Which MT legislator(s) should I contact? Student license problem

[Drake4]

Starting at the beginning of the school year seems pretty common sense to me. Semester starts in Sept...tag is valid in Sept.

If I had a vote, I'd get rid of the reduced student fees altogether.

 

[Straight Arrow]

"the only way to get changes made is to go to your legislator and propose it."
'Don't know if you read what I suggested about proposing it through a bonafide organization that can substantiate the need for the revision and propose it with some expectations of acceptance. But if it is really a widely felt opinion, then it may be worthy of consideration. If it's just something that bugs you and ten of your best friends ... then drop it.

One problem with the legislative process during the past couple of sessions, is that it was replete with bills proposed which are in the interest of a small minority or which are slanted sharply toward a special interest. Many are really bad bills, bad proposals, but all get way too much consideration and take up too much time and energy. The legislature has a relatively short window of time to consider the proposals and unfortunately many really good ideas die and many bad ideas thrive merely because of time constraints. FWP, wildlife, and hunting in general have been besieged by an onslaught of proposals not in the best interest of Montana sportsmen during the past several sessions. This backlash at least in part reflects a very defensive attitude. You chose the least likely audience for support, in my opinion.

Again, first substantiate that it is a widespread issue and many others agree with your proposal, that it's not just a pet peeve, then promote it appropriately.

 

[mtlion]

Redcued price student tags need to go same with the new MT born tags. Even though my brother is getting one and it will be our first chance to hunt together in years, it is draining a budget that's already 'bout dry. The thing about both of those tags is there are no limit on the number sold...

 

[PFUNK]

It makes perfect sense...

If you're a NR student, you dont get a break on tags until after September. If you want to fish between March 1 and Sept. 1st...you do so as a regular NR and purchase the appropriate NR license.

Simple.

The reasons for it are justified as well, "put yourself in the other shoes"...

Its embarrassing what the U of M has become...

You say it yourself... "you do so as a regular NR"... so why the point of the NR student license? You are killing the whole point of the student license by saying "well you gotta buy the regular nonresident license anyhow". Is she a nonresident student right now at this time? Yes. Can she use the nonresident student fishing license now at this time? No. That makes perfect sense?

I get that, in its current form, this is how the law is worded... so if by making sense you mean that FWP is following how this law was written in, then yes it makes sense. You don't have to simply restate the law and show that FWP is following it accordingly. I get it. When I say it doesn't make sense, I mean why offer a student license and then say you can't use that license for a full year like every other fishing license is good for? No, instead lets make that license good for half the year, even if they are a student the entire year and the next 3 years to come. Obviously you are way too worried that a student might get a couple extra months fishing in Montana after they have graduated and are no longer a student. Boy wouldn't that be the end of the world. No, instead lets tag them for an extra $70 bucks cuz hell, why not? But graduation shouldn't be a problem anyhow considering what an embarrassment the U of M has become right?

 

[PFUNK]

Starting at the beginning of the school year seems pretty common sense to me. Semester starts in Sept...tag is valid in Sept.

If I had a vote, I'd get rid of the reduced student fees altogether.

No opposition to the September start date at all! I just don't get why that license is not good from September-Aug. 31 instead of ending in February and then not available for purchase again until September. You may still be a student during that gap, yet your student fishing license is no good. That is the part I don't agree with.

 

[PFUNK]

"the only way to get changes made is to go to your legislator and propose it."
'Don't know if you read what I suggested about proposing it through a bonafide organization that can substantiate the need for the revision and propose it with some expectations of acceptance. But if it is really a widely felt opinion, then it may be worthy of consideration. If it's just something that bugs you and ten of your best friends ... then drop it.

One problem with the legislative process during the past couple of sessions, is that it was replete with bills proposed which are in the interest of a small minority or which are slanted sharply toward a special interest. Many are really bad bills, bad proposals, but all get way too much consideration and take up too much time and energy. The legislature has a relatively short window of time to consider the proposals and unfortunately many really good ideas die and many bad ideas thrive merely because of time constraints. FWP, wildlife, and hunting in general have been besieged by an onslaught of proposals not in the best interest of Montana sportsmen during the past several sessions. This backlash at least in part reflects a very defensive attitude. You chose the least likely audience for support, in my opinion.

