If You Are Ticked Off...........

[Branchminnow]

..................about our increases in hunting fees this year then make your voice heard. If you dont like this increase then dont be lazy, contact the board members as well as the Wildlife resources division. READ the story below.....then RESPOND accordingly


http://www.gon.com/article.php?id=1539&cid=84

By Daryl Kirby
Posted Tuesday March 25 2008, 3:03 PM

A decision by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to outsource the sales of hunting and fishing licenses and boat registration to a Missouri company, Central Bank, has raised the ire of sportsmen who had no chance to comment on the decision or examine alternatives.

Last month, GON incorrectly reported that DNR was directed by the state’s Department of Administrative Services (DOAS) to outsource license sales. The decision was DNR’s.

According to DOAS legal counsel Joseph Kim, “The decision to initiate the procurement and sign the contract were entirely decisions of DNR.”

The contract signed by DNR with Central Bank would drive most license sales to the Internet or telephone, which doesn’t sit well with sportsmen who don’t use credit cards for such purchases. The new contract gets rid of most over-the-counter outlets where sportsmen can purchase licenses except for large-volume retailers, most of which are near Atlanta or other high-population areas of the state. Sportsmen in rural Georgia could have to drive long distances to purchase licenses, or they would have to purchase licenses online or by telephone.

Under the new contract with Central Bank, set to take affect next fall, a transaction fee is added to the cost of licenses — $2.75 for online purchases or $4 for telephone purchases. The transaction fees would not apply to honorary or lifetime license holders to get their deer-harvest record.

Another issue with the change in how licenses are sold is that it would allow public access to personal information about license buyers, opening the door for marketers to target sportsmen. Under the new system through a private vendor, the names and addresses of everyone who buys a hunting or fishing license or registers a boat would be available as part of the public record, confirmed Todd Holbrook, WRD Assistant Director.

There is now an effort to tear up the contract between DNR and Central Bank. An “open letter” signed by 32 Georgia conservation organizations asked DNR to rescind the current contract and start over with a process that includes a chance for sportsmen to comment, which is an option, although it could cost the state money to break the contract.

The letter to DNR Commissioner Noel Holcomb said, “As you know sportsmen statewide are upset about DNR-contracted changes to the hunting and fishing license and boating registration systems. This will result in the largest fee/tax increase on sportsmen in history, with no traditional benefit to the sportsmen.”

The letter said “...we disagree and question the judgment of not including stakeholders, legislators and other related agencies through the process.”

A similar letter was sent to every member of the Georgia General Assembly that strongly urged legislators to “take control of a very public situation involving sportsmen dollars.”

The current license-sales system uses outdated machines that are so old that when they break, there’s no way to buy new machines, Holbrook said.

“The system we’re currently using was originally thought of as a five-year system, and then it was stretched to seven years and now we’re stretching it well beyond that,” he said.

An option to the current contract to outsource license sales to a private vendor like Central Bank would be to purchase a new in-house system with new computers.

“Whenever you deal with computers, you have to pretty much plan on upgrading about every five years,” Holbrook said.

The cost of keeping license sales in-house through WRD would involve more than a one-time cost to purchase new equipment, but rather an on-going cost to a department that has been through severe budget cuts resulting in reductions of services to sportsmen.




Print This Story E-Mail This Story

















© 2008 Georgia Outdoor News
















http://www.gadnr.org/board.aspx




About the Board of Natural Resources
The Board of Natural Resources consists of 18 citizens appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Georgia Senate. The Board is responsible for setting rules and regulations ranging from air and water quality to hunting seasons and provides input into issues such as the agency’s budget recommendations and legislative initiatives. The Board meets 10 times a year, usually the fourth Tuesday (Committee Day) and Wednesday (Board Day) of each month at the offices of the Department of Natural Resources located at 2 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, SE, Suite 1252 East Tower, Atlanta, Georgia 30334.



