![[Top]](/images/nav-top.gif)
![[Back]](/images/nav-back.gif)
![[Home]](/images/nav-home.gif)
June 17 and 18, 2004
School Administration Building
Thermopolis, Wyoming
Senator Delaine Roberts, Chairman
Representative Mike Baker, Chairman
Senator Tex Boggs
Senator Bruce Burns
Senator Keith Goodenough
Senator John Hanes
Representative Steve Harshman
Representative Jerry Iekel
Representative George McMurtrey
Representative Layton Morgan
Representative Mick Powers
Representative Jim Slater
Representative Dave Edwards
Representative Bill Thompson
Dave Gruver, Assistant Director
Please refer to
Appendices 1a and 1b to review the Committee Sign-in Sheet
for a list of other individuals who attended the meeting.
Cochairman Baker called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. The following sections summarize the Committee proceedings by topic. Please refer to Appendix 2 to review the Committee Meeting Agenda.
Cochairman Baker provided a draft natural resources enhancement fund concept paper provided by Jim Magagna. (Appendix 3). He also announced that the Management Council has assigned the Committee the issue of bingo regulation. The Committee discussed the assignment.
Alternative funding for state parks and cultural resources
Phil Noble, Director, Pat Green, State Parks Administrator, and Todd Thibodeau, Planning Consultant with the Department of State Parks and Cultural Resources addressed the issue of alternate funding of state parks. The Department had previously provided the Committee with alternatives. (Appendix 4) Mr. Noble added the possible use of a portion of the fuel tax. The Committee discussed the Constitutional limitations on uses of fuel taxes. Mr. Noble noted that the state parks generally have fewer improvements than any of the surrounding states. The Committee discussed the issue of charging for various services at the state parks. Mr. Noble agreed with Committee observations that a number of the options could conflict with private industry.
Mr. Thibodeau explained a review of capital facilities disclosed over $23 million dollar in deferred and critical maintenance at state parks; plus $4 million of the same at the Wyoming Territorial Prison State Park and an additional $2 million in road maintenance at Guernsey State Park. Of the deferred maintenance identified, approximately $18 million is in road maintenance. Joe Bonds, planning and construction manager, explained that the Department has attempted to secure funding for the road expenses from the highway department and federal funds but has not been able to do so. Currently $500,000 per biennium is earmarked for State parks road work.
Mr. Thibodeau noted the funding alternatives identified were not being advocated by the Department, but were suggested for consideration. Using the possibilities presented, the range of additional funding was calculated to be from $6 million to $10.5 million per year. Mr. Bonds stated that current revenues provide about $1.5 to $1.7 million for maintenance needs. Mr. Noble stated that current park entry fees are low in comparison to surrounding states and that an increase in fees and allowing the Department to retain fees generated were probably the most preferred choices.
The Committee requested an estimate of the amount needed to keep up with maintenance if a one time appropriation of $29 million were provided. The Committee also discussed whether the state parks would be receiving maintenance monies provided in last session's budget bill for state projects generally. Mr. Bonds stated that the department has asked for funds from that appropriation, but those requests are outside of the $29 million identified. An additional $1.6 million was requested from that funding. Mr. Bonds noted that previously appropriations were not dedicated for maintenance needs by formula. It has been addressed on a case by case basis.
Senator Burns asked for a total of funding for state parks and sites and income generated at the same.
Public testimony included support for allowing the Department to keep funds generated and opposition to allowing the Department to expand state parks into areas competing with private enterprise.
Senator Burns asked for the drafting of two bills. The first to provide for a set amount of funding for the identified maintenance needs. The second would give more flexibility to the department in setting fees. The flexibility given the department on fees would be tied to using it for maintenance. Senator Boggs suggested removing all revenue generating options other than as affirmatively requested to be placed in the requested bills. Cochairman Baker asked that the bill include allowing the Department to keep all fees generated at the parks and sites and not place those into the general fund. Those fees should be deposited into an earmarked account with the fees continuously appropriated to the Department for maintenance purposes.
The Committee discussed the second suggested draft regarding the ability of the Department to have flexible fees. Tied with the flexible fees would be the ability of the Department to increase the amenities of the various parks and sites. Those enhancements should be limited to items providing self-sustaining amounts. The Committee asked the Department to provide a list of enhancements meeting that criteria.
The Committee discussed what was meant by flexible fees. There should be a yearly review of the fees by the Committee and consultation with the Recreation Commission. Current set statutory amounts should be removed and the new fees should be established based upon market conditions. The fees should be established by rule.