Again, first substantiate that it is a widespread issue and many others agree with your proposal, that it's not just a pet peeve, then promote it appropriately.

I appreciate these comments and did read what you said. I was just stating that everyone recommends you go to your legislators when you feel there is an issue, whether it be straight to them or through an organization as a support team. Yet the first time I have considered pursuing something I feel worthy of changing, I get blown out of the water. I agree, audience probably isn't the most supportive, as I doubt there are many nonresident college students in here posting on the Montana elk hunting topics. Perhaps there is a student outdoorsman organization or something similar on campus here that may have out of state members. I don't know, but it may be worth looking into. If you feel like the legislative process is hampered by too many silly proposals, then I guess I will not pursue mine any farther (though I feel it is far from silly). I feel like if more thought had been put into this from the get go, it would not be an issue now. The original bill has great intent and is obviously beneficial. I just think it could be better. But if there are other more pertinent matters at hand that need attention, obviously I have no problem letting this one cook awhile. I still feel it is a valid argument worth consideration, and would love to see it changed in the future.

 

[BuzzH]

Really?

Its not about the money, but then you say, "No, instead lets tag them for an extra $70 bucks cuz hell, why not?

I agree, why not when the Residents are cutting you an $800 bill to hunt as a NR. Its just not good enough that a student saves over $800 off the backs of the Resident hunters...we need more.

And lets piss and moan about a whopping $70 that allows a NR student to fish 365 days...

What part of the fact that MT Residents are giving you the deal of the century dont you understand?

If you dont like the fees and rules, you have a few options.

1. Dont buy it until after September.

2. Move to another state.

3. Go back to your state of Residence and fish there.

4. Dont buy a MT license at all.

This is the exact reason why its just not possible to make some people happy...will find a bitch about everything.

 

[Straight Arrow]

You're right ... in view of the spectrum of real issues facing Montana wildlife, hunting, and FWP as an agency, this concern is trivial, probably doesn't affect alot of hunters / anglers, and doesn't deserve all this attention in the first place.

 

[Big Fin]

Hi PFunk,

Rather than tread the ground that's been laid out in terms of appropriateness of refunds, etc and the overall value you get from a license, there is one other item to consider:

FWP currently loses about $3 million per year in free and reduced cost licenses. Those are all due to legislators carrying special bills such as you are talking about. $3 million is 30% of the projected shortfall that FWP would have in FY 2015 if no license fee increases come forward in 2013.

That $3 million means fewer surveys on fisheries, flight counts for big game, and much needed salary increases. All of these free and reduced cost licenses have helped create a volitile funding environment for our wildlife managers.

If you are set on moving forward with something like this, I would suggest contacting Hellgate Hunters and Anglers in Missoula, and join up with them, ask their support, and if you find a legislator willing to do this, reach out to state wide hook and bullet organizations to garner their support. You'd be surprised when you come into a hearing and there's 30 people lined up to oppose your bill.

I'd also suggest including a component in the bill directing the legislature to make the bill revenue neutral and try to get a statutory appropriation for all free and reduced cost licenses so that upon receipt of the negative balance, that money is sent from the General Fund to the FWP General License account.

There is your answer PFunk. That is how you would go about getting that changed. Probably unlikely to get it changed if it costs the agency funds.

 

[PFUNK]

Really?

Its not about the money, but then you say, "No, instead lets tag them for an extra $70 bucks cuz hell, why not?

I agree, why not when the Residents are cutting you an $800 bill to hunt as a NR. Its just not good enough that a student saves over $800 off the backs of the Resident hunters...we need more.

And lets piss and moan about a whopping $70 that allows a NR student to fish 365 days...

What part of the fact that MT Residents are giving you the deal of the century dont you understand?

If you dont like the fees and rules, you have a few options.

1. Dont buy it until after September.

2. Move to another state.

3. Go back to your state of Residence and fish there.

4. Dont buy a MT license at all.

This is the exact reason why its just not possible to make some people happy...will find a bitch about everything.

I said it isn't about saving ME any money. I don't know how many times I gotta repeat it but it's about a confusing statute that ends up defeating its own purpose. I won't keep arguing on the board about it... I'll send you a message that you can do with as you please. To straight arrow, thanks for the remarks. It is appreciated. I do hope all the real pertinent issues facing FWP and the sportsmen of MT get addressed in a timely fashion as you all hope they do. Maybe then I will entertain the thought of pursuing this further.

