Sportsmans Input Sought by ConserveandProtectAZ.org-Unit wide Raffle and Auction Tags

[bonecollector777]

 

 

I thought someone was saying earlier that this was needed because Game and Fish can't use funds for politics? Now it is 100% of funds go to G&F for education? Something is not adding up on this. I agree with the $5 education stamp and would pay it, but just like the HSUS they will be back trying to get more tags again in a few years

As I understood it, there are two pools of money at hand.

 

Pool 1 would be generated by the auction/raffle tags tags or ??? and GnF would receive 100% of that and it should be earmarked for education. As stated before, G&F has to follow guidelines as to what they can put out on billboards and the like. It would be interesting to see how restrictive these guidelines are because it's going to be hard to "educate" people with your hands tied when you are really trying to fight a group with very deep pockets that can and will say anything to further their agenda.

 

Pool 2 would be used/controlled by C&P and could be used for political activities. Unless I missed it, the funding for this pool was only mentioned briefly in a response to a question asked by an attendee and it sounded like it would consist of primarily donations.

 

I would like to know what if anything the donors are asking for or have been offered by C&P?

 

Personally I'm leaning toward the dollar or two added to licenses and then maybe another dollar to application or tag fees as a way to fund the "education" portion.

 

I would also like to hear more from G&F regarding the necessity of this funding. Do they feel they need to generate 2M annually? I know it's being treated as "preventative maintenance" at this point and I think it's an issue that should be addressed, and soon.

The pool 2 you speak of HAS to come from donations only. No money from any tag or stamp or license can go to "pool 2". Therefore the tags being auctioned are not needed. The $5 stamp will raise their money. They have to depend on donations and raising money through raffles etc.

 

I'm sure these rich guys would love to donate a little money to CAPAZ but only if they get the tags in return.

[GreyGhost85]

The agenda is obvious. Nobody can say otherwise. We’ve been lied to about what the funds are going to be spent on, we’ve been lied to about what the funds can be spent on. CAP does not want to hear about alternative ways to raise money. The rich donors they refer to will only donate if they get more auction tags. Lets call a spade a spade. This IS a tag grab

[QCwtAddict]

The agenda is obvious. Nobody can say otherwise. Weve been lied to about what the funds are going to be spent on, weve been lied to about what the funds can be spent on. CAP does not want to hear about alternative ways to raise money. The rich donors they refer to will only donate if they get more auction tags. Lets call a spade a spade. This IS a tag grab

I haven't liked the idea of raffle or auction tags from the start but I did want to believe this was an honest organization that was trying to do something for the good of hunting. However the more this plays out the more rotten this group and their proposed plan seems.

[GJMauro12]

I had a question last night but it was already pretty heated.

 

How are all the different critter groups funded?

[bonecollector777]

I had a question last night but it was already pretty heated.

 

How are all the different critter groups funded?

Donations, fund raising, banquets etc.

[AZDirtyTaco]

I would encourage everyone that can make on Monday, make it happen. All of these folks do good things every day for our community, wildlife protection, conservation, and on and on... but after years and years of very little support from our community, a sense of entitlement has crept in. They feel they know what's best and have made decisions on our behalf, just like they do every other day of the week. It's only when something comes up that really gets people going (like auctioning tags), they hear boo from the crowd. So, I get that piece.

 

These groups did do a lot more than what they are getting credit for when it came to the HSUS fight. Each of the critter groups donated large sums of their annual budgets and spent countless hours working behind the scenes (including CAP) and for this they do deserve our thanks. BUT our thanks does not need to be given in the form of support of tags.

 

Take away the debate over tags, and we are all standing shoulder to shoulder as one, on every other topic. It's up to CAP and the contributing groups to decide between now and Mondays meeting whether or not they are married to auction tags (their constituents) or the common cause. We'll find out soon enough.

[GJMauro12]

 

I had a question last night but it was already pretty heated.

 

How are all the different critter groups funded?

Donations, fund raising, banquets etc.

Thats what I figured.

 

Im not going to pick a side on this argument yet but something that really turned me off last night was the hard defensive position C&P took last night. I heard a lot of what have you done and whats your ideas. They had to expect a backlash from what theyre proposing, so I didnt understand the hostility from them when people showed up with tough questions.

 

They are also taking some credit for stopping the cat ban by hiring the one ballot initiative company in Arizona. Which is awesome, Im glad they did it and Im glad it worked, but they did it off the donations of the Sportsman. So, that kinda throws you off when you hear the what have you done type questions towards hunters.

