How F&G really feels about NH Clubs and the "SCHEME" aka Registration Discount

[Freedom Rider 209]

Fish and Game Response.pdf

[WINNOCTURN 60]

As they say in Mass, IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN!

Rob, do you remember Ben Dover?

How do we get the RSA 215-C:39 CHANGED OR REMOVED? 

 

TITLE XVIII
FISH AND GAME

CHAPTER 215-C
SNOWMOBILES

Section 215-C:39

    215-C:39 Registration Fees. – The fees to be collected under this chapter are as follows:
    I. Individual resident registration--$90 for each snowmobile registration upon presentation of a valid driver's license issued to a New Hampshire resident 18 years of age or older. An individual resident registering a snowmobile who provides proof, at the time of registration, that the individual is a member of an organized New Hampshire nonprofit snowmobile club which is a member of the New Hampshire Snowmobile Association shall pay $60 for each snowmobile.

 

 

Start at Section 215-C:39

 

Link to Complete version of Chapter 215-C

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xviii/215-c/215-c-mrg.htm

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 21, 2018 by WINNOCTURN

[rivercat 119]

John  there are few words in 215-C:39  Id like to "dissect" for you, the first word is "PROOF" 

I will comment that in the USA there are 154 men named GEORGE FORMAN  I do not know how many snowmobile in NH however,,,  there are some John Smiths too,, maybe a SR, Jr, and third?

With the system that has been in use, there is PROOF that abuse of the system was happening.

How FAIR was the abuse to the people that have been paying (truly joining a NH club) right along?  

The next words are THAT THEY ARE A MEMBER, if the only way to stop people from trying to beat the system is to require a voucher how is it different for needing a boarding pass to get on an airplane, an arm band for a concert or grass drags or your local fair, or a ticket to the movies or theatre?  Its just a way of filtering out the people that have been trying to beat the "system"  

My best advice to those who are offended and upset is to  man up and pay the longer price without joining a club to register your sleds, which simply HELPS our sport more,  

As for myself I am active at multiple levels, now and assistant director, VP at my club, near perfect attendance at trail work projects, and donate my equipment in every way possible as needed for trail use. I also run groomer as well as store one groomer at my farm. There is no need for "applause" just take 10 seconds and ask yourself if PROOF of MEMBERSHIP is JUST MAYBE going to work? 

For ANYBODY that is convinced their club membership is going to disappear,,,, I simply want to ask,,, disappear to WHERE? 

 

 

[Nor'easter 21]

I remember 20 years ago when Nascar races where hard to get a ticket at any track …. fast forward to today, you can get a good ticket day of the show anywhere  ..

change the rules, and the hierarchy and a generational change to boot .... poof  … sport is changed forever, and not for the better. JMO

I only plan on riding a sled a couple more years and, then I am moving south …  politics in anything is BAD … period. 

I will support my local club only, whatever it costs.    Not the NHSA any longer. I don't need your discount

Thank you 

concerned member  

[jhwentworth 307]

On 7/21/2018 at 3:30 PM, Freedom Rider said:

Fish and Game Response.pdf

When considering the F&G response you should also consider that F&G relies on OHRV registrations and transfers for 34% of agency revenues. It seems reasonable that they would need to keep this fact in mind when crafting their proposals. The Union Leader carried a story today that focused on management of our state's wildlife titled "Whose wildlife is it , anyway?", but brought up the issue of agency funding by writing "A department once dedicated exclusively to hunting and fishing activities is now charged with search and rescue, marine fisheries, public boat access, nuisance wildlife control, off-highway recreational vehicles (OHRV), environmental review, non-game and endangered wildlife management, habitat conservation and public outreach. The largest source of Fish and Game revenue is now from OHRV registrations and transfers (34 percent), followed by federal funds (33 percent), and then licenses and associated fees (20 percent)."

 

[WINNOCTURN 60]

RiverCat    (27 Hours and no reply)

 

"With the system that has been in use, there is PROOF that abuse of the system was happening"

"I AM CALLING YOU OUT ON THIS ONE, REACH FOR YOUR GUN!" NOT ALL THE COWBOYS ARE IN LOUDEN TODAY!"

 

I CHALANGE YOU TO SHOW ME/EVERYONE THAT PROOF!

IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE 2012 F&G AUDIT THAT JOHN WIMSATT QUOATED, IT DOES NOT EXIST IN THAT AUDIT!

THE MAIN BODY OF THE AUDIT WAS ABOUT REGISTRATION DECALS. THERE WERE NUMEROUSE BOOKS OF DECALS THAT COULD NOT BE ACCOUNTED FOR.