 

[sweetnectar]

PFunk I agree that doesn't make sense the way it is. I like to see people getting into fishing and hunting and not having our system mess things up and cause discouragement. When organization get big then stupid rules and things come up that should be easily changed. However, the reality is that it seems to be a huge undertaking to get a simple thing changed like this. When I read others posts on here they seem to be more concerned about a different problem (funding for FWP) instead of a simple solution like you suggested with changing some dates.

 

[belly-deep]

don't know how many times I gotta repeat it but it's about a confusing statute that ends up defeating its own purpose.

The purpose was to give NR students a break on the price of big game tags.

 

[PFUNK]

The purpose was to give NR students a break on the price of big game tags.

And apparently fishing and upland game as well, or else they wouldn't be included I would presume?

Sweetnectar.... your post just brought on a huge sigh of relief that at least someone is understanding my frustration with this all. Everyone else wants to argue about cost. Fact is, the nonresident student license is already in place, but it just doesn't make sense the way it is. I don't want the licenses available for any cheaper than they are... it would just make so much more sense if the license was good for a full year, and if it isn't able to be purchased until september, then it shouldn't follow the same dates as the other fishing licenses that can be purchased ANYTIME. Simply changing it would suffice and keep these students from having to buy another license just to fish March 1st-September. Like you said it deters people from getting into the sport and a simple ammendment to change the dates would solve the problem. Yet people want to argue till they are blue in the face that it is just fine in its current form. I don't get how it is skin off of ANYONES back to get it changed.

 

[Ben Lamb]

PFunk I agree that doesn't make sense the way it is. I like to see people getting into fishing and hunting and not having our system mess things up and cause discouragement. When organization get big then stupid rules and things come up that should be easily changed. However, the reality is that it seems to be a huge undertaking to get a simple thing changed like this.

Absolutely agree. However, it's the Legislature who makes the rules in terms of license sales.You can't blame FWP for this. It's encouraging to see a college student want to get involved in the political process, and that should be encouraged.

When I read others posts on here they seem to be more concerned about a different problem (funding for FWP) instead of a simple solution like you suggested with changing some dates.

Things like this are additive. When you look at the big picture for funding, losing $3 million/year is a big deal. You have to look at the issues that changing dates, etc, cause in terms of cash flow and planning as well as the convenience for an admittedly very small constituency.

Plus, if we're trying to simplify the regs, then why would we change dates for just this license and create a second fishing season where only college NR would benefit? That creates more confusion than anything. Separating out the fishing license from the NR tags would make sense, but then you'd have the over 98% coming out complaining that their NR tag value just went down.

So now we're looking at restructuring the entire NR combo system. Which I'm ok with.

 

[BuzzH]

Easier fix is just do away with the NR student licenses...no more complaining and no date changing required.

If you want to hunt and fish as a NR, get in line with all the other NR's.

 

[mtlion]

Easier fix is just do away with the NR student licenses...no more complaining and no date changing required.

If you want to hunt and fish as a NR, get in line with all the other NR's.

So which legislator should I start writing to lay out my case that these NR college student tags are costing FWP money and should be repealed? I'm betting with the collective weight that gets thrown around here something could happen...:hump:

 

[WV Hunter]

Drop the fishing from the student license but don't drop the price

There, I fixed it, NEXT.........

 

[MattK]

MTlion-

So which legislator should I start writing to lay out my case that these NR college student tags are costing FWP money and should be repealed? I'm betting with the collective weight that gets thrown around here something could happen...

Since this is an election year, I should be getting a personal visit from the candidates for the state legislatures...they always ask me if I have any thoughts on legislation that needs to be passed. Now I have something to tell them...How the fishing licenses for NR students doesn't make sense...So they should get rid of all special NR prices for college students. I'm just concerned about fairness and equity. I wouldn't want to confuse any current college students with this confusing problem.

 

[shoots-straight]

Isn't this where they say: "Decretion is the better part of valor"?

 

[steamfitter]

I think its crazy they get a discount period. Before i moved to montana i would work in billings at the refineries for 6 mths at a time i was never allowed a cheap license consider yourself lucky you get a license for cheap even if its only from sept. to feb.