Wyoming License Increase Bill Dies!!!

[Ben Lamb]

Well I guess the other day when I put in a for a special general elk tag + point I'm not helping to fund their budget in your mind? But I guarantee that if you look into the fish and game's budget, you will find many area's where they are wasting money. Problem is no one wants to do that, everyone wants to keep charging consumers more instead of getting their own house in check.

Here's their budget for 2011:
http://wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/Departments/WGFD/pdfs/WGFDANNUALREPORT_20110001745.pdf

I look forward to your cost savings report.

 

[174in]

I do agree they will probably need more funding,but I also think they could wait to raise tag prices until the economy picks up a little bit.

 

[dustinf]

I look forward to your cost savings report.

Reminds me of another question, I often want to ask most politicians, do you even balance your own checkbook?

 

[blb078]

Here's their budget for 2011:
http://wgfd.wyo.gov/web2011/Departments/WGFD/pdfs/WGFDANNUALREPORT_20110001745.pdf

I look forward to your cost savings report.

WYF&G releases pheasants at a cost ot $23 per bird, but only charges $14 for a license, pretty sure there aren't many NR buying those so it's all on the residents. $4mil per year on trout and salmon. Right of the bat you have two losing parts of their business that would be a huge cost savings. Ask why they don't have a super tag lottery like MT & AZ do. Oil and coal are pretty vast up in WY but there's no contributions from that to the F&G.

Going to quote this one "From 2007 to 2011, the average compensation for Game and Fish permanent employees grew by nearly 36 percent. During the same period, average compensation for employees in the private sector grew by a mere 11 percent, less than a third of the Game and Fish total."

Seems the WYG&F isn't as efficient as many think it is, I know that's going to ruffle some feathers on here but it is what it is. When you having a business that is having money issues sometimes you have to cut the losing parts of the business to make up for it. But like most business w/money issues they want to charge the consumer rather than trying to clean up the issues first.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Going to quote this one "From 2007 to 2011, the average compensation for Game and Fish permanent employees grew by nearly 36 percent. During the same period, average compensation for employees in the private sector grew by a mere 11 percent, less than a third of the Game and Fish total."

.

And I'm going to call BS on this one. That growth is not reflective of where GF employees stood relative to private sector employees before those raises took place. A much more indicative statistic would be what GF employees make relative to other private sector jobs, similar federal jobs, and other law enforcement agencies. You'll find there is disparity, but odds are it's not the kind you would think.

Edit: I commend WY for giving their employees raises. If you want good employees you need to compensate them. It is getting harder and harder for fish and wildlife agencies to get good qualified employees.

 

[Ben Lamb]

WYF&G releases pheasants at a cost ot $23 per bird, but only charges $14 for a license, pretty sure there aren't many NR buying those so it's all on the residents. $4mil per year on trout and salmon. Right of the bat you have two losing parts of their business that would be a huge cost savings. Ask why they don't have a super tag lottery like MT & AZ do. Oil and coal are pretty vast up in WY but there's no contributions from that to the F&G.

Going to quote this one "From 2007 to 2011, the average compensation for Game and Fish permanent employees grew by nearly 36 percent. During the same period, average compensation for employees in the private sector grew by a mere 11 percent, less than a third of the Game and Fish total."

Seems the WYG&F isn't as efficient as many think it is, I know that's going to ruffle some feathers on here but it is what it is. When you having a business that is having money issues sometimes you have to cut the losing parts of the business to make up for it. But like most business w/money issues they want to charge the consumer rather than trying to clean up the issues first.

I tend to agree that the pheasant release program is bad, and I much prefer Montana's style of management when it comes to trout. Good calls. What is the total budget for the pheasant release program and fisheries? Also, are you calling for the elimination of hatcheries or just a select few?

On the raises I would compare apples to apples. Look at what oil and gas biologists earn versus game and fish. Also compare warden salaries during this time with highway patrol or other law enforcement.

A for O&G contributing, do you really want them to have a finger on the department?

