COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTROL GREED AND ROBBERY!!!!!!!

[trphyhntr]

Hey, they gotta pay for the new trucks and boats somehow...

the new 3/4 ton duramax AZGFD truck i see on the 202 every morning on my way to work pisses me off.

 

 

You're joking, right? Some things in life make me a little angry, but a new truck purchased by G&F isn't one of them. Do you get angry when you see a new police cruiser or helicopter? Maybe you expect G&F to purchase used pick-ups? (They can make a bid on my 96 GMC if they want..... )

 

S.

ya i think they should be using the same ones they were 10 years ago

Again, I'm thinking you're joking....... You know they actually drive these vehicles for work, right? The average miles driven per year on these vehicles is not necessarily what the average citizen puts on thier personal car/pick-up. Imagine the maintence and lost service necessary on a 10 year old pick-up that is driven for work (not just to work.....). So now the G&F has a fleet of old worn-out pick-ups and has to pay an army of mechanics & purchase parts to keep the old fleet in service? Not sure if you've ever run a business before, but in the long run that very well would not be more economical than keeping the fleet staffed with fresh wheels. Plus the minute some hunter is looking for help/assistance from the G&F (or any 'first responder' service) but the call is not answered because the old pick-up broke down? Not a good thing, I think.

 

Just something to think about.

 

S.

 

well, ford ranger would be more cost effective than a 2500hd for daily driving

[stanley]

Hey, they gotta pay for the new trucks and boats somehow...

the new 3/4 ton duramax AZGFD truck i see on the 202 every morning on my way to work pisses me off.

 

 

You're joking, right? Some things in life make me a little angry, but a new truck purchased by G&F isn't one of them. Do you get angry when you see a new police cruiser or helicopter? Maybe you expect G&F to purchase used pick-ups? (They can make a bid on my 96 GMC if they want..... )

 

S.

ya i think they should be using the same ones they were 10 years ago

Again, I'm thinking you're joking....... You know they actually drive these vehicles for work, right? The average miles driven per year on these vehicles is not necessarily what the average citizen puts on thier personal car/pick-up. Imagine the maintence and lost service necessary on a 10 year old pick-up that is driven for work (not just to work.....). So now the G&F has a fleet of old worn-out pick-ups and has to pay an army of mechanics & purchase parts to keep the old fleet in service? Not sure if you've ever run a business before, but in the long run that very well would not be more economical than keeping the fleet staffed with fresh wheels. Plus the minute some hunter is looking for help/assistance from the G&F (or any 'first responder' service) but the call is not answered because the old pick-up broke down? Not a good thing, I think.

 

Just something to think about.

 

S.

 

well, ford ranger would be more cost effective than a 2500hd for daily driving

Can't dissagree with you there, Of course if a guy's primary job is to sit around the office and/or handle a 'desk job', then a 2500hd is not necessary. They should buy the 'desk jockeys' sedans and/or more efficient vehicals.

 

That is a totally different topic than the 10 year old vehicle debate though.......

 

S.

 

PS: Nice job dodging the '10 year old vehical' question.....

 

[trphyhntr]

Hey, they gotta pay for the new trucks and boats somehow...

the new 3/4 ton duramax AZGFD truck i see on the 202 every morning on my way to work pisses me off.

 

 

You're joking, right? Some things in life make me a little angry, but a new truck purchased by G&F isn't one of them. Do you get angry when you see a new police cruiser or helicopter? Maybe you expect G&F to purchase used pick-ups? (They can make a bid on my 96 GMC if they want..... )

 

S.

ya i think they should be using the same ones they were 10 years ago

Again, I'm thinking you're joking....... You know they actually drive these vehicles for work, right? The average miles driven per year on these vehicles is not necessarily what the average citizen puts on thier personal car/pick-up. Imagine the maintence and lost service necessary on a 10 year old pick-up that is driven for work (not just to work.....). So now the G&F has a fleet of old worn-out pick-ups and has to pay an army of mechanics & purchase parts to keep the old fleet in service? Not sure if you've ever run a business before, but in the long run that very well would not be more economical than keeping the fleet staffed with fresh wheels. Plus the minute some hunter is looking for help/assistance from the G&F (or any 'first responder' service) but the call is not answered because the old pick-up broke down? Not a good thing, I think.

 

Just something to think about.

 

S.

 

well, ford ranger would be more cost effective than a 2500hd for daily driving

Can't dissagree with you there, Of course if a guy's primary job is to sit around the office and/or handle a 'desk job', then a 2500hd is not necessary. They should buy the 'desk jockeys' sedans and/or more efficient vehicals.

 

That is a totally different topic than the 10 year old vehicle debate though.......

 

S.

 

PS: Nice job dodging the '10 year old vehical' question.....

 

id argue that depreciation of the new ones alone exceeds the cost to repair used ones.

[stanley]

Huh???

 

Depreciation doesn't 'cost' anything. It's simply the way a company (or organization) accounts for the reduction in value of an asset over time. It's just allocating the cost of the asset over it's useful life and has nothing to do with making the asset cost more or less. The 'used ones' would have been depreciated just like the 'new ones'...... It would have nothing to do with the maintenance costs of the asset.

[trphyhntr]

Huh???

 

Depreciation doesn't 'cost' anything. It's simply the way a company (or organization) accounts for the reduction in value of an asset over time. It's just allocating the cost of the asset over it's useful life and has nothing to do with making the asset cost more or less. The 'used ones' would have been depreciated just like the 'new ones'...... It would have nothing to do with the maintenance costs of the asset.

wot? if you buy a new truck every 2 years youre taking the biggest depreciation hit. depreciation of a truck isnt linear. this new truck talk really pisses you off i see. this is only one thing that i dont like about AZGFD. i also dont like that they ask for public assistance, funds, and donation of time and goods to complete AZGFD projects.