 

I also understand those groups show up month after month, donating their time to these meetings and looking around the room and seeing no one around but the same people. I applaud them for that. They are doing the Sportsman a great service with the projects they complete and the hunter recruitment with youth camps, etc.

 

Im not defending the hunters either as far as donations go. It sounds like game and fish certainly doesnt do well with the donation box on the online big game draw.

 

Maybe hunters dont see the need to donate because it always seems like the narrative to fight anti hunters is the Sportsmans have been funding wildlife to protect and grow our herds for generations without help from

The other side. Maybe that narrative needs to change to our wildlife needs more help

 

I dont think this group is 100% bad news. It seems like all of them want to do the right thing for the wildlife of Arizona.

 

I think one group that has failed us is the Arizona game and fish department. All of a sudden theres this huge need to educate the public because 70% of Arizona (what ever the numbers were last night) doesnt know about the Arizona game and fish department. That is flat out the fault of game and fish for not planning, budgeting and marketing themselves to the public, whether they are underfunded or over funded.

[AZDirtyTaco]

I want to take a moment to regress a bit from my previous opinions and statements related to agendas, motives, etc... when it comes to all involved. Much of our concerns I believe are due to a direct result of lack of knowledge to how funds can be generated, where they are held, how many departments have access to said funds, etc. As I learn more about the rules, regulations, laws to which AZGFD is bound, I am seeing the "why" behind the proposal of allocating tags specifically. I am not saying that I now, or even remotely, support auction or raffling of tags, but I am starting to at least see where these folks are coming from and am softening up to my previous view points.

 

I'm not going to journal it all out at this time... Please come to the meeting on Monday is all I can say.

 

I suppose it's only a matter of perspective, but I didn't see the meeting as heated as some describe. Not saying you're wrong in your view point. I'm just used to opinionated and passionate conversations in similar settings, so it doesn't resonate with me as it might with others.

[krp]

Are they claiming exclusive access to the educational funds through tag sales vs education license/application fee?

 

Kent

[AZDirtyTaco]

Are they claiming exclusive access to the educational funds through tag sales vs education license/application fee?

 

Kent

Under the proposed structure of AZGFD gifting tags, CAP generating funds through the raffle/auctions, and CAP then donating that money back to AZGFD - those donated funds go to a specified fund that is not accessible to any AZGFD departments. These funds would only be used for the purpose of education. It's my understanding that this handling of the funds was one of the major objectives for all of the contributing parties, including CAP. I believe we are most all in favor of this strategy. The question on the table today and maybe someone here can contribute to the solution; can this be accomplished w/o the use of tags??? This question was brought back to all involved, is being explored, and will be discussed at further length on Monday.

 

This "gifting" process is the key to why those donated funds would not be entered in to the general pool of funds available to AZGFD for use as maintenance, improved facilities, new trucks, etc... At this time, it's my hope that we can come up with alternatives for generating these education funds for their stated purposes, and this is the kicker - without sending those funds to the general pool.

 

Disclaimer:

I am WAY new to all of this and am doing my best to learn on a quick curve. I am explaining this all to the best of my ability and hope that I am not hurting nor confusing anyone by relaying this information. I have zero ego on this topic, and anyone, please correct this information as needed.

[azelkhunter2]

I would like to take a moment on behalf of the ADA to say thank you to those that attended last nights meeting. I would also encourage all of you to attend as many of the Q/A sessions that conserve and protect schedules as you can. There were many ideas brought to the form and it sounded like many more had been E - Mailed to conserve and protect...It is my hope that everyone gets the answers to their respective questions....It is also my sincere hope that a common ground can be found and we as sportsman can continue to enjoy The sport we so desperately care about.

[trophyseeker]

And any "gifted" tag will need to go through a rule making process to change the present criteria of how the money is used. An added stamp/license fee increase would likely have to go through a legislative process.

Although this is an older copy (2016), it lays out the current procedure for "gifted" tags. See R12-4-120

https://www.azgfd.com/PortalImages/files/rules/Article%201.pdf

[trophyseeker]

Pittman Robinson funds should be the first look.

 

Kent

As written, (see below) those funds can't be used to educate the general public. Thus it would take the proverbial "act of congress" to change it.

 

 

Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration

(Pittman-Robertson)

 

Description

The Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, commonly known as the Pittman-Robertson Act, was approved by Congress on September 2, 1937, and became effective July 1, 1938.

