NC Fishing License Funds Diverted

BR549

Twelve Pointer
dc09edb401b1c6cf0f3687351aa7d782.jpg
 

PaperBoy

Guest
Seems to me that the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission controls the license funds, doesn't it? Was set up that way so Marine Fisheries Commission with huge tilt toward commercials wouldn't spend all the money on projects for commercials only?
 

Pirate96

Twelve Pointer
Anyone shocked that Cooper would divert funds? As Attorney general he worked under Easley and Purdue.

Those two governors were expert at diverting funds from legitimate sources and using them for pet projects.

Has anyone confirmed Roy is awake? He was asleep as Attorney general for years.
 

BR549

Twelve Pointer
The Senate was formally notified in 2009, 2011 via staff legal opinion of Fiscal Research whom stated, any diversion of Sportsman / Angling License Funds would place NCDMF & NCWRC out of compliance with WSFR / FWS Assent Language.

This legal advise was totally ignored and NCDMF was cited by an Office of Inspector General Audit in March 2014 and found in non-compliance for just that and notified they were unable to receive federal aid grants.

NC Residents continued to pay federal excise taxes on rods, reels, firearms, and etc... Roughly $25 - $30M in recent (gun run) years.

In 2014 Marine Fisheries responded to the OIG and agreed to take corrective action, yet it didn't... Rather DMF opted to continue to deliberately divert Sportsman License Funds in violation of federal rule 50 CFR 80.

Marine Fisheries simultaneously requested and received tens of millions in federal aid grants willfully knowing it was in direct violation of 50 CFR 80.

Anyone who questioned staff was deliberate pushed out of the process and previous safeguards in place to prevent the diversion of funds were removed in an deliberate attempt to continue the willful diversion of Sportsman Funds.


73da704a15a35f4a60bfcf4ed0159a52.jpg
7e796fddb309cab99791230ac5c39e1f.jpg
b18463dee7f58d9765bcaa6f45124ad0.jpg


98a116648544ca0defe47e964c7c101b.jpg




http://forum.citizensscience.org/index.php/topic,560.0.html
 
Last edited:

BR549

Twelve Pointer
Deer Farming oversight diverted from WRC to Dept of Ag by GA and it places us in non-compliance and jambs up our Federal funds?


da3a63fc862138bb3526a80176d97104.jpg
 
Last edited:

LanceR

Six Pointer
Contributor
Italic added in an edit....

I should have been more clear about what they NYS Fish and Wildlife Management Board is. The board was established by law 60 years ago to advise the state and landowners on matters of fish, wildlife and habitat management and on sporting access. It is made up of regionally elected members of the sporting public, landowners (Farm Bureau and forest products folks) and county government reps from 55 out of the 62 counties in the state. While I carry a Department of Environmental Conservation business card I don't work and never have worked for the state. I'm a county and regional landowner rep. The board is statutorily independent. We can deal directly with the governor, legislature, press other state agencies etc."

As a former member of New York's Conservation Fund Advisory Board and as a long time member and chairman of NYS Fish and Wildlife Management Board I have a more than passing familiarity with sport fish and wildlife restoration funds and how they can be placed in jeopardy by an actual or only theoretical sporting license fund diversion.

All funds received from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses must be used only for wildlife or fish management. Note that that does not mean only on game and sport fish regardless of the title of one of the acts... Management can mean a lot of things not directly related to field operations though.

All funds must remain under the control of the state fish and wildlife agency. An exception may be made for states such as NY wherein the state constitution gives the power of the purse to the governor but funds can still only be spent on fish and wildlife programs that are themselves under the control and supervision of the state fish and wildlife agency.

Any bill language that usurps or even threatens state fish and wildlife agency control over the funds can make the state ineligible for federal sport fish and/or wildlife restoration funds. There is no level of real or threatened diversion acceptable if the state is to remain eligible as any bill language that allows or even implies that the funds can be diverted voids the state's previous acceptance of the "assent language" in the Dingell-Johnson Sportfish Restoration and Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Acts (AKA The Acts) upon which eligibility is based. As I understand it though some diversions can lead to being ineligible for funding for a portion of the state fish and wildlife agency's programs while remaining eligible for other purposes. That seems to be the case in NC.

