herring, administrator for the Conservation and Recreation Division of the Iowa DNR.

“In the next few months, the Department will be meeting and actively engaging our stakeholder groups because these conservation efforts are their successes. If we are going to continue to offer the best natural resource protection and habitat management that we can, we will need to increase license fees,” reported Herring. “The primary goal of the increase will be to provide a solid operational base for the existing bureaus augmenting the efforts aimed at retaining and recruiting new anglers, hunters, and trappers, improving recreational access for outdoor activities, and adequately serving Iowa’s recreational demands.”

The following table illustrates comparisons regarding the Department’s current license fees, the consumer price index, and the proposed increase. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments during this time of preparation.







Table 1. Hunting and Fishing License Fees and the Consumer Price Index (CPI)

Current Last CPI CPI Proposal
License Type Fee Change In 2008 In 2013* For 2009
Hunting
Resident
Deer (any-sex) $25.50 1991 $38.50 $45.00 $35.50
Deer (anterless) $10.00 1991 $16.00 $18.00 $15.00
Turkey $23.00 1991 $35.00 $39.00 $27.50
Hunting $17.50 2002 $20.00 $23.50 $23.50
Habitat Fee $11.50 2007 $12.00 $13.50 $13.50
Waterfowl Fee $8.50 2003 $10.00 $11.50 $11.50
Furharvester $21.00 1991 $31.00 $36.00 $36.00

Nonresident
Hunting $80.50 2000 $93.50 $108.50 $110.00
Turkey $100.50 2000 $122.50 $141.50 $125.00
Furharvester $200.50 2000 $251.50 $283.00 $275.00
Deer (any-sex) $220.50 2000 $268.50 $311.00 $295.00
Deer (mandatory anterless) $100.50 2006 $110.00 $123.50 $125.00
Deer (optional antlerless) $150.50 2000 $188.50 $212.50 $200.00
Deer (holiday) $55.00 2001 $65.00 $75.50 $75.00
Fishing
Resident
Season $17.50 2002 $19.50 $23.00 $23.50
7 Day $12.00 2002 $9.00 $15.50 $15.00
1 Day $8.00 2002 $9.00 $10.50 $8.00
Trout $11.00 2002 $12.50 $14.50 $13.00

Nonresident
Season $39.50 2004 $46.00 $52.50 $49.50
7 Day $30.50 2004 $35.50 $41.50 $35.50
3 Day $16.00 2004 $18.50 $21.50 $21.00
1 Day $9.00 2004 $10.50 $12.00 $10.00
Trout $13.50 2004 $16.00 $18.50 $17.50
* assumes a 3% rate of inflation

[paulb]

is there any mention about a state park user fee or an increase in camping fee's?

[dfox]

Dec 15, 2008 12:55:11 GMT -6 paulb said:

is there any mention about a state park user fee or an increase in camping fee's?

nope, but their should be as well as all the bike trail usage.

[TexA]

What kind of Economics is this?

They loose Revenue because of decreased license sales
and expect to increase Revenue by Raising Fees?

THAT'S NUTS !

They are just going to push more people AWAY from fishing, hunting and trapping if that goes through..

It sounds about like the "plan" to save the auto makers to me.
Not Good

Already, they have too many chiefs and not enough indians to take care of what they already have. Every year they keep adding land (in our area) to their "list" and their services keep getting worse at their existing areas.

Call or Write your State Senator(s) and Representatives and let them know what you think of the proposal.
That's the only way it can be stopped....
DO IT NOW.........

[dfox]

The DNR needs to be funded in a different way other than through the sale of licenses. If they are not, they have no choice BUT to raise license fees. It needs to be more than just the hunters, fisherman and trappers footing the bill to fund them. They have been hiring too many middle managers instead of guys on the front lines to take care of the public areas they already own. That is why you see a decrease in maintenance on a lot of areas. It's not because the guys working the wildlife units are lazy, it's because they lack the man power and the funding to get the work done.

[paulb]

are u saying the DNR gets NO money from the general fund?

[dfox]

Dec 16, 2008 8:28:48 GMT -6 paulb said:

are u saying the DNR gets NO money from the general fund?