DNR Board MembersFirst District
Loyce W. Turner
608 Howellbrook Drive
Valdosta, GA 31602
Res: (229) 244-1501 Tenth District
Joseph M. "Joe" Hatfield
2336 Fred Pitts Road
Clarkesville, GA 30523
Bus: (706) 778-5100

Second District
Philip C. Watt
P. O. Box 1577
Thomasville, GA 31799
Bus: (229) 226-4300 Eleventh District
William A. "Bill" Carruth, Vice-Chairman
P. O. Box 423
Hiram, GA 30141
Bus: (770) 445-3224

Third District
Warren C. Budd, Jr.
P. O. Box 1723
Newnan, GA 30264
Bus: (770) 251-3630 Twelfth District
Mabel C. Jenkins
1012 Highway 23 North
Millen, GA 30442
Res: (478) 982-4196

Fourth District
J. David Allen
2985 Longmeadow Drive
Scottdale, GA 30079
Res: (404) 814-3836 Thirteenth District
Walter A. Hudson
6934 West Broad Street
Douglasville, GA 30134
Bus: (770) 942-5641

Fifth District
Thomas W. Wheeler, Jr.
P. O. Box 957209
Duluth, GA 30095
Bus: (770) 476-4801 Coastal District
Jenny Lynn Bradley, Secretary
1 Sylvan Island Road
Savannah, GA 31404
Res: (912) 354-3260

Sixth District
James W. "Jim" Tysinger
3781 Watkins Place, N. E.
Atlanta, GA 30319
Res: (770) 457-2375 Member-At-Large
Eugene M. "Gene" Bishop
9168 Dawsonville highway
Dawsonville, GA 30534
Res: (706) 265-1600

Seventh District
Robert J. "Bob" Rutland
1137 Clark Street
Covington, GA 30014
Bus: (770) 787-2006 Member-At-Large
Phyllis T. Johnson, Chairman
87 Bill Thompson Road
Hazlehurst, GA 31539
Res: (912) 375-9865

Eighth District
Earl D. Barrs
149 Lamar Street
Macon, GA 31204
Bus: (478) 741-8742 Member-At-Large
William C. "Bill" Archer
P. O. Box 97
Tiger, GA 30576
Res: (706) 947-3045

Ninth District
James A. "Jim" Walters
P. O. Box 2935
Gainesville, GA 30503
Bus: (770) 534-9909 Member-At-Large
Ray P. Lambert, Jr.
P. O. Box 428
McDonough, GA 30253
Bus: (770) 957-8511



For your convenience in contacting the Board of Natural Resources to provide input on DNR issues, please use the following options:

Mailing Address:
Board of Natural Resources
2 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, SE
Suite 1252 East
Atlanta, GA 30334.
Fax Number: (404) 656-4729
E-mail Address: dnrboard@dnr.state.ga.us

 

[Branchminnow]

Come on fellas 28 views here somebody post if they have responded. I have called three of the members so far with messages left for the rest of them to call me back.

 

[Jeff Raines]

I emailed them last month

 

[Mechanicaldawg]

If you are ticked off then you need to study this:

The following is a summary of the FY 2009 budget for the Wildife Resources Divisions as passed by the General Assmebly on Friday, April 4, 2008


State Appropriations - $37,516,647 (this figure does not include Federal funds which are NOT State funds used in WRD operations.)

The General Assembly did not provide any appropriations for increased motor fuel costs

The General Assembly recognized the funds collected from the sales of lifetime licenses for the past year and appropriated $95,896 to the Wildlife Endowment Fund as required by state and federal law

Despite that the Governor requested $400,000 to replace 23 vehicles with mileage in excess of 135,000, the General Assembly appropriated $100,000 to replace 6 vehicles with mileage in excess of 135,000

Despite that the Governor requested $675,000 to fill 23 vacant positions, the General assemply appropriated $450,000 for 10 vacant positions

Despite that the Governor requested $200,000 to cover the shortfall for leased Wildlife Management Areas, the General Assembly appropriated $100,000 for shortfalls in leased Wildlife Management Areas

The Governor did not request any funds for special pay raises. However, the General Assembly appropriated $1,411,373 for special pay raises only to law enforcement (i.e. P.O.S.T. certified) employees, which does not include office administrative personnel, wildlife biologists, fisheries biologists, technical assistants, and many other positions.