Here in NY an annual state budget bill 6-7 years ago authorized the sweeping of "special revenue accounts" one of which is the traditional Conservation Fund where sporting license money goes. That bill language would have cost us around $27M/year if it hadn't been changed later on since it put all sporting license revenue at risk.

As we're retiring to NC in a few months I see that need to get up to speed on this issue as it affects NC....

BR548, animals in a captive in a breeding or shooting facility are often not considered wildlife even if of the same species as the local free ranging wildlife. As such they are considered as being essentially livestock and their regulatory or statutory status doesn't come into play for PR funds. That would depend on how the state views captive herds as many, if not most states give control of captive deer etc to their agricultural dept.


Lance
 
Last edited:

CJF

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
Lance Will you be around this weekend? If you are maybe we can talk and we can over some of this.
 

Ldsoldier

Old Mossy Horns
BR548, animals in a captive in a breeding or shooting facility are not considered wildlife even if of the same species as the local free ranging wildlife. As such they are considered as being essentially livestock and their regulatory or statutory status doesn't come into play for PR funds. Many, if not most states give control of captive deer etc to their agricultural dept.


Lance

That may be the case in some states, but not in NC. In NC (with few exceptions) wildlife is wildlife, ranch or not. Doesn't matter if your fences are 20 feet tall and you bought all of your deer from somebody else and stocked your property, if they're white-tailed deer you still have to abide by the seasons and limits in your area. That's part of the public trust doctrine, and part of it that most of us are not very fond of changing. Same applies as I understand it to quail hunts here. Even if it's put and take, if the quail you put out are bobwhite then you're still constrained to the actual season.
 

LanceR

Six Pointer
Contributor
MAybe I'm not understanding something here....BR549, are you rerfing to captive deer in Georgia?
 

BR549

Twelve Pointer
Referring to NC Captive Deer.

Lance, some background - Recent legislative changes here in NC were meant to distinguish farm cervids from wild cervids for commercial breeding purposes.

The intent of the NC General Assembly in NOT defining Captive Farmed Cervids as "Livestock" is significant.

Attempting to redefine wildlife as livestock is an attempt to circumvent the Federal Lacy Act.

Again, this is why NC defined captive cervids as "Farmed Cervids" and not livestock, as illegal movement of cervids across state lines would carry little consequences.

In 2015 this was issue was articulated by Judge Sargus Jr. when he ruled on the question...

"Thomas (lawyer) had asked Judge Edmund A. Sargus Jr. to dismiss the charges against Wainwright Sr. (deer farmer), arguing in part that the Lacey Act covers only wild deer and the deer he owned were livestock."

U.S. District Judge Edmund Sargus Jr. rejected that argument, saying, “White-tailed deer are wild,” and courts “should inquire whether a species — not an individual specimen — is wild because [the law] prevents animals that are normally found in a wild state from losing their wildness simply because they are in captivity.”
 

BR549

Twelve Pointer
On the Federal Aid / PR issue relating to NC Deer Farming -

NC Wildlife Resources Commission manages Farmed Cervids cooperatively with the NC Dept. of Ag.

This issue just arose with the Marine Fisheries Diversion of funds to Division of Coastal Management for unrelated administrative actions.

This from the Chief of Wildlife and Sportfish Restoration Program should provide further info-

Xxxxxx

A diversion of license revenue occurs when a state game and fish agency uses license revenue outside of the statuary administrative authority of the G/F agency. An example would be if a state legislature transfers the administration and management of captive cervids to another state agency and requires the G/F agency to use License revenues to pay for the cost of managing the program.