This is a quote from the above posted article by Iayogi17:

"Fisheries, Wildlife, and the Law Enforcement bureaus do not receive general fund dollars from the state and are dependant upon the license fees paid by hunters and anglers."

These are the main bureaus that take care of our wildlife and public hunting areas along with stocking fish and enforce conservation laws. These bureaus are totally dependent on the sale of licenses and other attached fees. No money, nothing is going to get done or enforcement of laws. They can't even afford to have at least one game warden per county anymore. I know Craig Lonneman covers Dallas and Madison county and no one is assigned to Guthrie County either.

[paulb]

i guess this part of your post was what i was referring to::

The DNR needs to be funded in a different way other than through the sale of licenses

[ringtail]

Jermy King has been assigned to Guthrie and Adubon counties. Does anyone know if the hunting guides that are leasing up all the land for hunting rights and charging 2500 per head to hunt deer have to pay a guiding license? I agree with Tex, that in this economy they are gonna push people away from the sport and keep young and new people from trying our great sport.

[dfox]

I should have said those particular bureaus need to be funded diferently than with just the sale of licenses. The sustainable funding is a great way to help fund them if it would ever get passed and it would be everyone helping fund fisheries, wildlife management and law enforcement instead of hunters, trappers and fisherman alone.

[x-demoman]

Why do trappers get a 70 some % increase and the others are in the 30s??? How bout the bird watchers, park users, bike riders, trail hikers. Seems like we help them with nice trails ect and I have never had any of those groups off to help us when we need it. Seems like they are acting like the antis, pick on the group with the smallest numbers. GET THE MONEY FROM THE ONES WHO ARE USING THE FACILITES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I agree Tex, smells like another bail out and I have no fur market so how bout a bail out for me!!!!!!!

[rob]

I would agree to an increase, "IF", there was more public access on property that is in crp or other gov. programs. I know crp isn't a golden ticket for farmers, so maybe give them another $10 an acre for the public use of their land for hunting. If they don't want the public access then they don't need to be enrolled in the crp program.
Horseback riders should have to pay a trail access fee, boaters should pay a launch fee. Park users should pay a park use fee. To many are getting the benefits of our dollars without spending a dime out of their own pocket.
If you purchase a hunting and fishing license then the launch fee, park fee, trail fee could be waived.

[Horn]

Dec 16, 2008 10:37:55 GMT -6 ringtail said:

Jeremy King has been assigned to Guthrie and Adubon counties. .

He just left my area, My loss, Your gain. I like the guy and he does a great job. He is a go getter and knows about trapping.

[iayogi17]

Dec 16, 2008 8:28:48 GMT -6 paulb said:

are u saying the DNR gets NO money from the general fund?

the dnr is broke

[iayogi17]

Dec 16, 2008 19:48:20 GMT -6 Horn said:

Dec 16, 2008 10:37:55 GMT -6 ringtail said:

Jeremy King has been assigned to Guthrie and Adubon counties. .

He just left my area, My loss, Your gain. I like the guy and he does a great job. He is a go getter and knows about trapping.

He never payed me in full for a shotgun back in college

[muskrat72]

several years ago, when the out of state deer tags and other licenses went way up, a conservation officer told my uncle that the reason for the increase in licenses was due to the democrats taking away the dnr "rainy day fund"(which had nearly 1million$$ in it) and they give it to the "queer,minority,welfare,tree hugging groups etc.......... and he said to thank the people at the capitol building. and until a big change is made there lawmakers will continue to mismanage dnr funds.

not meaning to offend anyone , just what he said.

[iayogi17]

hey guys, the world now days runs on $$$ (sad but true) we tried running the IDNR on the dollars we the trapper, hunter,and fisherman put in but we just don't have enough. we need to fight for sustainable funding. Like MO % of sales tax going to CONSERVATION. AKA what we enjoy the most

[TexA]

hmmmmm wonder what's going on here??

Guess I stepped on someones "toes" HUH?
My origional post some-how got deleted....
;(

[Eric Rector]

Dec 16, 2008 12:44:24 GMT -6 x-demoman said:

How bout the bird watchers, park users, bike riders, trail hikers. Seems like we help them with nice trails etc and I have never had any of those groups off to help us when we need it.