ONE INSIDENT THAT WAS QUTOED ABOUT IN THE AUDIT WAS ABOUT 2 BLOCKS OF DECALS BEING FOUND IN A CLEANING CLOSIT.

THE OTHER COMMENT WAS THAT F&G WERE LAX IN THE NUMBER AND FREQUANCY THAT F&G PERFORMED ANY AUDITS.

I CHALANGE YOU TO POST YOUR PROOF OF YOUR SUPOSED ABUSE!!!

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

FISH AND GAME DEPARTMENT

OFF HIGHWAY RECREATIONAL VEHICLE

REGISTRATION PROGRAM

INTERNAL CONTROL OVER REVENUE

NOVEMBER 2012

                                                                                                                                FG_OHRV_2012 Audit.pdf
 

MY FINDINGS OF THE 2012 F&G Audit THAT JOHN WIMSATT QUOATED.

2012 F&G Audit Findings.pdf

I am mad as hell and I am not going to take IT any more!!!!

 

Edited July 24, 2018 by WINNOCTURN

[RK-SXViper 144]

2 hours ago, jhwentworth said:

When considering the F&G response you should also consider that F&G relies on OHRV registrations and transfers for 34% of agency revenues. It seems reasonable that they would need to keep this fact in mind when crafting their proposals. The Union Leader carried a story today that focused on management of our state's wildlife titled "Whose wildlife is it , anyway?", but brought up the issue of agency funding by writing "A department once dedicated exclusively to hunting and fishing activities is now charged with search and rescue, marine fisheries, public boat access, nuisance wildlife control, off-highway recreational vehicles (OHRV), environmental review, non-game and endangered wildlife management, habitat conservation and public outreach. The largest source of Fish and Game revenue is now from OHRV registrations and transfers (34 percent), followed by federal funds (33 percent), and then licenses and associated fees (20 percent)."

 

This has no real bearing on the discount program. F&G gets the same amount from both club members and non club members registrations so their revenue should not change.

[jhwentworth 307]

6 minutes ago, RK-SXViper said:

This has no real bearing on the discount program. F&G gets the same amount from both club members and non club members registrations so their revenue should not change.

Yes, that's true, but F&G has become dependent on that revenue and doesn't want to rock the boat. They wouldn't want the registration process to be transferred to another agency ((DMV?) and be left with only the enforcement piece. DMV currently does boats, why wouldn't another form of recreational vehicle fall under them? Doesn't marine law enforcement fall under Department of Safety? Why wouldn't OHRV fit under Safety as well? I'd say that F&G's top priority is to keep the business in-house, and will work with the people who can help keep it that way.

[dirt dummy 105]

7 hours ago, rivercat said:

John  there are few words in 215-C:39  Id like to "dissect" for you, the first word is "PROOF" 

I will comment that in the USA there are 154 men named GEORGE FORMAN  I do not know how many snowmobile in NH however,,,  there are some John Smiths too,, maybe a SR, Jr, and third?

With the system that has been in use, there is PROOF that abuse of the system was happening.

How FAIR was the abuse to the people that have been paying (truly joining a NH club) right along?  

The next words are THAT THEY ARE A MEMBER, if the only way to stop people from trying to beat the system is to require a voucher how is it different for needing a boarding pass to get on an airplane, an arm band for a concert or grass drags or your local fair, or a ticket to the movies or theatre?  Its just a way of filtering out the people that have been trying to beat the "system"  

My best advice to those who are offended and upset is to  man up and pay the longer price without joining a club to register your sleds, which simply HELPS our sport more,  

As for myself I am active at multiple levels, now and assistant director, VP at my club, near perfect attendance at trail work projects, and donate my equipment in every way possible as needed for trail use. I also run groomer as well as store one groomer at my farm. There is no need for "applause" just take 10 seconds and ask yourself if PROOF of MEMBERSHIP is JUST MAYBE going to work? 

For ANYBODY that is convinced their club membership is going to disappear,,,, I simply want to ask,,, disappear to WHERE? 

 

 

Don't forget to throw in the Hero bridge buddy! lol

[Skip 262]

22 hours ago, dirt dummy said:

Don't forget to throw in the Hero bridge buddy! lol

I’m going to start a go-fund me page so we can cover the cost of attaching a third arm to Dave. That way he can pat himself on the back while still eating, swimming, snowmobiling or signing autographs at “Hero’s” bridge!