A third bill draft would allow the Department to retain all fees from leases, etc., as proposed in item 2 of appendix 4. Those funds would also be deposited in an earmarked fund and be continuously appropriated for maintenance needs.
Mr. Noble and Mr. Green addressed the development of site criteria for state parks and historic sites. Legislation passed in the last session provided for the development of site criteria and requires the development of criteria by rule and a master plan by September of this year. Intermittent springs in Afton Wyoming and Hamm's Fork site have submitted applications. The Vore Buffalo Jump has not formally submitted an application. Mr. Green does expect to hear from the proponents of that site. The evaluation teams will travel to those sites but will not take action until after the start of the next fiscal year.
Wyoming territorial prison state park and historical site update
Tom Lindmier and Linda Jones, Department of State Parks and Cultural Resources addressed the changeover in operation of the Territorial Prison Park to the Department. They provided written testimony (appendix 5). Ms. Jones stated that all agreements to terminate operations by the previous management group are apparently complete. The termination of old agreements and the change of the operation of the site is ahead of schedule. There is lower pricing at the Park. In the two weeks of operation under the Department the visitation has been about 75 to 100 per day. The Friends Group is still active and attempting to raise funds and will attempt to run the theater and theme town portion of the Park. Visitation is expected to be about 26,000 this year. Mr. Green and the Committee commended Mr. Lindmier for his dedication and expertise in taking over the operation of the Park and Site.
Cochairman Roberts asked about bringing the U.S. Marshall's exhibit back to the Park. Mr. Lindmier concurred that the exhibit would be a positive addition. A better exhibit gallery should be explored in his view. Cochairman Roberts suggested the Department express its interest in the exhibit being housed at the Park.
Management and organizational changes for the Cultural Resources Division
Mr. Noble and Wendy Bredehoft, Administrator of the Cultural Resources Division, addressed the Committee. Mr. Noble explained organizational and personnel changes being made to improve customer service. The archives and museums sections will be under one manager. Other changes include increasing access to archive resources and eliminating duplication of activities. She provided specific examples of how the Department was attempting to make the provision of services more consumer friendly. The Committee asked about specific efforts to deal with public concern over past collections procedures.
Committee members questioned the time for an oil permitting site to be reviewed under the federal section 106 requirements (for archeological issues). Ms. Bredehoft stated that the time varied, with federal personnel doing the field work. Using those findings the State has 30 days to complete its review. Currently the typical review period by the State is about 25 days.
Responding to Committee questions Mr. Lindmier stated that the artifacts may be accepted on a site specific limitation. If accepted with site specific restrictions the artifact still part of the state museum, not the specific site to which it has been restricted.
Senator Burns asked for an overview of the role the state historic information and preservation office plays in the federal income tax benefit program for restoration of historic sites.
Ms. Bredehoft presented a video showing substandard conditions for artifact housing. Cochairman Baker asked the price for addressing the needs identified. Ms. Bredehoft stated that the price is unknown and suggested the use of a consultant to prioritize the issues identified: space, quality of space, staff training, sufficiency of staff and making the resources available to the public. The cost could be as much as $100,000 for approximately six months of consultation.
Representative Powers suggested using personnel throughout the State and moving collections around the State to take advantage of the slower times at those museums. The Committee questioned whether there is a process in place regarding which items are necessary to maintain and which are not.
John Keck, Montana/Wyoming coordinator for the National Park Service noted the Service also has similar problems, but not to the same extent. They would like to explore potential partnerships with the State to perhaps solve the problems in a single fashion.
The Committee discussed funding a consultant. Senator Boggs suggested that it would be beneficial to hire an architect at the same time since adequate facilities would be required to implement the suggestions and this could be done concurrently rather than sequentially. Cochairman Baker suggested a bill be drafted to appropriate an unspecified amount of funds for hiring a consultant as suggested. The bill should include the hiring of an architectural firm to work with the consultant to determine the facilities necessary to implement the recommendations. The Department was requested to determine the amount of funds necessary to implement the requested study.
Lesley Boughton, Wyoming State Librarian addressed the Committee. She previously provided the Committee with information on the WYLD network. (Appendix 6) The State library is currently housed in the Supreme Court building and will be moving from that building. The State Library became part of the Department of Administration and Information with reorganization in 1990. The WLYD network is a database collection of all library collections within Wyoming (other than the University). The Library is also a state depository and is considering digitizing their collection. They will wait to do so in light of the archives division going forward with a digitization project. Ms. Boughton suggested that the library collection should be discussed at the same time the archival collection is discussed. Currently she anticipates no additional space requirements for the state library.
