Seen the fee proposals for 2006?

[lfootmatt]

Being a Missouri transplant to AZ, here's an idea. Missouri VOTERS passed a 1/2 cent sales tax to fund the MO Dept. of Conservation (i.e. Game and Fish in AZ). Recently it was set to expire. The MO voters then made it permnant.

 

In MO the state parks all have flushers, nice CLEAN Showers, ample and well funded / paid game rangers, a great monthly glossy magazine, kids programs, frequent hunter safety classes, etc, etc......

 

I doubt tag/license fees have gone up much since then in MO.

 

The selling point to the non-sportsman, hunter and fishing citizen was the ongoing habatat restoration, environmental protection and other programs that come with the package. A re-name to the AZ Dept. of Conservation would also help the moderate tree huggers get on board. The environmental nut jobs will never be on board so why try.

 

Unfortunately, in the AZ reality of having a very large retirement population and, at least in Tucson, a large hard left wing environmental leaning population might make passing such a tax impossible.

 

Sure was a good thing for Missouri!!!

 

My .02,

 

Matt

[DesertBull]

That's all nice and dandy, but G&F is not in charge of clean crappers and showers. That is the state parks department and it is already tax payer funded.

[lfootmatt]

Just trying to point out what has worked nicely elsewhere. As long as it is called "Game and Fish" anyone who is left leaning will oppose anything that supports the "Game and Fish" department. It's all in the marketing. If it only appeals to the hunting and fishing crowd in AZ the voter base will be too small to get it passed. If it appeals to a larger part of the community who can view it in a positive light also it would stand a chance.

 

I never ment to imply that it was G&F's responsibility to clean the "Crappers". Just highlighting a program the also carries out the same responsibilities as the AZ G&F Dept. and has very broad public voter support.

 

Matt

 

 

That's all nice and dandy, but G&F is not in charge of clean crappers and showers. That is the state parks department and it is already tax payer funded.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[az4life]

Face it, we can get funding for our crappy professional football team (ha ha Professional...) but we are not going to get anything like that for the wildlife and conservation of. I think the TAX well is about dry. We have been taxed here, taxed there, and taxed every which way but loose. It seems the liberal answer to everything is add another tax and throw more money at any problem.

 

Just in case the tax "well" has a little bit of juice left, I could propose another reason to milk the working public for the benefit of a small group.

 

What about the AZ4life welfare fund? Administered for the benefit of selective native Arizonans who desire to commune with nature and remember the heritage of the outdoors in this great state.

[JohnFriddle]

First of all "Proposed fee increases" suggests that a they have'nt made up their minds yet... That they will actually take public input under consideration... I think "Proposed fee increases" is just a nice way of saying "get used to it"... The class A deal is a little extreme... How about $20 more than the class b... It's already hard enough to get drawn for premium hunts anyway... I understand fee increases are neccessary and I don't mind them for the most part... I don't see them really effecting draw odds however, except for those who can't afford the increases, but who can afford much of anything with the price of gas the way it is, which will begin to effect everything else before you know it... I'll still be putting in, as will several thousand others with the dreaded online process coming back to the party... You won't have to pay unless your drawn, minus the app. fee... Thats where game and fish will make a killing, Upped fees will not effect draw odds until you have to actually pay them...

 

I still think Arizona Game and Fish does a great job... Even when I don't get drawn... I don't think they'll ever get a fair shake, if their not getting sued for trying to offer their resident hunters a better deal, their getting reemed by their resident hunters for trying to recover some lost revenue...

[KGAINES]

az4life the football crack was a low blow , I one of the few fans, but we have funded all of our sports teams stadiums some not even voted for, so they should be able to give some of our tax dollars to game and fish, I thought the lottery and taxes contributed to the heritage fund which is supposed to go to game and fish.

[az4life]

Kevin, I could not resist the Cardinals comment. I sort of do like them. thye are about as close to a sure bet as you can get. (Betting against them that is)

 

Our Funding sports stadiums should take a back seat to funding AZ GFD, but big politics and money always win over un-represented wildlife.

 

Yes, The heritage fund is for AZGFD. Other than that, voluntary contributions on personal taxes are the only "guaranteed" funding outside of department fees. To that extent, The funding is guaranteed but the amount is not, since it is based on lottery sales and personal contributions.

The department also gets federal grants and funding for a variety of studies.

I am not sure what % of each makes up the final income but it would be interesting to know.

 

I agree that the "proposal" is not written in stone, but I would have to say the mold has been cast. They know what the plan is before public meetings and unless some major @#%& hits the fan, it will be a pretty sure bet... like the Cards...

[patrick15]

I did a lot of research on this topic.

For one, hunters's license fees are required by statute for the Game and Fish to spend on Game. Non-game dollars come totally from the funds from the lottery and matching federal funds.

It bothers me when hunters bitch about spending on nongame. Habitat improved for non-game also benefits game and it makes hunters look like ignorant rednecks to think otherwise.

Also, the license fees increase were already approved by the legisture and they are earmarked exclusively for raises to law enforcement, who currently make 28,000 a year. They cant hire any new ones. I think thats a good investment if you care about your wildlife. We still are the lowest resident fees in the country....and the numbers are only the highest that the Dept can raise them...not the amount that they will. They put them up high because they can only go to the legislature about every ten years with this.

I answered these questions by calling them up and asking...which is what you can do to if something doesnt make sense.

[Petersen]

This is very unfortunate. As a nonresident I can barely afford the license fees, as is, and the increases effect all the residents as well. We all must remember that the "I" is not the only one hunting and these traditions, for many of us, are passed on to our kids. Taking the youngsters, as my father did with me, is a way to build experiences together and show them what hunting is all about. I am sure you all have experienced the impossibility of explaining the experience to those that have never hunted. The passion is something that can't be explicated in words.