 

The purpose of this Act was to provide funding for restoration of wild birds and mammals and to acquire, develop and manage their habitats. The Act was amended October 23, 1970, to include funding for hunter training programs and the development, operation and maintenance of public shooting ranges.

 

Funds are derived from an 11 percent federal excise tax on sporting arms, ammunition, and archery equipment, and a 10 percent tax on handguns. These funds are collected from the manufacturers by the Department of the Treasury and are apportioned each year to the states by the Department of the Interior on the basis of formulas that consider the total area of the state and the number of licensed hunters in the state. Funds for hunter education and target ranges are derived from one-half of the tax on handguns and archery equipment.

[40-year-AZ-hunter]

And any "gifted" tag will need to go through a rule making process to change the present criteria of how the money is used. An added stamp/license fee increase would likely have to go through a legislative process.

 

Although this is an older copy (2016), it lays out the current procedure for "gifted" tags. See R12-4-120

 

https://www.azgfd.com/PortalImages/files/rules/Article%201.pdf

 

The requirements posted above are actually just the opposite.

 

Tag fees no longer require legislative action to increase as long as the total collected is under 50% more than the FY2012-13 appropriation.

 

See ARS 17.333A

 

A. Through July 1, 2019, the commission shall prescribe by rule license classifications that are valid for the taking or handling of wildlife, fees for licenses, permits, tags and stamps and application fees.

 

and 2019 is no longer the end of the authority.

 

 

Then See ARS 17-333.01 for the limit placed on that authority.

 

 

17-333.01. Fee limitation

The department may establish fees pursuant to this article, but the total amount of license, permit, tag and stamp fees collected in any fiscal year may not exceed fifty per cent more than the amount appropriated from the game and fish fund for fiscal year 2012-2013.

 

Furthermore ARS 17-346 limits the "special" tags to 3 per species.

 

17-346. Special big game license tags

In addition to any license tags issued under section 17-333, the commission may issue special big game license tags in the name of an incorporated nonprofit organization that is dedicated to wildlife conservation. No more than three special big game license tags may be issued for each species of big game in a license year. Notwithstanding section 17-332, subsection D, an organization that receives special big game license tags issued under this section may sell and transfer them if all proceeds of the sale are used in this state for wildlife management.

 

So bottom line is that the situation is just the reverse. More auction/raffle tags require a change of the law. Increased license or tag fees do not require a change in the law as long as G&F is below the cap set as outlined above.,

[krp]

§ 80.50 What activities are eligible for funding under the Pittman-RobertsonWildlife Restoration Act?

The following activities are eligible for funding under the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act:

(a)Wildlife Restoration program.

(1) Restore and manage wildlife for the benefit of the public.

(2) Conduct research on the problems of managing wildlife and its habitat if necessary to administer wildliferesources efficiently.

(3) Obtain data to guide and direct the regulation of hunting.

(4) Acquire real property suitable or capable of being made suitable for:

(i) Wildlife habitat; or

(ii) Public access for hunting or other wildlife-oriented recreation.

(5) Restore, rehabilitate, improve, or manage areas of lands or waters as wildlife habitat.

(6) Build structures or acquire equipment, goods, and services to:

(i) Restore, rehabilitate, or improve lands or waters as wildlife habitat; or

(ii) Provide public access for hunting or other wildlife-oriented recreation.

(7) Operate or maintain:

(i) Projects that the State fish and wildlife agency completed under the Pittman-Robertson WildlifeRestoration Act; or

(ii) Facilities that the agency acquired or constructed with funds other than those authorized under the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act if these facilities are necessary to carry out activities authorized by the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act.

(8) Coordinate grants in the Wildlife Restoration program and related programs and subprograms.

(Wildlife Restoration - Basic Hunter Education and Safety subprogram.

(1) Teach the skills, knowledge, and attitudes necessary to be a responsible hunter.

(2) Construct, operate, or maintain firearm and archery ranges for public use.

©Enhanced Hunter Education and Safety program.

(1) Enhance programs for hunter education, hunter development, and firearm and archery safety. Hunter-development programs introduce individuals to and recruit them to take part in hunting, bow hunting, target shooting, or archery.

(2) Enhance interstate coordination of hunter-education and firearm- and archery-range programs.

(3) Enhance programs for education, safety, or development of bow hunters, archers, and shooters.

(4) Enhance construction and development of firearm and archery ranges.

(5) Update safety features of firearm and archery ranges.