DEC Commissioner's Budget Testimony

[mike rossi]

Below, in italics, is an extraction from the DEC Commissioner's 2015-16 budget testimony. The reason I extracted that part is because the rest of the testimony is not directly related to wildlife and fisheries.  For those who want to read about other things in the DEC budget, here is the link:  http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/administration_pdf/budget2015.pdf

 

Working with the Conservation Fund Advisory Board, the budget continues to build on
Governor Cuomo’s Open for Fishing and Hunting initiative, which has reinvigorated New York
as a hunting and fishing destination and boosted tourism opportunities throughout the state. The
Executive Budget proposes to establish a new Habitat Conservation and Access Account which
will consist of revenue from habitat stamps and a portion of the revenue from lifetime license
sales to support the management, protection and restoration of fish and wildlife habitat and
related recreation. This infusion of funding will enable DEC to match federal Pittman-Robertson
funding that together will support 18 new DEC staff to undertake this work.
 

[landtracdeerhunter]

Great, more government jobs to fund. Doesn't Albany have enough employees already?

[mike rossi]

Great, more government jobs to fund. Doesn't Albany have enough employees already?

 

You must be referring to this part: "This infusion of funding will enable DEC to match federal Pittman-Robertson

funding that together will support 18 new DEC staff to undertake this work".

 

You think people would be more interested in the actual projects rather than the jobs they create. Especially people who are being addressed about the DEC budget. That is kind of perverted. Obviously the commissioner has political savvy and knows what is palatable and what is not... 

Edited January 29, 2015 by mike rossi

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Below, in italics, is an extraction from the DEC Commissioner's 2015-16 budget testimony. The reason I extracted that part is because the rest of the testimony is not directly related to wildlife and fisheries.  For those who want to read about other things in the DEC budget, here is the link:  http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/administration_pdf/budget2015.pdf

 

Working with the Conservation Fund Advisory Board, the budget continues to build on

Governor Cuomo’s Open for Fishing and Hunting initiative, which has reinvigorated New York

as a hunting and fishing destination and boosted tourism opportunities throughout the state. The

Executive Budget proposes to establish a new Habitat Conservation and Access Account which

will consist of revenue from habitat stamps and a portion of the revenue from lifetime license

sales to support the management, protection and restoration of fish and wildlife habitat and

related recreation. This infusion of funding will enable DEC to match federal Pittman-Robertson

funding that together will support 18 new DEC staff to undertake this work.

 

So now take this post and put it over with the 1 buck rule, Ar, shorter season posts and say its not about making ny into a come to place to hunt big deer. Very few out of staters will come to another state and pay the price just to shoot..Any Deer.  I know t say fishing and hunting but what other animal are they going to say..Come to Ny to hunt?   We have the fisheries wrapped up for sure. Not much better anywhere for an area to take all kinds of game fish but besides Yotes i dont think we have much on the hunting end. Some of us have great turkey and waterfowl for a short time of the season but over all they will have to advertise Big Deer to boost tourism in hunting.

[gjs4]

Is this a campaign ad for Andy? Are we better for being stricter with laws? Why are there so many funds by proportion going to the state for funding and so little of a return? Big focus on down state and no focus on those paying in.... Do the math here folks

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Curmudgeon]

Last I knew there was ~$22 million in PR money for NYS that was doing nothing. A 25% match sounds like a good return on investment.

[mike rossi]

Last I knew there was ~$22 million in PR money for NYS that was doing nothing. A 25% match sounds like a good return on investment.

 

You are preaching to the choir, although I have been assuming not actually following, which is quite foolish I admit....

 

 The state is eligible for that much grant money.... But to take advantage of it they need to devise restoration or conservation plans, apply for individual grants, and  pledge matching cost share.

 

If you are saying the state has received X dollars and has not launched certain initiatives for which they received grants,, that is different, and I would say that is another issue... 

 

Maybe the state requirements for the DEC to hire, an entirely different issue not related to PR funding, enters the equation? I dont really know or care, but I do care if the state is not taking advantage of conservation funding. If cfab or lobby opines somethng is "too green" because they don't have a clue, we are in a sorry state,,,, 

[mike rossi]

You are preaching to the choir, although I have been assuming not actually following, which is quite foolish I admit....