Demoman: The license money DOES NOT pay for trails upkeep, development and such. You license money goes directly to fund the Fish and Wildlife trust fund, which yes is going broke, but is at least constitutionally protected so the knuckleheads in the legislature can't use it for something else. They can however and do use other funds that are recreation oriented to fund other projects than for which they were intended with the "good faith" promise to pay it back, such as snowmobile license fee's, etc, transferred into the general fund. Does the other users of state lands, that were purchased with HABITAT STAMP monies need to fund their use, absolutely, but I'm not sure how to do that or even enforce it.

Do we need another source of funding for Fish and Wildlife, absolutely, is sustainable funding achievable, absolutely, but the kicker is: IT ONLY GOES INTO EFFECT WHEN THERE IS A NEW INCREASE IN THE STATES SALES TAX. So I see it as a uphill battle due to the fact that you will be increasing TAXES and the anti tax people will be on board pushing against any increases in the future. If it would pass and we do get sustainable funding, the DNR better have it's ducks in a row so that other special interest groups IE. the arts, the zoo's, homeless shelters, blah, blah, blah, don't get thrown into the mix and get funding through this source. If that happens, we will be no better off than we are now.

But we will still have license fee's raised by the time that sustainable funding even gets to a vote of the people for their consideration.

I think the DNR would be better suited to take a real close look at it's operation and see how it is run. Someone said that they don't even have a GAME WARDEN in every county. They don't NEED a game warden in every county. For cripes sakes, I lived in Montana for 4 years, you know, BIG GAME country, 4th LARGEST state in the country, they run fewer full time game wardens in the whole state than we do.

Does the DNR need a Gasoline Specialist, ATV officers, RSO officers, PWC officers, I could go on and on.

They need funding, YES absolutely, but I think they also need to take a real hard look at within and see what they can do without.

This is not a rant on the DNR and how they do things, but before you ask me to pay more, demonstrate to me that you have looked within before you ask and to me they have not done that.

[moleman]

This is not a rant on the DNR and how they do things, but before you ask me to pay more, demonstrate to me that you have looked within before you ask and to me they have not done that

A very good post & well said. I am sure the DNR has cost saving programs in place already as most business do. Is there room for improvement, sure. I think Texra said it all. " Start with your state representatives". Will your little voice be heard,probably not.

[x-demoman]

Did not think I said where the money was being spent. Just wondering out loud what these folks are doing to help the cause. If none of our money goes to the parks, structures ect they why the rant and rave about the problems caused by the floods

[muskrat72]

Sportsman notebook talked about this today at noon. Only got in on last 15 min.

[paulb]

Gene,,,it is my understanding that license money is used only for law enforcement,,this would include wages,,uniforms,,,vehicles,,vehicle maintence,,supplies,,,etc...and law enforcement does NOT get any money from the general fund,,,is that correct?,,do they recieve money from the pittman roberson fund,?,,,

[paulb]

so what was said in the last 15 minutes you heard?

[muskrat72]

Between in n out of truck, they did talk about initiating that all public trail users etc. pay a habitat fee for use of habitat. And talked about the tax chickadee checkoff n how its revenue is very little. And how EVERYONE with a concern needs to contact their legislator to express their concern. Wish i'd caught it all. Gonna check if its on who website???

[paulb]

that would be good,,,it is time that the ones who enjoy and use the facilities pay for the use....the park user fee was a prime example,,,the state had one a number of years ago but i was told by a state park official they had to many complaints so they discontinued it,,,,

[iayogi17]

Dec 21, 2008 18:41:50 GMT -6 paulb said:

Gene,,,it is my understanding that license money is used only for law enforcement,,this would include wages,,uniforms,,,vehicles,,vehicle maintence,,supplies,,,etc...and law enforcement does NOT get any money from the general fund,,,is that correct?,,do they recieve money from the pittman roberson fund,?,,,

The money from license sales go to the Fish & Wildlife trust fund with some of it earmarked for special funds like habitat stamps going to habitat.

[paulb]

WHAT IS THE TRUST FUND USED FOR?,,,AND WHO DECIDES WHO USES IT??