The General Assembly provided $25,000 to construct a campground and horse trails on Berry College WMA. This was not requested by the Governor and was added by the Senate and adopted by the Conference Committee.

Land Conservation funds are administered by the Georgia Environmental Facilities Auhtority (GEFA) and have greatly benefitted sportsmen through their use in the purchase of WMA lands. Despite that the Governor requested $35 million in Land Conservation, the General Assembly appropriated $10 milllion. The reduction of the Governor's request occurred in the House. The Senate attempted to restore most of this cut to provide a total of $25,548,423. However, the Conference Committee ultimately cut $25,000,000 from the Governor's request resulting in an appropriation of $10,000,000.

 

[Branchminnow]

In light of the info above looks like we also need to give our legislators a buzz as well, looks like they are in control of the dollars but if we dont act then nothing will happen. Comments need to be sent to both sides.legislators and our board representatives.

There is another solution.

 

[Researcher31726]

Come on fellas 28 views here somebody post if they have responded. I have called three of the members so far with messages left for the rest of them to call me back.

Watt, 2nd District, has not answred my calls yet. Johnson, Chairperson, called me back, encouraging me to get all sides of the story (since I was a reporter) and to read the DNR message by Holbrook.

Sue

 

[matthewsman]

here's what I'm missing...

A few dollars doesn't matter that mch to me...I'd pay double what I'm currently paying for my liscences(not my lease,liscences)if it meant more money for the resource,parity for game officers to keep those with the experience needed to protect the resource,fund more technicians,and provide materials and equipment for burning and plots.

It was my understanding that this outsourcing would provide 12 new jobs previously left open and that liscences would still be offered over the counter, but through less vendors.

I may be missing something,but it doesn't seem to be that big a deal

 

[Mechanicaldawg]

A few dollars doesn't matter that mch to me...I'd pay double what I'm currently paying for my liscences(not my lease,liscences)if it meant more money for the resource,parity for game officers to keep those with the experience needed to protect the resource,fund more technicians,and provide materials and equipment for burning and plots.

It was my understanding that this outsourcing would provide 12 new jobs previously left open and that liscences would still be offered over the counter, but through less vendors.

I may be missing something,but it doesn't seem to be that big a deal

Is $24-33 million over the next 10 years a big deal?

If not, then share some of your wealth with the rest of us High Roller!

 

[Branchminnow]

A few dollars doesn't matter that mch to me...I'd pay double what I'm currently paying for my liscences(not my lease,liscences)if it meant more money for the resource,parity for game officers to keep those with the experience needed to protect the resource,fund more technicians,and provide materials and equipment for burning and plots.

It was my understanding that this outsourcing would provide 12 new jobs previously left open and that liscences would still be offered over the counter, but through less vendors.

I may be missing something,but it doesn't seem to be that big a deal

Every body dont make what the bread man makes.....

Just yankin' ole buddy.

Im with you I would not mind even paying ten bucks extra but what makes me so irritated is that the hunters and fisherman of the state get 0 for the extra money.

 

[matthewsman]

consider this

I'll admit,it sucks to be rich


With the lack of response in assigning funds as requested in the past ie. gas price increases and vehicle upgrades...Why,who,or how would the state pony up the cash for the upgrade this year or five years from now when it needed to be upgraded again?It's evident already the state isn't going to spend money on sportsmen unless it's a revenue generating program such as GoFish and benefits more than sportsmen.

Jeff,Branch,...Do you really think we'd see any of the 23 million over the next few years to amount to anything?

likewise,we've been told in the past that the revenue generated through liscence sales is not much in comparison to matched gov't funds etc..

The additional fees won't be collected if you renew before expiration....

In short,the state doesn't want the capital expense.

Parity for the POST certified officers is money well spent to keep them here.