 

 The state is eligible for that much grant money.... But to take advantage of it they need to devise restoration or conservation plans, apply for individual grants, and  pledge matching cost share.

 

If you are saying the state has received X dollars and has not launched certain initiatives for which they received grants,, that is different, and I would say that is another issue... 

 

Maybe the state requirements for the DEC to hire, an entirely different issue not related to PR funding, enters the equation? I dont really know or care, but I do care if the state is not taking advantage of conservation funding. If cfab or lobby opines somethng is "too green" because they don't have a clue, we are in a sorry state,,,, 

 

Wait a second, I need to post-script that.... Are you confusing the state conservation fund with the state's PR eligibility award? Hoarding of the CF is related, but not the same, never the less it doesn't really alter the point or change the premise, but just want to be clear... 

Edited February 3, 2015 by mike rossi

[Curmudgeon]

Wait a second, I need to post-script that.... Are you confusing the state conservation fund with the state's PR eligibility award? Hoarding of the CF is related, but not the same, never the less it doesn't really alter the point or change the premise, but just want to be clear... 

 

I was talking about PR money. I was told that one of the problems within the agency is a lack of staff to do the paperwork for projects. This may or may not be true. I was advocating for something at the time.

 

[mike rossi]

I was talking about PR money. I was told that one of the problems within the agency is a lack of staff to do the paperwork for projects. This may or may not be true. I was advocating for something at the time.

 

 

I guess I my mind just wanders out into space when I hear the staffing / budget woes... Not sure I even know what I am talking about. I just found it interesting that a new combined account was formed within the CF. 

 

Boring topic, change the subject, what project were you advocating for if you dont mind saying? 

 

Edited February 3, 2015 by mike rossi

[Curmudgeon]

I guess I my mind just wanders out into space when I hear the staffing / budget woes... Not sure I even know what I am talking about. I just found it interesting that a new combined account was formed within the CF. 

 

Boring topic, change the subject, what project were you advocating for if you dont mind saying? 

 

I was trying to get funding for a grad student at ESF to study NYS wintering Golden Eagles. We have more than met the PR match already.

 

[mike rossi]

I was trying to get funding for a grad student at ESF to study NYS wintering Golden Eagles. We have more than met the PR match already.

 

 

They are migratory, so even if the focus is wintering goldens in NY, perhaps you can ask a different state  to apply for a PR grant to fund this study? That is purely a guess, but I would be interested in the answer.... 

[Curmudgeon]

They are migratory, so even if the focus is wintering goldens in NY, perhaps you can ask a different state  to apply for a PR grant to fund this study? That is purely a guess, but I would be interested in the answer.... 

 

Eventually, maybe. NYS has not been ruled out as an option. There are a couple of complications that may go away over the next year or so.

 

[gjs4]

Would love to see the simple comparison of hunting dollars received versus invested (let alone how)..... Guessing we would be sick to our stomachs

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mike rossi]

Would love to see the simple comparison of hunting dollars received versus invested (let alone how)..... Guessing we would be sick to our stomachs

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

What exactly do you mean by "invested"? The reason I ask is that Life time License revenue has been being turned over to the state comptroller and invested in the STIP. I just read the "first" dividend was (recently) received and it was something like $250,000...

 

You probably were not aware that life time license revenue was treated that way, as most people do not. You probably were referring to how much license dollars are used for conservation? One of these days I am going to look that up, but for now I can tell you this...

 

NY is among the states with the largest hunting license revenue and open land available for hunting. The license revenue, with a questionable exception to life time license revenue, is put into a state conservation fund. By law, that fund cannot be swept or diverted - hence the reason the investment of lifetime license revenue is questionable. This law also limits the use of this fund to a defined range of uses. The last I payed attention, about a year or two ago, the state conservation fund was something like 30 million dollars. As a matter of fact, state organizations representing hunters testified that since the conservation fund was so large, that they recommend a reduction in the price of sporting licenses, which as you know was indeed granted. 