[John Mercier 36]

On 7/22/2018 at 6:25 PM, jhwentworth said:

When considering the F&G response you should also consider that F&G relies on OHRV registrations and transfers for 34% of agency revenues. It seems reasonable that they would need to keep this fact in mind when crafting their proposals. The Union Leader carried a story today that focused on management of our state's wildlife titled "Whose wildlife is it , anyway?", but brought up the issue of agency funding by writing "A department once dedicated exclusively to hunting and fishing activities is now charged with search and rescue, marine fisheries, public boat access, nuisance wildlife control, off-highway recreational vehicles (OHRV), environmental review, non-game and endangered wildlife management, habitat conservation and public outreach. The largest source of Fish and Game revenue is now from OHRV registrations and transfers (34 percent), followed by federal funds (33 percent), and then licenses and associated fees (20 percent)."

F&G's response was simple stated as... if we can not find a meaningful way to make the system work with audit oversight, then we need to scrap the system. 

It was mostly a response to the Legislature to either legislate the exact method that F&G is to use, within the confines of the LBA report; or scrap their ''scheme'' with the understanding that market forces will cause registrants to avoid joining the clubs and Associations. 

 

 

 

[John Mercier 36]

On 7/22/2018 at 9:10 PM, jhwentworth said:

Yes, that's true, but F&G has become dependent on that revenue and doesn't want to rock the boat. They wouldn't want the registration process to be transferred to another agency ((DMV?) and be left with only the enforcement piece. DMV currently does boats, why wouldn't another form of recreational vehicle fall under them? Doesn't marine law enforcement fall under Department of Safety? Why wouldn't OHRV fit under Safety as well? I'd say that F&G's top priority is to keep the business in-house, and will work with the people who can help keep it that way.

Out of the registrations, F&G pretty much only gets to keep the ''enforcement piece'' . There is a small sum going to safety education and such... but I don't think that F&G is that concerned with it.

For OHRV to go to the Department of Safety, the entire F&G field units would need to go to Safety... this was proposed under Governor Lynch years ago. At the time, there was also a battle to get Marine Patrol under F&G. It was a matter of the overlapping cost of having field officers, with differing training and missions. If Marine Patrol went under F&G, the DOS would focus on-highway... with F&G focusing off-highway... and Marine Patrol would be trained as COs. 

 

[Freedom Rider 209]

3 hours ago, John Mercier said:

 

I do not doubt that people will just ride unregistered.

Watch what happens when system goes down on a Friday. People wont spend the extra $30.00 they will just ride. For a non resident still cheaper to run risk. Chances of seeing a CO out on trails is between slim and none. Only place you will see them is on a straightaway in Pittsburg.Or maybe 4-6 of them sitting in restaurant next to Youngs eating. Almost non existent law enforcement for snowmobiling in NH. They do show up when reporters are there though. I did get pulled over 2 years ago driving down road with my work trailer in NH. Excuse was plate mounted in wrong place. It was mounted to factory bracket welded to location set in factory, lit up by plate light. My question to him was eye exam a requirement and since when are F&G doing DOT's job for commercial vehicle? Was hunting for construction jobs now covered under hunting and fishing? F#*king joke.

[John Mercier 36]

That is F&G's argument for higher registration... they do not have enough officers to enforce the rules.

By setting their budget target to 40K sled registrations instead of the current 50K... without ever adding a penny to the bottom line it would need to be a 25% registration increase on the F&G funding side - which not only includes the actual registration dollars, but also the State gas tax transfer for each machine.  Then the two groups (sleds/OHRVs) through whatever balance formula they come up with have to increase enough to solve that lack of funding for enforcement officers. I think that number is around $1.5 million at this time. 

The Legislature generally raises the fines when they raise the registration cost. Whether they will raise it enough to offset the risk, and whether F&G will go into hard enforcement is at question. 

The other question they seem to be looking into at this time is the change in the usage of RTP grants. Seems there is a longstanding law on the books that Federal Highway funds when used to buy equipment must do so with equipment that is American-made and sourced with American steel. 

These proposals generally get ''walked back'' in that a dramatic increase in registration does as you would suggest - it causes overall registration numbers to fall. So budgeting for 40K sled registrations with such a dramatic pop, should result in quite a drop off of registration; and risking meeting that 40K number. I could be wrong, but I believe that is usually what happens.

 

[jhwentworth 307]

On 7/24/2018 at 8:50 AM, John Mercier said:

Out of the registrations, F&G pretty much only gets to keep the ''enforcement piece'' . There is a small sum going to safety education and such... but I don't think that F&G is that concerned with it.