The other program is turnkey,without the hiccups that would inevitably follow a upgrade here,or the expense to upgrade again soon...

Should sportsman have been allowed a chance to respond..sure....


I am not as well versed as either of you due to your "connections",but I will say it's good to see GONetwork and The CAMO Coalition agreeing for a common cause

 

[stev]

I have no issues with issues.I just do as i need to do.

 

[Mechanicaldawg]

I'll admit,it sucks to be rich


With the lack of response in assigning funds as requested in the past ie. gas price increases and vehicle upgrades...Why,who,or how would the state pony up the cash for the upgrade this year or five years from now when it needed to be upgraded again?It's evident already the state isn't going to spend money on sportsmen unless it's a revenue generating program such as GoFish and benefits more than sportsmen.

Jeff,Branch,...Do you really think we'd see any of the 23 million over the next few years to amount to anything? If people that care don't surrender we may. If you're willing to surrender then, no we will not see anything change.

likewise,we've been told in the past that the revenue generated through liscence sales is not much in comparison to matched gov't funds etc.. Define "not much" Personally any number followed by the word "million" is not insignificant to me.

The additional fees won't be collected if you renew before expiration....SB382 did not pass. There will be no discount. You will pay the fee

In short,the state doesn't want the capital expense. There are several ways the new equipment could have been purchased with little front end expense.

Parity for the POST certified officers is money well spent to keep them here. The entire agency is underfunded and all of the employees are underpaid. This move probably will prove to have been unhealthy for agency in net. Our wildlife agency should receive permanent funding, unattached from the Executive and Legislative Branches, in an amount suitable to provide decent wages and equipment for all of its dedicated employees. The fish squeezers, technicians, secretaries, biologists, LE's all deserve proper compensation for their service.

The other program is turnkey,without the hiccups that would inevitably follow a upgrade here,or the expense to upgrade again soon... Completely assumptive statement.

Should sportsman have been allowed a chance to respond..sure....Stakeholders should have been allowed input, PERIOD.


I am not as well versed as either of you due to your "connections",but I will say it's good to see GONetwork and The CAMO Coalition agreeing for a common causeDonnie, as you know the "rank and file" of the two groups almost always are in lockstep concerning the need to protect the resource and the elements of our traditions for future generations.

This thread and the lack of activity on the other threads where I have posted the FY2009 budget info is symptomatic of the true problem.

While we as a group were quite energized by the goring of our ox in the licensing deal, no one seems to be excited by the fact that the Governor had asked for a little more money in his budget for a change and the Legislature has seen fit to deny the request!

Where is the outrage?!?!?!

 

[Mechanicaldawg]

BTW, does anyone see the shear lunacy in these two facts?

Despite that the Governor requested $400,000 to replace 23 vehicles with mileage in excess of 135,000, the General Assembly appropriated $100,000 to replace 6 vehicles with mileage in excess of 135,000

Despite that the Governor requested $675,000 to fill 23 vacant positions, the General assembly appropriated $450,000 for 10 vacant positions

 

[dawg2]

BTW, does anyone see the shear lunacy in these two facts?

Despite that the Governor requested $400,000 to replace 23 vehicles with mileage in excess of 135,000, the General Assembly appropriated $100,000 to replace 6 vehicles with mileage in excess of 135,000

Despite that the Governor requested $675,000 to fill 23 vacant positions, the General assembly appropriated $450,000 for 10 vacant positions

I see instead of 23 vehicles at $17,391 they are going to get 6 vehicles for $16,666.

Instead of 23 jobs @$29,348 they will get 10 @$45,000

 

[Branchminnow]

This thread and the lack of activity on the other threads where I have posted the FY2009 budget info is symptomatic of the true problem.

While we as a group were quite energized by the goring of our ox in the licensing deal, no one seems to be excited by the fact that the Governor had asked for a little more money in his budget for a change and the Legislature has seen fit to deny the request!

Where is the outrage?!?!?!

great thoughts Jeff, great answers given your last statement/question absolutely sums it up.