 

Based on a formula, NY is eligible for federal grants under the Pittman-Robertson program for up to something like $20 million. In order to access those funds, the state must submit individual grant proposals. If those proposals are excepted, the Pittman-Robertson program is a cost sharing program - the state must put up 25% of the total cost of the project to receive federal funding. 

 

A couple of unexplained mysteries:

 

Does the DEC have enough staff to be able to use all of the available funding? If they do not, why do they not increase their staff? Pittman-Robertson grants may be used to pay staff, when that staffing need is for a PR funded project. Perhaps it is a hang up with the state's procedure for hiring new personal that has nothing to do with the CF and PR program? 

 

Is it politics rather than staffing? Are elected politicians trying to twist the arms of the other party? Or, is it the politics among the various advisory boards and organizations, particularly what is called  " The Summit"? "The Summit" is the NY State Conservation Council; the Conservation Alliance of NY; and the Fish and Wildlife Management Board. No, I am not kidding... Do these entities block or fail to be enthused about DEC grant proposals to the PR program because they think they are too "green"? Are these entities thinking they are being good republicans by hoarding the conservation fund, especially because of objection for green uses? About 1% by law can be used for hunter education. A small percentage can be used to construct shooting facilities (and that is in addition to the recent state grants for shooting ranges). Another percentage can be used for things like parking and boat ramps. Perhaps The Summit. CFAB, and other connected entities fail to support anything besides hunter ed; shooting ranges; and access facilities? I hope not, but that is something I suspect. 

 

What about land acquisition? Well the Environmental Protection Fund is as big or bigger than the conservation fund, but it is not funded by hunting revenue. So if the DEC wants to buy land it can leverage federal PR grants with the EPF as well as the CF. Just remember that when you boast to an anti hunter that you pay for conservation lands... Non government organizations might also provide the DEC with all or some of the 25%, some of those organizations are not hunting organizations, as a matter of fact, most of them are not... Again, know what you are talking about... 

 

Furthermore, the DEC has other federal cost sharing grant programs that are not funded by hunters which work like the Pittman-Robertson program... 

 

I am not going to make accusations or speculations, all I am saying that from the bits and pieces of information we all get it sounds like it is not the entire picture, I will end it with this: The NY pheasant stocking program is only 1.37% of the Fish, Wildlife, and Marine Resources expenditures and that is only .05% of the DEC's total budget. NY reports that it has 60,000 pheasant hunters. I don't have economic data on NY, but NJ reports that its pheasant program serves 12,000 pheasant hunters and generated $2.5 million dollars annually in general economic activity. Pheasant stocking also increases early succession habitat and thereby biodiversity. So leave the pheasant farm alone and out of conflation... 

Edited February 15, 2015 by mike rossi

[gjs4]

As this progressed I became more and more with you. Simply put hunting dollars are not appropriated enough to hunting land. Before you tell me how much land we have- base it on non mountainous (aka game rich ) areas.

A few aspects are mysterious and feel they're that way for a reason. All we've heard about lately of deer management. I worked for the DEC and can tell you they do not have adequate resources or accurate methods for making any decisions with regard to deer.... But that's the species that gives them 65% of their license revenue.

[mike rossi]

I have to razz you a little, but admit I am only half joking --  The way you guys post, you appear to be professional internet trolls hired to get people to generate content which in turn generates revenue for someone.... Your post can be replied to in multiple contexts... The hunting community has never learned to focus, and it continues to cost them... 

 

For the purpose of the Pittman-Robertson the formula does not consider how productive the habitat is, but the total acreage available to hunters. Your implication about habitat productivity can expand on a number of subjects only mildly relevant to the topic of this post. Important topics, but not subjects relevant here nor which will interest most of the hook and bullet crowd which patronize this site. 

 

You may know more about the DEC's ability to survey deer populations than I do, but I will give you my take. Most hunting chatter shows hunters have a poor grasp on population biology and are uninformed. For example, whitetail deer management prescriptions have recently changed, nationwide, and these new parameters are not going to please many hunters. Second, not only does the DEC use the same proven survey methods used everywhere else, the whitetail is a ridiculously simple animal to monitor. Managing whitetails is about as idiot proof as it gets. I think the DEC is adept enough to manage whitetails... Whenever there is a social component, you cannot please everybody. Whenever you have put ecology first and are opposed by individuals, organizations, and industries that want their own interests prioritized before ecological soundness you get unhappy faces... I don't find the DEC better or worse than other state wildlife agencies, if I find any deficiency with them, it in that they are less likely to stand up to the public and industry, including the hunting community, than other state agencies do. They fail to say, listen, WE are the professionals, not you. We want your opinions, but we know what opinions have merit and which do not... The DEC does not do that, however. I am all for not being rude, but at a certain point things exceed ridiculous... 

