Residents Paying for Tags Poll!



No announcement yet.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Residents Paying for Tags Poll!

    It seems like the issues involving non-residents and our states F&G budget go hand in hand. Sometimes even seems that the state is catering to non-residents to some degree. It would only make sense since most of F&Gs' finances come from non-resident licenses and tags. So my question is would we the resident hunters of Alaska be willing to pay for our tags to aid in F&G actually having some money to be able to do their job better and break their reliance on the non-res money. That is assuming in a perfect world that the money will actually be put to good use. I for one absolutely would be willing to pay for all my tags, I have long thought it was silly we dont.
    Yes, absolutely, we need F&G to rely on us for their budget non non-residents!!
    Heck No, I want them to be free!

    The poll is expired.

  • #2
    Yes, I would be willing to pay for my tag's "ONLY, ONLY" if I knew the monies were going soley to F&G and to good use. I also believe the non-res. tags should be "increased" and must be acompanied by a "regesterd guide" for ANY big game in Alaska.


    • #3

      Same: We already pay for licenses, but paying for a small fee for tags would be fine if it was guaranteed to go directly to management like yearly aerial surveys studies or something. But not to just increase salaries or to be diverted into other state programs as can happen.
      I come home with an honestly earned feeling that something good has taken place. It makes no difference whether I got anything, it has to do with how the day was spent. Fred Bear


      • #4
        Its sad to believe that something like us paying for our tags is the only way for us to get some lobbying leverage at the big boy table. Alaska has 2 primary huge resources, the black stuff that comes out of the ground that makes our cars go varoom and the fish & wildlife, and it blows me away that none of the states budget goes towards F&G. That would explain why so many of the coveted draw tags are split 50/50 with res and non res hunters. Not many states make it that even between res and non res hunters.


        • #5
          Again, if the monies generated were used for game management ( aireal survey's, field studies, ect.) only. Fish and Game is under funded and if it would make the difference between having the proper information gained from proper surveys and field studies to help F&G make informed decisions over guessing by using some "scientific model" then I would probably support it.

          I don't think it would be easy for them to garner support for it and it would most likely be complicated by the different user groups unique to Alaska but I do think most Alaskan's would benifit from it as well as the wildlife.

          I hate to give the govenment money, In this case though it might be money well spent. It might mean that I go in the field with only the tag(s) of my targeted quarry instead of the pile I usually carry, I may be willing to sacrifice that and a few bucksfor better management of our resources. Would have to see how it was presented.

          It is nice not to have to pay out the extra dollars for most of the tag's.


          • #6
            OK If

            OK if the money goes to F&G.

            Patriot Life Member NRA
            Life Member Veterans of Foreign Wars
            Life Member Disabled American Veterans


            • #7
              Not now.

              When the state is enjoying a huge budget surplus due to high oil prices, we should not be implementing new taxes. Call it a "user fee" or whatever, it is just a tax. The state can certainly afford to appropriate more money to ADFG's budget right now. It is clearly not a priority with the state government.
              I would have no problem paying more to ADFG if the state needed the money. The current licensing fees for residents are a steal.


              • #8
                I'll gladly pay for my tags! On one condition. The BOG as we know it disbands and Fish and game takes over managing our game herds!!!!


                • #9
                  Are Resident Tags Free?

                  Some of the convsation gives me the impression that some resident tags are FREE? That is what Alaska Cub and a couple others have posted. How can that be? Not a bad deal if true.


                  • #10
                    It is true that harvest tags for the general season are free. Then there is the draw tags, these you have to pay for to apply. Think its $10 for each that you select. If you don't get it you have contributed to their fund.

                    As for paying for tags. I would have to vote NO. Reason being I would have to assume that F&G's budgets are set up similar to State Parks. I once suggested that they raise the fees for camping annual passes rather than do away with them and was informed that it wouldn't do any good. Reason being that they wouldn't get the extra money, it goes into the States general fund. I could be wrong but even if you wanted to contribute you wouldn't be putting your money where you think its going.


                    • #11
                      Well this is an interesting result so far. I would really like someone to enlighten me on how some things work. I understand that the F&G is solely funded by the monies they recieve for licenses and tags, no money is received from the state for F&G. Obviously mostly by non-residents must be paying the F&Gs' budget because we dont pay for our tags with the exception of a griz tag in a some units. So when and how does the resident who lives in Alaska have a voice in what goes on? I have heard of the corruption within the system first hand from several sources. This corruption that I speak of is basically where a biologist comes up with a viable plan and or theory on a given animals herd condtion in a given area and the BOG ignores the biologist completely. Then on the other hand I am told that the biologist dont have a clue because funding only allows them to do minimal studies due to lack of funds and manpower. Then I hear about all these large interest groups especially guides and groups like Bushrat is a member of. So my question is when if ever do we the people who live hear ever have a say in what goes on and what changes are taking places and do we really have the capability to influence any changes at all. This seems like F&G is the underground politics to me because we never hear about changes till they have happened. I hate to sound negative but the outdoor experiences I have in Alaska are the only reason I live here and its pretty frightening to lave the lower 48 freight train methods for hunting minimization and land control to be taking over up here too.