[stanley]

Actually it's not the "new truck talk...." that pisses me off. (Ummm.... I think someone else said that seeing a new pick-up pisses THEM off! lol) In fact, not much of anything really 'pisses me off....'. I'm a pretty easy going guy........ It's the argument that driving 10 year old trucks would be better for the financials of the department that I'm questioning.

 

If the organization buys a new truck every 2 years or every 10 years, the cost is the same for that particular asset. Depreciation ONLY determines now long the org. has to write the asset off. Depreciation has nothing to do with how much the asset costs. I guess as I think of it, depreciation frankly should really not be that big of a consideration. It is primarily meant for a business to write-down the value of an asset relative to the benefit (or income) that the business is gaining from the asset. Might not be that applicable here in a public service and/or government agency that is a 'not for profit' org.

 

Either way, my point is that it's easy for you and/or I to second-guess what the department is doing but to me, simply stating that the department should keep their vehicles for 10 years sounds like a bit of an ignorant statememt (unless you have the maintenance and other costs figured into the equation), which I haven't seen from you. I suspect if it made logical financial sense to keep the vehicles that long, that they would. I suspect that there are actual accountants (I'm just an amature....) that have figured it all out for the department.

 

Happy hunting and good luck in the draws!

 

S.

 

[SWDesertRat]

/> wot? if you buy a new truck every 2 years youre taking the biggest depreciation hit. depreciation of a truck isnt linear. this new truck talk really pisses you off i see. this is only one thing that i dont like about AZGFD. i also dont like that they ask for public assistance, funds, and donation of time and goods to complete AZGFD projects.

I've generally gone through life keeping my mouth shut unless I knew what I was talking about. Seems like you have a pretty set opinion about how game and fish acquires trucks without much knowledge about what it costs or takes to run or operate a fleet.

I also think you should further look into the projects and opportunities that Az Antelope Foundation, AES, ABA, DBSS, Rod and Gun Clubs, SCI, Turkey Federation, Trout Unlimited, (and all the other groups I missed) that not only identify but also gladly volunteer their time and funds to conservation work done. Additionally, maybe you should do some research about HPC and what funding and allocation or resources are utilized and evaluated.

I have my complaints about the game and fish department, as well as any other state or federal agency. I greatly appreciate the work and effort that many wm's and biologists do on a regular basis. Could they do things better, sure they can.

 

I simply challenge that you get involved in a conservation project in 2014, and then tell all of us here at CWT that you still can't believe game and fish couldn't do it on their own...'cause I'm sure you will value the sweat, effort and satisfaction in working alongside like minded folks and agency personnel.

Have a great year...

[trphyhntr]

well, im an idiot guess. cant wait till i have so much dough i dont worry about any of that stuff. get a new lease on a mercedes or something. youre right they shouldnt try to cut spending anywhere. just keep increasing fee's on us. makes more sense. ill do a trash clean up, but im no im not donating my time or resources to them. they stand to make about $10 million in application fee's alone this year, what do they do with that? <serious question, because i dont know and i would like too. btw how often you guys get checked for licenses?

[muledeerarea33?]

As far as the new truck argument, if you buy a vehicle that's a year or two old that's under a certified pre owned warranty, not only do you save roughly $4000 from the cost of a new one, the CPO warrant usually covers more than base warranty for a longer period of time. If they have the man power and time to pick and choose used vehicles I'm sure money would be saved.

[jim]

For the most part their buying power of state contracts would not allow the buying of used vehicles. As tax payers if you wanted the departments to use used vehicles you would have to get the legislature to mandate that agencies purchase used vehicles. They also do not spend what a new vehicle cost the gen public they are bought at fleet pricing as they have to put out for bid what they want to buy. Their are so may rules on state agencies buying things that are all dictated by the politicians.

[khmer6]

+1. A lot of these decisions are governed by a higher power, whether it maybe the department if administration or the legislation.

/>For the most part their buying power of state contracts would not allow the buying of used vehicles. As tax payers if you wanted the departments to use used vehicles you would have to get the legislature to mandate that agencies purchase used vehicles. They also do not spend what a new vehicle cost the gen public they are bought at fleet pricing as they have to put out for bid what they want to buy. Their are so may rules on state agencies buying things that are all dictated by the politicians.

[jeremiahjohnson]

Being born and raised in Tucson, I never looked at other states to hunt, AZ had all I needed. Since moving to colorado I have started applying in other western states, Wyoming, Colorado, AZ. I can tell you that AZ is about the most expensive state to hunt for both residents, and non resident hunters. 170$ license 660$ elk 242 deer.. Wyoming your 320$ deer tag is. 320$ your tag is your license. I love AZ it's home, but dang I better draw my elk tag soon cuz I can't afford it much longer

[couesmagnet]

I have a solution for the people who don't like the tag prices, don't put in. I wish there was a revolt against putting in, so i had a better chance of getting drawn. Someone get a group together and go door to door trying to get others to join the revolt.

[DesertBull]

/> I mean this act is no different than calling a small appliance repairmen to work on your dishwasher, and have him tell you that to fix the dishwasher you would have to purchase central air-conditioning. Unacceptable in the private sector, why should we tolerate it from our government a-holes.

 

A $160 non-res hunt/fish license is more like calling the small appliance guy to work on your dishwasher and he fixes your broken freezer for free.

 

 

and your dishwasher is still broke.

[Guest wdenike]

I have a solution for the people who don't like the tag prices, don't put in. I wish there was a revolt against putting in, so i had a better chance of getting drawn. Someone get a group together and go door to door trying to get others to join the revolt.

 

 

 

 

YUP, I got mine chit on everyone else. No shortage of this mind set these days!!

 

 

 

Take care, Willie