For OHRV to go to the Department of Safety, the entire F&G field units would need to go to Safety... this was proposed under Governor Lynch years ago. At the time, there was also a battle to get Marine Patrol under F&G. It was a matter of the overlapping cost of having field officers, with differing training and missions. If Marine Patrol went under F&G, the DOS would focus on-highway... with F&G focusing off-highway... and Marine Patrol would be trained as COs. 

 

I register my sleds at the F&G Headquarters in Concord and pay $66 per sled. Of that $66, $60 is for the registration and $6 goes to Agent ($3) and Transaction ($2) fees and F&G search & rescue($1).  It's that same situation for mail-in registrations. That $2 transaction fee is authorized under RSA 214-A:2,VI-a : "Notwithstanding other provisions of law to the contrary, the executive director may permit license agents to collect from licensees an Internet transaction fee when issuing online licenses. This Internet transaction fee shall be in addition to the agent fee as provided in RSA 214-A:4. The amount of the Internet transaction fee shall be set at the discretion of the executive director." While the RSA calls for the fee for online sales, it seems to apply to any and all sales. It's odd that the NHSA site links to a 2010 price list ($64) at http://www.nhstateparks.org/uploads/pdf/Snowmobile_Res_Club_2010.pdf  .

 

So, for registrations handled by F&G, the total that F&G gets to keep is $19. I don't know the breakdown of state vs 3'rd party agent registration sales, and don't suspect that too many people use the F&G headquarters in Concord, but mail-in registrations are pretty convenient. 

[John Mercier 36]

$19 is correct. But for mail-in registrations, I can not be sure whether they would legally have access to internet transaction fees. They may be taking it... but it may not be quite legal. So it is a pretty good question to bring to F&G attention. Of course, it is only a matter of them removing the option of mail-in forcing everyone to use internet.

But all of this hit is on the base $13. Moving budgeting numbers from 50k to 40k results in a little over a $3 pop. F&G is trending toward a shortage of $20 per machine... so when you allocate under the present Snowmobile/OHRV ratio... it increases the Snowmobile F&G amount by about $16 and the OHRV F&G amount by about $24. They rough out these numbers for proposals. So snowmobile registration dollars to F&G (not including the add on fees) would go to around $32, and OHRV would go to around $44. 

The BoT pop gets calculated separately... and then any increase that each Association wants to the GIA funds for the clubs.

It is all preliminary... but the next legislative session is a budget cycle.

 

 

[jhwentworth 307]

56 minutes ago, John Mercier said:

$19 is correct. But for mail-in registrations, I can not be sure whether they would legally have access to internet transaction fees. They may be taking it... but it may not be quite legal. So it is a pretty good question to bring to F&G attention. Of course, it is only a matter of them removing the option of mail-in forcing everyone to use internet.

But all of this hit is on the base $13. Moving budgeting numbers from 50k to 40k results in a little over a $3 pop. F&G is trending toward a shortage of $20 per machine... so when you allocate under the present Snowmobile/OHRV ratio... it increases the Snowmobile F&G amount by about $16 and the OHRV F&G amount by about $24. They rough out these numbers for proposals. So snowmobile registration dollars to F&G (not including the add on fees) would go to around $32, and OHRV would go to around $44. 

The BoT pop gets calculated separately... and then any increase that each Association wants to the GIA funds for the clubs.

It is all preliminary... but the next legislative session is a budget cycle.

 

 

I believe the intent of the "transaction fee", now $2, was to compensate  F&G agents for any charges they might incur in using the Internet for online licensing. There are no online snowmobile registrations, at least registrations that the public can use, but it is being used for that purpose and the rate is set at the discretion of the F&G director and all registration options include the fee, including an in-person registration done at F&G headquarters.

At the end of the day, the fees and the slice of the $60/$90 registration amount to 34% of F&G revenues, and they'll do what they must to maintain that revenue. Hunting and fishing licenses are not paying the rent anymore, and F&G relies on the Feds and OHRV/snowmobile revenues, but the F&G commissioners are all hunting/fishing oriented.

[John Mercier 36]

The 34% in the article included transfer payments from other State agencies; and I am not sure that it included transfer payments from F&G to other State agencies. It is usually pointed out by hunting/fishing opposition; but it isn't a realistic breakdown, as federal funds come from federal taxes on sporting goods - mainly guns and ammo.

Our 34% includes gas tax transfers for OHRV and Snowmobiles, but also registration and gas tax transfers from boats. They may have also included recent funding from the Legislature over the last few budget cycles.

