Yes, I have done the math and 800 unsold non-resident tags can't be a good thing for FWP's budget. During that meeting, did you catch the part about where the funding from HB607 goes? FWP has the discretion so it could be used to fund block management or "diverted" to other programs. A system that "goes broke every so often" does not sound like a fiscally sound program. The fact is FWP supported I-161 and it backfired in more ways than just revenue (leased land is another indication). I would be very interested in any data that shows the real numbers generated by non-resident license sales comparing 2011 with years past.
Didn't mean to hijack this thread but would like to know the truth about I-161's effect on FWP revenue.
I did catch where the money goes. It goes into the general FW&P's account. Where payroll, vehicles, building costs, and day to day operational money comes from. It was a way to make sure MTFW&P's couldn't acquire any more land with the money. If you had been involved the the last legislative session you would have known that there was a big right wing attempt to stop MTFW&P's from purchasing land for sportsman. That is partially what this is about.
800 tags unsold and still they made almost $2 million dollars more, is a good thing. Less kill, less pressure on a dwindling big game population. Sure MTFW&P's could have used the money for the tags but the game needed a break. So it's good for the game. I don't give a chit about the money.
Sue never said that the money could be put back into Block or habitat. I think that would be a stretch to assume they can.
MTFW&P's is the only State agency that is self sufficient. They need to add 15% to the cost of the resident tags to get by again for awhile. I think we can afford that.
Didn't mean to hijack this thread but would like to know the truth about I-161's effect on FWP revenue.