                      • #12

                        As an advisory committee member, as far as I can understand, F&G doesn't receive any monies from the general budget at all. It is funds from non-residents, and probably some other federal funds (Robertson-Pittman??)

                        It is a crying shame that Alaskans can't agree to pay $5 or even $10 for a tag. Those tags didn't grow on trees. It cost money to print, etc. I proposed to add a tag fee along with the license increase. I do agree that all money raised by fish and game should stay with fish and game and not into a general fund. Pretty sad that our state can't CONTRIBUTE a few million here and there to fund the F&G. We can fund about anything else known to man, but not one of the biggest resources we have. Almost as stupid as not selling our oil to Alaska refineries at a discounted rate, so we can have the cheapest gas in America. Makes no sense to me. jmo


                        • #13
                          Dam Right

                          truely a said state we are in.


                          • #14
                            Here's how it works

                            Here's a link to the 2005 ADFG budget and expenditures report that will answer a lot of questions:

                            I want to clarify something I said in the other thread about SB 170, the senate bill that was supposed to be about license and tag fee increases for ADFG.

                            While I blame the Alaska Outdoor Council for lobbying for the drastic changes to our Fish and Game statutes that were eventually incorporated into this bill, which caused it to fail, and which prevented ADFG from getting the increases they sorely neeeded, AOC on the other hand lobbied to get general fund monies to ADFG last year.

                            Generalizing here, ADFG does not normally receive much in the way of General Fund (GF) monies from the state. Check out the expenditures/funding graph on the link above and you'll note general fund monies going to ADFG in 2005.

                            I want to enlighten everyone about why GF monies are not normally used in large amounts to fund ADFG, and why many pro-hunting orgs and hunters are afraid of this source of funding. If GF monies are used to fund ADFG, then non-hunters can well lobby that since "their" money is going to fund Fish and Game, that they want to see more wildlife viewing programs, less (or no) predator control, etc.

                            I also don't believe in always throwing money at a problem, but ADFG really needs a license and tag-fee increase. It's been too long since the last increase, and inflation has prevented them from keeping pace. People wonder why some sheep areas go to draw now. In some cases, that's because area biologists have to err on the side of caution when they don't have the funds to do surveys, because that money is not available or is going into other programs in the state.

                            Take note that predator control programs are not "free." Many are under the impression that since the "public" is doing the aerial control of wolves that it costs ADFG nothing. Nothing could be farther from the truth. So it's a balancing act. When we do extensive pred-control programs that require ADFG monitoring, aerial surveys, bear hair-snag dna samplings, that takes monies away from other areas, from sheep surveys, from habitat studies, from research projects.

                            We need to all get on the same page the next legislative session to get ADFG the license and tag-fee increases they need and deserve without tying those increases to absurd mandates that go well beyond the IM law we already have. If groups like AOC and others continue to lobby for these mandates, once again ADFG and the org I co-chair will have to oppose the license and tag increases.

                            Changing a budget bill so that the very department requesting the budget increase must oppose the bill on biological principles, is just plain wrong. We all lose in the end, whether it's sheep hunters that want to hunt in a particular area, or the very wildlife we all depend upon across the state.
                            Mark Richards


                            • #15
                              I hadn't thought of that, Mark-


                              You made perhaps one of the strongest arguments so far. If ADFG were funded from the General Fund, they would create leverage that could later be used against hunters. As it is, hunters pay their way. I like it.

                              What makes me uncomfortable is initiating tag fees. Hear me out on this. I'm not opposed to it, but I am somewhat uncomfortable, and here's why. Once they launch tag fees for residents, won't it be a simple matter to raise those fees later? I believe it will. I know that inflation has taken a big bite out of ADFG, and that many of their top biologists are bailing because they make more money working for the Feds. The place is a revolving door. But once the camel gets its nose under the tent flap...

                              That said, I would be fine with tag fees, but I would want some stiff controls on how they are raised later (and they will be). I'm tired of being taxed to death for public services, with over 30% of my income gone before I ever see it. I'm working four months out of the year to pay the government and I'm tired of it! When is it enough?

                              So I have a little of both sides here, I hope we can do something with this.

                              Not overly impressed with Seekins, either, btw.

                              Michael Strahan
                              Site Owner
                              Alaska Hunt Consultant
                              1 (406) 662-1791


                              Footer Ad Module 300 x 300


                              Footer Adsense