 

 

Edited February 16, 2015 by mike rossi

[phade]

I have to razz you a little, but admit I am only half joking -- The way you guys post, you appear to be professional internet trolls hired to get people to generate content which in turn generates revenue for someone.... Your post can be replied to in multiple contexts... The hunting community has never learned to focus, and it continues to cost them...

For the purpose of the Pittman-Robertson the formula does not consider how productive the habitat is, but the total acreage available to hunters. Your implication about habitat productivity can expand on a number of subjects only mildly relevant to the topic of this post. Important topics, but not subjects relevant here nor which will interest most of the hook and bullet crowd which patronize this site.

You may know more about the DEC's ability to survey deer populations than I do, but I will give you my take. Most hunting chatter shows hunters have a poor grasp on population biology and are uninformed. For example, whitetail deer management prescriptions have recently changed, nationwide, and these new parameters are not going to please many hunters. Second, not only does the DEC use the same proven survey methods used everywhere else, the whitetail is a ridiculously simple animal to monitor. Managing whitetails is about as idiot proof as it gets. I think the DEC is adept enough to manage whitetails... Whenever there is a social component, you cannot please everybody. Whenever you have put ecology first and are opposed by individuals, organizations, and industries that want their own interests prioritized before ecological soundness you get unhappy faces... I don't find the DEC better or worse than other state wildlife agencies, if I find any deficiency with them, it in that they are less likely to stand up to the public and industry, including the hunting community, than other state agencies do. They fail to say, listen, WE are the professionals, not you. We want your opinions, but we know what opinions have merit and which do not... The DEC does not do that, however. I am all for not being rude, but at a certain point things exceed ridiculous...

Mike you post great things but the DEC could easily staff to the resources that generate revenue with the funds available. Such staffing could then work toward improved management of the resource.

For whatever reason, agency, law, politics, etc. it is not done. When you dont have the warm bodies, not much else gets done. Its the lowest hole in the bucket.

[mike rossi]

Mike you post great things but the DEC could easily staff to the resources that generate revenue with the funds available. Such staffing could then work toward improved management of the resource.

For whatever reason, agency, law, politics, etc. it is not done. When you dont have the warm bodies, not much else gets done. Its the lowest hole in the bucket.

 

 

What specifically do you believe is not  getting done? 

[phade]

What specifically do you believe is not getting done?

I dont have much time to get into it but theres alot that is not getting done right. The QDMA surveyed the agencies this past year on the importance of some of the problems facing deer management in their state. NY ranked their order as deer overpopulation (ie controlling numbers where there are too many doe), bad legislation, and third, too few deer specific employees.

Staffing is a top three concern for the dec, along with bad legislation. Safe to say if the agency feels that way...probably a legit problem because i suspect the hunting public would likely agree they are understaffed.

[mike rossi]

I dont have much time to get into it but theres alot that is not getting done right. The QDMA surveyed the agencies this past year on the importance of some of the problems facing deer management in their state. NY ranked their order as deer overpopulation (ie controlling numbers where there are too many doe), bad legislation, and third, too few deer specific employees.

Staffing is a top three concern for the dec, along with bad legislation. Safe to say if the agency feels that way...probably a legit problem because i suspect the hunting public would likely agree they are understaffed.

 

Well, when you get freed up and have the time, I would be interested in hearing it.  From what I see from the DEC,  none of their deer project  goals are going to excite the hook and bullet crowd: 

 

1) Update inventories on deer wintering areas

2) Develop a CLIMATE CHANGE model

3) Do more social studies

 

I also see they have a deer team of 4 and a big game team of 15. That probably does not include technicians.  An inventory of deer winter areas across the state or the mountain areas of the state would indeed be a big project...