The attachment provided is outdated, 50 CFR 80 was amended August 2011. I have copied/pasted section 50 CFR 80.10, 11 and 21 which provides regulation relative to a diversion of license revenue.

§80.10 Who is eligible to receive the benefits of the Acts?

States acting through their fish and wildlife agencies are eligible for benefits of the Acts only if they pass and maintain legislation that:

(a) Assents to the provisions of the Acts;

(b) Ensures the conservation of fish and wildlife; and

(c) Requires that revenue from hunting and fishing licenses be:

(1) Controlled only by the State fish and wildlife agency; and

(2) Used only for administration of the State fish and wildlife agency, which includes only the functions required to manage the agency and the fish- and wildlife-related resources for which the agency has authority under State law.

Back to Top

§80.11 How does a State become ineligible to receive the benefits of the Acts?

A State becomes ineligible to receive the benefits of the Acts if it:

(a) Fails materially to comply with any law, regulation, or term of a grant as it relates to acceptance and use of funds under the Acts;

(b) Does not have legislation required at §80.10 or passes legislation contrary to the Acts; or

(c) Diverts hunting and fishing license revenue from:

(1) The control of the State fish and wildlife agency; or

(2) Purposes other than the agency's administration.

§80.21 What if a State diverts license revenue from the control of its fish and wildlife agency?

The Director may declare a State to be in diversion if it violates the requirements of §80.10 by diverting license revenue from the control of its fish and wildlife agency to purposes other than the agency's administration. The State is then ineligible to receive benefits under the relevant Act from the date the Director signs the declaration until the State resolves the diversion. Only the Director may declare a State to be in diversion, and only the Director may rescind the declaration.

I hope this helps and feel free to call

Mike Piccirilli
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Chief of Wildlife and Sportfish Restoration Program
1875 Century Blvd. Suite 240
Atlanta, Georgia 30345
Phone: (404) 679-4154
 
Last edited:

LanceR

Six Pointer
Contributor
Thanks, BR549. Sorry for my late response but I don't think I got an email regarding your updates being posted. You post some good info. Now my brain cell is going to need some time digest the differences in state law and policy from what I'm used to.

Again, thanks.


Lance
 

hunter

Eight Pointer
Contributor
Thanks, BR549. Sorry for my late response but I don't think I got an email regarding your updates being posted. You post some good info. Now my brain cell is going to need some time digest the differences in state law and policy from what I'm used to.

Again, thanks.


Lance

As you are probably already familiar with from NY, just insert the word "politics" anywhere you want to use the word "logic" when it comes to many of NC's fish and wildlife laws and you will understand things just fine. A lot still won't make sense but you will understand how they got there! :)

Welcome to NC!
 

Ldsoldier

Old Mossy Horns
Thanks, BR549. Sorry for my late response but I don't think I got an email regarding your updates being posted. You post some good info. Now my brain cell is going to need some time digest the differences in state law and policy from what I'm used to.

Again, thanks.


Lance

As with most legislation anywhere there are a lot of nuances in the legalese. Like hunter said, if it makes 0 sense whatsoever there was likely a politician involved.
 

BR549

Twelve Pointer
Here is USFWS definition under 50 CFR 80.1

It appears once a Deer Farmers Farmed Cervid breeds the captive offspring is once again defined as "Wildlife" by USFWS?

This remains a pending issue with the possibility of having Federal P/R funds / license revenue entangled with oversight of deer farming. The nexus becomes, loss of control and or diversion and carries a 3/1 matching penalty.


051f6c2882a6fd4ac6645a1f33fc96c1.jpg
 

BR549

Twelve Pointer
Update from NC Division of Marine Fisheries -

I hope every hunter and angler in North Carolina pays very close attention as this continues to unfold as we deserve to know what has occurred to our license funds and the justification of such -


d6a022c6569698d03cfca975ca2325e9.jpg
 
Last edited:

BR549

Twelve Pointer
It's been nearly two months and NCDMF has not only failed to correct this problem, they canceled the May 10th CRFL meeting.
 
Top