|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 8, 2007 22:29:15 GMT -5
I think there is an attrition rate that is figured in. 2 or 3 percent loss in nuumbers each year. I guess that is for hunters that quit or die off.
.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Jan 8, 2007 23:41:33 GMT -5
I'm not sure who chastised you but there is no loss of federal dollars on the lifetime licenses. They are reported annually to the feds and using actuarial tables they return the same money to Indiana that they would have gotten if these had been regular license holders. This is a non-issue on the LTL's. Jack I asked about this when the LL's went out a few years ago. There IS a federal money loss. DNR can only count the LL holder for so many years, according to the feds. Not for the holder's whole life. Yup. That would be the acturial tables I refered to. They can't poll each Lifetime License holder to see who's dead or alive so they use the insurance companies actuarial tables to "estimate" who's still going. The info (if you really want to see it) is available through the DNR's Department of Fish & Wildlife. I can get you the name of the person reasponsible and his phone number if you wish to verify this. Jack
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jan 11, 2007 8:13:35 GMT -5
If people are that worried about the state losing money due to LL, perhaps the worried LL holders could buy a couple of deer tags every year to help defray costs. A Very good idea. And pretty much defeats the purpose of buying a LL , stupid idea . I agonized long and hard before buying mine , but once I did buy it there was a very clear understanding between me and the IDNR that I would not have to buy tags anymore . Otherwise nobody would have an incentive to buy one in the first place . If you're so worried about IDNR's revenue stream then how about supporting doubling the license fees for everyone ala the Michigan model ? Didn't think so ... Rather than attacking those who were smart enough to recognize the best deal in hunting and penalizing us with some rinky dink fee perhaps the state should do far more than it has been to promote the sport among the youth of our state and through non-resident recruiting . Adding HE to the schools as an elective would be a fantastic idea since it directly recruits the very ones needed to reverse the decline in our numbers , the youth hunter . It would also simplify and improve the currently cumbersome problem of access to HE . Let's face it , most kids won't spend 8-16 hours in a HE class , but spread over a semester it would be far more palatable and even allow for some time to be spent teaching the basic outdoor skills needed to hunt and fish . Probably the single best thing that could be done to help keep the IDNR budget from hemmorhaging would be to remove their budget from the General Fund so that the Legislature would no longer be able to pillage it every time they wanted some extra pork barrel funding , make their budget dedicated only to their mission construct in much the same way that LL funds are to theirs . This measure alone , hopefully enforced by the state Constitution in conjunction with a protection of hunting and fishing rights , would do vastly more to help their budget than penny pinching LL holders could ever hope to achieve .
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Jan 11, 2007 11:08:53 GMT -5
kevin - ok good idea. You've been selected to go to the legislature and get this done. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. The legislature controls the purse strings of every state agency and will NEVER relinquinsh that control.
Jack
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Jan 11, 2007 21:44:45 GMT -5
So lets make it simple. Reintroduce the LL with the annual registration fee. If you don't use the LL that year you pay nothing. If you want to use it, pay the fee. Hmmmm-THAT wasn`t the deal when I plunked down over $1,500-read that again-OVER $1,500 The bargain for my $1,500 was never having to buy another Indiana hunting/fishing license or stamps, so unless the registration fee you`re proposing is only for the new LL licenses the answer would be a big negatory.
|
|
|
Post by danf on Jan 11, 2007 22:47:06 GMT -5
His statement specifically says, "REINTRODUCE the LL with the restration fee". I don't see anything there about tacking it on to those already in existence.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jan 12, 2007 7:34:39 GMT -5
If you're so worried about IDNR's revenue stream then how about supporting doubling the license fees for everyone ala the Michigan model ? Didn't think so ... I am NOT one of the people worried about the DNR's finances. I was referring to the LL holders on this site who were against the possibility of allowing them to be sold again. They are the ones voicing concerns about finances. Rather than attacking those who were smart enough to recognize the best deal in hunting I'm pretty sure most of us recognized what a great deal it was, however, not all of us were financially capable of aquiring one.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jan 12, 2007 7:45:39 GMT -5
kevin - ok good idea. You've been selected to go to the legislature and get this done. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. The legislature controls the purse strings of every state agency and will NEVER relinquinsh that control. Jack I don't doubt that you're right Jack , but at some point in the very foreseeable future the Legislature is gonna have to get off the pot and figure out some way to keep IDNR solvent before they're no longer able to do their job . Our parks are deteriorating rapidly , new hunters aren't exactly falling out of the sky , and they can't simply keep raising license fees without eventually pricing themselves out of what has now become a very competitve market . Hunting and fishing , sad to say , are now big business , and the soul of any business in this country is competition . According to many on this very board we're seriously behind all other states in hunting value and losing ground annually . The Legislature will eventually either have to protect IDNR's budget from themselves or find them a new source of funds (which they'll plunder anyway) before the point of diminishing returns begins to drive potential revenue to our neighboring states . Either way they can't leave their heads in the sand forever .
|
|
|
Post by greenhunter on Jan 14, 2007 16:18:04 GMT -5
I would like to buy a LTL for my grandson. I can afford it and I know it will something he will have to remember me by after I'm gone.
|
|
|
Post by bschwein on Jan 15, 2007 16:36:10 GMT -5
Did they ever make a public announcement about dropping LTL's or was it word of mouth?
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 15, 2007 18:25:52 GMT -5
Did they ever make a public announcement about dropping LTL's or was it word of mouth? They isssued a press release. Sometimes the outdoor newspaper writers pick this stuff up and convey it to the public and sometimes they don't. The DNR cant tell them what to print and what not to print. I've got mixed emotions about this whole thing. I'd like to see Indiana have a Lifetime License system in palce, but I also know how hard up the IDNR is for money. Maybe a yearly Sportsman's License is the way to go? .
|
|
|
Post by joen on Jan 18, 2007 20:38:04 GMT -5
Have every hunter get a hip number then they are counted.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jan 19, 2007 7:03:19 GMT -5
Have every hunter get a hip number then they are counted. Good idea, anyone buying license would automatically be counted if the HIP# was required for purchase.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Jan 19, 2007 11:30:08 GMT -5
What about the lifetime license guys who don't have a need for HIP#?
Jack
|
|
|
Post by hotshot on Jan 23, 2007 13:13:22 GMT -5
One of the money losing parts of the issue concerned life-timers not being counted as licensed hunters when it came to pitt-rob act $$. As I understand those of us with life licenses aren't counted. An easy way to keep me and others counted is to track licenses via soc security numbers. As long as the hunter pays social secuirty tax he is counted- then until soc security money is nolonger payed that individual he or she is counted.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 23, 2007 18:38:29 GMT -5
The total of LL is 43,000+ . They are counted as yearly license numbers for P-R funds.. That number does go down each year as some of us old coots are dying off.
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Jan 24, 2007 19:49:33 GMT -5
What about the lifetime license guys who don't have a need for HIP#? Jack What am I missing Jack? Why wouldn`t a Lifetime License holder need a HIP number? EVERYONE hunting migratory birds is required to have this.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Jan 24, 2007 21:13:56 GMT -5
Not everyone hunts migratory birds.
|
|
|
Post by jackc99 on Jan 24, 2007 21:55:37 GMT -5
Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jan 29, 2007 14:11:56 GMT -5
Not everyone hunts migratory birds. I don't, and don't have any plans to do so, I have a LL.
|
|