Data for hunting licenses sold over 50 years

[Andy 3F]

Not sure if any ones interested but I like seeing "the numbers" on certain things and its interesting to see how many hunting licenses sold from the 1950's to Today. Its interesting to see what the cost was and how many hunters were active for the year. Hunters contributed 821 million dollars to conservation through licenses and fee's in 2015

 

http://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/LicenseInfo/Hunting.htm

Edited December 2, 2015 by Andy 3F

[NFA-ADK]

Some interesting data.

[The_Field_Ager]

License holders have declined from 998,448 in 1958 to 535,915 in 2015

 

 

[turkeyfeathers]

License holders have declined from 998,448 in 1958 to 535,915 in 2015

That's crazy. I would have bet the house it would be other way around. Here you go. I'll repost this pic

Edited December 2, 2015 by turkeyfeathers

[Doc]

License holders have declined from 998,448 in 1958 to 535,915 in 2015

Check out the NYS number from 1958 vs, 1959. I believe there is some kind of mistake there or the numbers were arrived at with some factor that is not present in any of the other years.

NYS:

1958 ----998,448

1959-----700,010

Almost a 300,000 difference in one year. Is that even possible?

That huge difference is way out of scale with the rest of the chart. There are other anomalies that look a bit unusual but nothing as gross as that difference between the two years. It would be interesting to see what was going on during some of these licensing years where there were big gains or big losses. Perhaps there is something to be learned there.

 

I did a spread sheet that showed the variations from one year to the next. Unfortunately the columns and rows lose their format and are unreadable in this messaging system.

[The_Field_Ager]

hmmm.  

[Five Seasons]

Colorado must charge an arm and a leg. low numbers and most income.

[Andy 3F]

Colorado must charge an arm and a leg. low numbers and most income.

 

Yeah and now with legalized pot they'll all be too paranoid to go outside.

[chas0218]

Anyone notice the amount of revenue? 27 million dollars from just license sales. Wow where is it all going?

[Andy 3F]

DEC NY web site says

 

"Approximately 1.2 million people purchase hunting, fishing, and trapping licenses each year, and sporting license sales generate approximately $42 million annually in revenue used to manage New York's fish and wildlife resources and their habitats, as well as to improve access to those resources."

 

How ever they don't give a break down of where the money is going. How much does it actually cost to maintain a wilderness area? Probably not $42 million.....

[mike rossi]

Anyone notice the amount of revenue? 27 million dollars from just license sales. Wow where is it all going?  

 

By law, hunting and fishing license revenue can only be used to fund the Bureau of wildlife, fisheries, and marine resources.

 

You are not seriously asking for an itemized breakdown are you? If that is your question, I would say file a FOIL request to the State Comptroller or the DEC....

Edited December 4, 2015 by mike rossi

[chas0218]

By law, hunting and fishing license revenue can only be used to fund the Bureau of wildlife, fisheries, and marine resources.

 

You are not seriously asking for an itemized breakdown are you? If that is your question, I would say file a FOIL request to the State Comptroller or the DEC....

No I'm not but why are they always complaining about not having enough money? Everything done has to be done via bid so I would think there would be more money than they are leading onto or someone is padding their pockets when it comes to state bids and such.

 

In several areas where I have hunted state property they haven't invested any money into over the past 10 years or longer.

Edited December 4, 2015 by chas0218

[Andy 3F]

When dealing with that much funding it would be nice if they were more financially transparent. 

[mmkay]

I would assume most of the money ($27M)  goes to current and retired staff.

 

assume 400 current or retired employees that's an average of $67,000 each

 

but I'm only guessing

Edited December 4, 2015 by mmkay

[chas0218]

I would assume most of the money ($27M)  goes to current and retired staff.

 

assume 400 current or retired employees that's an average of $67,000 each

 

but I'm only guessing

I wouldn't think so being a pension that should be a totally separate fund (NYS retirement) and as the contibutor contributes so does the state but that still isn't much more than 3% of the salary for approximately 30 years.

Edited December 4, 2015 by chas0218

[mike rossi]

I have wondered how the pension is covered myself, but it is not in our favor from public approval if it is from taxes instead of license revenue..... 

 

They are complaining about money because less people are hunting and fishing, so they are facing less revenue. Also, even though 75% (national average and NY does a little better I would think)is paid by hunters - they need to get the other 25% from other sources. Some sources are grants - both game and non game, but sometimes they need to ask the Legislature and governor during the budget hearing each year.....

 

As far as transparency, there is a member on here, who is on the Conservation Fund Advisory Board. That board is mandated by law, and their function (briefly) is to "report periodically on the conservation fund". two or three of the accounts within the conservation fund are sporting license revenue. I will leave it to this member to enter this discussion if he wants. I will say CFAB minutes are online too. So that is a form of transparency I think? 

[mike rossi]

Just heard that state employees (not specifically dec) pay into a pool which is invested and return on investment covers penisons?  I really dont know all the details, if interested I am sure you can find out. 

[mike rossi]

A quick (real quick I was not thorough so dont take this as fact): The employee pays in about 3%, the investment dividends pays about 80%, and the state - read taxpayers pay about 17%.

 

So: Do not complain about non-game programs. If the bureau was only administering hunting programs and concerned only with game species, there would be an argument with merit. 

 

Also: the same thing said to non hunters can also be said to hunters: The non game grants, projects and research which are used primarily for non game also benefit game species and hunting. The vice versa is also true. 

 

 

[The_Field_Ager]

. 

 

Edited December 4, 2015 by Papist

[mike rossi]

This just came out:

 

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/reports/economic/sportpersons_11302015.pdf

 

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/dec15/120915.htm?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fiscal+oversight