 

This will also have great effects in the bordering states. If Arizona does it, why don't we. Not to single Arizona out, my home state, Nevada, has already begun with their increases.

 

This "way of life" of mine has certainly changed since my birth. Hunting has been publicized and fashionalized to great extents. There have been inventions to cover almost every dang corner of your imagination to use in the field, and it makes me wonder, "how did my dad use to do it" and "dang, doesn't anybody just go hunting anymore". Droves of persons come into the hills in the fall with more on wheels than I owe on my mortgage. That is fine, some have worked very hard for all these things they "need" to harvest an animal. I am my own critic in this regard as I have about $5k in equipment on my person when on foot, and yes I did work hard for it myself.

 

Anyways, sorry for the banter but these matters are frustrating and depressing, but I can assure you all of this, my kids are going to be the best dang coyote and jackrabbit hunters out there. After all, they will soon be charging per game bird when they decide upland game stamps don't seem to produce enough revenue.

[DesertBull]

I did a lot of research on this topic.

For one, hunters's license fees are required by statute for the Game and Fish to spend on Game. Non-game dollars come totally from the funds from the lottery and matching federal funds.

It bothers me when hunters bitch about spending on nongame. Habitat improved for non-game also benefits game and it makes hunters look like ignorant rednecks to think otherwise.

Also, the license fees increase were already approved by the legisture and they are earmarked exclusively for raises to law enforcement, who currently make 28,000 a year. They cant hire any new ones. I think thats a good investment if you care about your wildlife.  We still are the lowest resident fees in the country....and the numbers are only the highest that the Dept can raise them...not the amount that they will. They put them up high because they can only go to the legislature about every ten years with this.

I answered these questions by calling them up and asking...which is what you can do to if something doesnt make sense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

http://www.azgfd.gov/temp/documents/AGFDPr...creases_000.pdf

 

We are talking about the proposed fees, not the fee caps. Two different things.

And we are not even close to being the cheapest resident fees in the country.

[.270]

if you add it all up, permit fees are pretty small when you compare the cost of the rest of the hunt. i just pumped over a grand in gas into my pickup the past month. all for hunting. any increase is a pain to deal with. especially when ya have kids wanting to hunt. it can get real expensive. but it's sorta like they say about how come divorces are so expensive, they're worth it. start a permit fund. put a little aside and when the time comes apply for everthing. i'm the worst critic the azgfd has. they're the most poorly managed and most politically motivated entity of this state. conservation and biology means absolutely nothing to em. $$$ is what gets there attention. but it's their ball and if we wanna play we gotta put up with em. that is until we can get a new governor a new director and a completely new commission that consists of something other than cronies. compared to other states, the prices seem real close. heck, new mex wants $750 for elk tags in units i wouldn't hunt in. Az. has some great hunting, but not a lot of great hunting country. lotsa folks want to hunt what little stuff we have. if the high prices weed out some nonresidents, fine. you can blame this whole mess on 2 people, taulman and shroufe. taulman for bein' a greedy sob and shroufe for spendin' more time on his sprayed on tan than he does dealing with azgfd problems. but i sure hate to hear residents say they can't afford to take their kids hunting. don't like that a bit. kids need to know what it's like to hear a rifle crack across a canyon and smell the gunsmoke when they open the bolt. do what have to do, but take them kids huntin'. Lark.

[25-06]

Great to have you back Lark

[CouesSlayer]

I'm a non-resident archery hunter. The price increase for me is ok because I get to hunt for three months, the rifle hunts, however, are only days! Where does all of this money go? The deer #'s seem to be decreasing! They are making it harder and harder for the average citizen to hunt these days! I know that permit fees are small compared to the rest of the hunt, but now that extra money on the fee is put on top of gas and food and gear! I'm 16 and I have a feeling that someday when I have kids it will either be too expensive to hunt, or there won't be enough game.

[trufletch]

$1,000 in gas for a month? That's alot of scouting or long trips-. I don't like the fees going up anymore than anyone else, and I definately hope to have my little ones behind the scope one day, but in the grand scheme of things, my hunting trips are still affordable. I setup a budget, take my lunch to work, and try to save a little where I can. Like many of you, I have a choice where to spend my money, high end optics, camp items to make us comfortable and good whiskey. I am willing to shell out a coupla extra bucks if it will help the cause. Look at what it takes to take a family of four to a movie or to a professional ball game. talk about outrageous. I truely feel for the average hunter (because I am one), but we all make decisions on how to spend our hard earned dollars. Whitetails are a passion of mine and I choose to skimp in other areas so I can spend them on my passions.

[COOSEFAN]

This is definitely a depressing issue, and one which affects all of us to different degrees. Depending on the importance you, as an individual, place on hunting, and more importantly your financial stability in life, this issue will affect everyone in different ways. To most, this is definitely going to make it harder for us to afford to do what we've done our whole life. I hate change, but it's going to happen no matter what, It sucks! I make a living 6 months out of the year from guiding, and NR clients are the bread and butter of the biz. With the cost of expenses, gas,gas,gas.........and food, I had to raise prices to stay afloat. With this new increase, on top of my own, it will definitely be harder to get clients willing to pay that much more. It will definitely create a "rich man's" sport for NR to hunt here. And the worst part is, I'm making less $ and having to pay more $ to hunt for myself in my own state! That sucks, but I'll do it, it'll be hard, but there's always a way! I personally know of several guys who will not be putting there mom, dad, sister, brother and family dog in for the draw this year because of increases, so there will be a few extra tags around for those who really want to hunt! ( maybe a silver lining?!?) thanks, JIM