 

[BuzzH]

WYF&G releases pheasants at a cost ot $23 per bird, but only charges $14 for a license, pretty sure there aren't many NR buying those so it's all on the residents. $4mil per year on trout and salmon. Right of the bat you have two losing parts of their business that would be a huge cost savings. Ask why they don't have a super tag lottery like MT & AZ do. Oil and coal are pretty vast up in WY but there's no contributions from that to the F&G.

Going to quote this one "From 2007 to 2011, the average compensation for Game and Fish permanent employees grew by nearly 36 percent. During the same period, average compensation for employees in the private sector grew by a mere 11 percent, less than a third of the Game and Fish total."

Seems the WYG&F isn't as efficient as many think it is, I know that's going to ruffle some feathers on here but it is what it is. When you having a business that is having money issues sometimes you have to cut the losing parts of the business to make up for it. But like most business w/money issues they want to charge the consumer rather than trying to clean up the issues first.

Great, so your proposal is to cut fish hatcheries, eliminate a huge family oriented outdoor pursuit (fishing), so that you can maintain your chump change NR elk tag every 10 years...

Oh, and those pesky bird hunters...get rid of them too.

Lets not forget to throw the G&F employees under the bus as well...let them compete for wages with Chinese sweat shop labor. How dare those red-shirted bastards ask for all the "extras" like insurance for their families...and a RETIREMENT program??? Those filthy heathens...and lets knock off their vacation time while we're at it. How dare they make a living wage where they can afford a house, a decent vehicle, and maybe take a vacation once in a while. Greedy is all they are...

:W::W:

 

[blb078]

Great, so your proposal is to cut fish hatcheries, eliminate a huge family oriented outdoor pursuit (fishing), so that you can maintain your chump change NR elk tag every 10 years...

Oh, and those pesky bird hunters...get rid of them too.

Lets not forget to throw the G&F employees under the bus as well...let them compete for wages with Chinese sweat shop labor. How dare those red-shirted bastards ask for all the "extras" like insurance for their families...and a RETIREMENT program??? Those filthy heathens...and lets knock off their vacation time while we're at it. How dare they make a living wage where they can afford a house, a decent vehicle, and maybe take a vacation once in a while. Greedy is all they are...

:W::W:

Or just keep raising fees on hunting licenses so there are less people hunting then raise the fees even more, run more people off. Cutting out fisheries isn't going to eliminate fishing, it's not like the lakes and streams are just going to dry up of fish. And if you go back and check you will see that never once did I complain about my NR fee being to high. But it's a typical response of a company hurting for money to not look within and look to charge the consumer more first, and you're seeing it here. How about even recently when this fee proposal was brought and the WYF&G hired an outside research firm to analyze it all to determine what it should be,wonder how much the spent on that. Or the $300k per year they spent on Call of The Wild, sure it's a TV show for kids but I'm sure there are many other cost effective ways to get young hunters involved.

Just so you know if they cut the hatchery program for trout and salmon in half they'd save $2 million a year. Funny how this stuff works when you really start to look into things.

Or BuzzH since you stated a few posts ago that the $1100 a NR pays is "chump change", why don't you just take over the WYF&G w/your vast wealth.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

The only program that I've seen that IMHO needs the ax is the pheasant program unless they can shop it out for a lot lower cost. Michigan had the same type of program a couple decades ago and scrapped it because the payback was not sufficient for the costs involved and the number of overall hunters that were involved in the harvest didn't warrant it. I do agree 100% with everything else that Ben and BuzzH have stated in regards to the overall efficiency of the Department and the fact that their employees are not getting rich for what schooling they have to have for what they make. Being a retired MI Dept. of Ag employee, I heard the same BS over the years about Government workers up here I got tired of it one day when I was out busting my azz working overtime for no extra money and this yoyo walks up and out of the blue and says how great it must be to be on the state payroll and do nothing for a living. Then he had the balls to ask how he could get a job with us and I just looked up and told him the first thing he needed to do was learn to read and write! The guy ducked tail and was gone in a flash, LOL!

 

[brownbear932008]

I have worked for govt. agencies my whole life and have seen way too much wasteful spending. Most all agencies can cut spending in lots of ways and still do the job well.
I say thank you wyoming for not raising fees to a price unaffordable to most people. Maybe they have looked at what has happened to MT. and the other states that has tried to rape N/R's.