  

[WINNOCTURN 60]

 

 

Dave,

I CHALANGED YOU 12 DAYS AGO TO PUBLISH YOUR PROOF of ABUSE. WHERE IS IT ??????!

Edited August 2, 2018 by WINNOCTURN

[rivercat 119]

On 8/2/2018 at 8:30 AM, WINNOCTURN said:

 

 

Dave,

I CHALANGED YOU 12 DAYS AGO TO PUBLISH YOUR PROOF of ABUSE. WHERE IS IT ??????!

 

On 8/2/2018 at 8:30 AM, WINNOCTURN said:

 

 

Dave,

I CHALANGED YOU 12 DAYS AGO TO PUBLISH YOUR PROOF of ABUSE. WHERE IS IT ??????!

My brother passed away rather suddenly , ,, I have been in the throws of a lot of family stuff including company from out of state,, I will get back you you soon

[WINNOCTURN 60]

1 hour ago, rivercat said:

 

My brother passed away rather suddenly , ,, I have been in the throws of a lot of family stuff including company from out of state,, I will get back you you soon

Dave,

Some things are more important than Snowmobiling.

My deepest sympathies on your lose of your brother.

 

George

[jhwentworth 307]

If you read the F&G response it's clear that they're saying that the clubs have no way to provide assurance that a member is a member of a snowmobile club that will comply with the needs of the registration system. They offer the alternative of a repeal of the club discount.

How many clubs would favor such a repeal?

[jhwentworth 307]

Interesting story in today's Concord Monitor about the current state of our NH F&G department. F&G has a lot of roles today, and doesn't get sufficient funding for some of those roles. Search & Rescue was maybe the most well known for being underfunded, but there are others.

The story discusses some changes that impact the snowmobile and dirt bike/ATV communities to some extent. F&G will be shifting two wardens to all-OHRV duties year-round. Col. Jordan is quoted as saying "We've reached the point where we could have a field force in the state to do nothing but that, very similar to highway safety with state police." 

There's a comment about F&G getting a lot of jobs dumped on them, but were able to avoid taking on the Marine Patrol duties from State Police. 

Looks like F&G is trying to align itself with its funding sources, which makes sense, but won't be well received by some groups that have gotten more attention in the past. There's a feeling that this is a zero sum game; that if OHRV's get more resources, then hunters must get less. The F&G Nongame & Endangered Wildlife program has 8 employees and an annual budget of $1 million, with the state general fund contributing $50,000. The federal government provides most of the group's funding.

What do you suppose would happen to this group if the Fed funding died and funding had to come from the state general fund? The legislature likes programs that are self-funded.

Edited September 2, 2018 by jhwentworth

[John Mercier 36]

Actually, I was there. We didn't try to ''dump'' Marine Patrol on the F&G. Governor Lynch had made a legislative suggestion to get rid of the department and move the various responsibilities to other departments. The Department of Safety would be responsible for enforcement. DES would take much of the other functions with the biologist over. DRED would take over the land management. Since F&G handled ''off-highway'' enforcement at the time (and did not have authority over enforcement on-highway), the only other group handling ''off-highway'' enforcement was DOS-Marine Patrol. I, and others, mentioned to the Governor and legislators that if the department was not dissolved... a realignment may be smarter to move Marine Patrol to F&G. F&G has always wanted the funding from Marine Patrol - an example is canoes and kayaks that other than public landing access would have little to nothing to do with F&G; and thus requiring them to register should be money granted more to funding Marine Patrol, and not F&G.

The story also suggest that ''rescues'' are only paid for through the $100,000, or so, of HikeSafe cards... when in reality the greatest funding source for the SAR fund is a $1 charge on boat, snowmobile, and OHRV registrations... even to this day.

Federal funding to them is toward hunting, fishing, trapping, and wildlife conservation... so I think the Legislature is still on the same line of discussion as it was in 2008. 

Back then, a legislator had emtered a bill to use Rooms & Meals taxes to fund F&G that got shot down, so he wanted another $20 added to each OHRV and snowmobile registration for funding to F&G. Major Acerno came to me with an idea. Each of the registrations had 100 gallons of gasoline taxation allocated to them... the ''unreturned'' funds were being split 50/50 between the BoT and DoT. Major Acerno suggested that the F&G would oppose the $20 increase, helping us with the oversight committees, in return for NHOHVA support of changing that to 50/50 between BoT and F&G. I made the agreement for NHOHVA; since DoT provided nothing to OHRVs at the time.