As far as $1100 dollars for an elk tag being "CHUMP CHANGE" well sir I know for a fact that amount of money for a tag is very expensive to almost anyone I know. I know guys that save their dollars all year to afford that "CHUMP CHANGE" license fee and go without a lot to do it. I seriously take offense to that statement since that fee is supporting the majority of your game department so we can go enjoy our sport when we can.
I see in the future many of the western states are gonna have to skinny up a ton because the simple fact is some people are tired of getting screwed on these fees I personally would have never paid the price they were gonna charge for a antelope tag 300 maybe but that's pushing it.

It get's a little aggrevating because I never see these fishing license fees at this point and I wonder why that is? Because a fish isn't worth as much yet millions are spent on fishing programs. What do you guys think about that hunters footing the bill for all the fish programs that many of us never take advantage of? Don't get me wrong here I know game departments take on a lot but maybe sometimes they are trying to take on too much. It is gonna come to a point to where this is a rich man sport and then we have lost it all at that point it's getting very close now.

 

[Brisco]

I am glad they didnt raise prices as well and hope they can get the funding worked out. Brownbear made a good point about taking on too much. Peasants forever sponsors a ton of habitat stuff around here dont know what presence they have there. Im sure there are other organizations and options.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

"sometimes they are trying to take on too much."

FYI it's not that they are asking to do a lot of extra stuff, but rather because they are mandated to take on more and more stuff that doesn't have any incoming money to support all those tasks.

 

[noharleyyet]

By God (with or without a comma here) WV sounds like a good place for a Texan to visit.

....well said Mr Brownbear..

 

[blb078]

"sometimes they are trying to take on too much."

FYI it's not that they are asking to do a lot of extra stuff, but rather because they are mandated to take on more and more stuff that doesn't have any incoming money to support all those tasks.

That's actually not true, they're given grants from state & federal gov'ts when they take on something new. They were given almost $4.5 million by the state alone in '11. WYF&G also pays ranchers about $500k a year for wildlife crop damage, I'd be willing to be a lot of those ranchers turn around and lease their lands to outfitters or charge trespassing fees to hunt. What they should do is implement a rule that states if a landowner is going to get paid for crop damage then that land should be open to public access for hunting to help reduce further crop damage. But that's probably wishful thinking there.

This link I found interesting. The article isn't anything already known, but the comments at the bottom lead one to believe that WYF&G hasn't managed their finances as well as some people on here think.
http://trib.com/news/state-and-regi...cle_398f33af-4c5f-5782-8513-a9a56a221ca8.html

 

[spook12]

Is Wy. ''Mandated'' to spend money planting non-native species? (Pheasants)

 

[jlmatthew]

Thank God

I thought Colorado was gonna get even more crowded if folks quit hunting Wyoming because of the fee increase.

 

[blb078]

Is Wy. ''Mandated'' to spend money planting non-native species? (Pheasants)

Nope, but they release 25k of them a year at $23 a pop. The average number released between '06 - '10 was 31k a year.

 

[spook12]

They should have their arse kicked for it too. Nutria,Pheasants,Swine and Horses nothing more than vermin.Remove them all!

 

[dan.kirkpatrick]

hopefully wyoming will keep the prices where they are,,,I hope they are smart enough to know that that will improve tourism in that state when we go there instead of other higher priced states that are pushing there luck on how much well spend on hunting.tag price is certainly one of the many factors to consider.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

blb078---Please show me one thing in that link you posted that says anything about G&F not spending money properly! You guys are pulling chit out of the air now as far as what I mentioned as being mandated. I already stated that the pheasant program is one that needs to go if they can't get the cost down to a decent level and even if they do it will probably be one of the first things on the chopping block now that the fee increase have been axed. They are not getting a lot of money that is needed to meet all expenses involved in managing all the flora and fauna they now do. They get some money as you stated, but many times it's on a one time basis and other times it isn't nearly enough to continue on with what they are given to do as the years go on.

EDIT: Please read this naysayers---Of nine members, only Rep. John Freeman, D-Green River, voted in favor of HB136. While the department should find ways to save money, a report found it was one of the most efficient state agencies, Freeman said.