The Committee requested that the State Library collection be included in any study being done on the state archives collection as noted above.
The Committee adjourned for the day to tour Legend Rock at approximately 4:00 p.m.
Governor's proposal for wildlife funding
The meeting was called to order by cochairman Baker at 8:00 a.m. The Committee discussed setting a meeting during the special session and perhaps visiting the Barrett building to view the storage situation.
The Committee started the discussion of Game and Fish funding with Deputy Director Bill Wichers' review of current funding sources. Mr. Wichers presentation followed the charts and graphs provided in appendix 7. He reviewed 2003 license revenues other revenue sources of the G&F, and compared funding and budgeting for the 2004 and 2005 fiscal years.
Governor Freudenthal addressed the Committee. He would like the Legislature to address the issue of investing in wildlife and habitat. He believes there is agreement that wildlife is a legacy of the state but the ongoing funding for wildlife and habitat has previously been caught up in the mechanics of how to implement that funding. Two items should be established in his view: there should agreement to set aside part of the current surplus, not new taxes, for wildlife and habitat; and secondly, neither the Game and Fish Department nor the Agriculture Department should determine expenditures to be made from the fund.
As to the mechanics implementing the concept, the Governor suggested the administrative structure needs adequate independence from any interest group in the state, the ability to take proposals from all interest groups and a clear statement that habitat acquisition will be based upon willing buyers and willing sellers. There should be no right to condemn property.
The funding could be measured based upon one cent for every MCF of natural gas produced in the state. That is not a new tax, only a measuring stick for the amount of funding each year. The Governor is not tied to that or any other measuring stick for funding, what is important is that some amount be locked into the budgeting process.
As to funding, the Governor suggested income from appropriations should be used for funding and at some point annual appropriations should not be needed; the interest income should be sufficient to sustain expenditures. The Governor felt there should be no matching fund requirement, but the administering entity should be able to accept matching funds. There should be legislative limitations on the ability to draw on the corpus. A new or existing entity will be an overseer of the expenditures, but that entity should not be the agency implementing the projects, thus the overseeing entity should not require a large staff. The total expenditures in any year most likely should not be allowed to be for a single project, although there could be an instance where an extraordinary situation could call for such an expenditure. There will be a need for geographic distribution of project funding.
The Governor thought there should be some Legislative oversight, but not to the extent of the water development project model. Project by project approval could politicize the issue.
In response to Cochairman Roberts' suggestion that a one time appropriation be used for the trust rather than annual appropriations, the Governor would support that approach. While that might be possible in 2005, he thinks it more likely the funds will be available in 2006, based upon large coal lease bonuses and high natural gas prices. The Governor reemphasized that most important is a commitment to the idea, he is flexible on the specifics of the administration.
Regarding the limitation on condemnation, the Governor backs that position because the potential for condemnation has been used as a reason to defeat the concept. Senator Goodenough noted that it might be necessary to address infringements on property rights in order to effectively address the issue of habitat protection. The Governor agreed that habitat might be better protected with such an approach, but that if the willing buyer/willing seller concept had been in place years ago the habitat might be better protected today. Commitment to the willing buyer/willing seller limitation might be needed for the concept to be accepted by the Legislature. This approach might not solve every issue, but it will help to begin a state investment in a state resource.
Senator Burns suggested that the Governor come up with additional details, since in the past the details seem to have derailed the idea. The Governor accepted the invitation and will provide a suggestion within a month. He asked the Committee to develop other ideas if they were in disagreement with the specifics of the proposal.
The Committee questioned whether the Game and Fish funding and the Governor's proposal were being taken as a parallel topics or intertwined. The Governor viewed them as parallel provisions and asked that they be maintained as separate items.
He noted that the funding of wildlife and wildlife habitat is the one glaring omission in the state's investment strategy for the future. He asked the Committee and the Legislature take the issue up and adopt the concept, then address the mechanics. The Governor agreed to testify before the Committee in support of legislation introduced on the issue.
Alternative funding for Game and Fish Department
The Committee returned to the funding of the Game and Fish Department. Mr. Wichers explained that the new license fees will result in a surplus in the first year which will be used in subsequent years when the costs begin exceeding revenues. There has been no net increase in personnel spending overall; while the Department has added some new full time positions it has reduced the number of contract positions to offset the costs. Mr. Wichers explained comparisons with other state's game and fish department funding. (Appendices 8 and 9).
Terry Cleveland, Director of the Game and Fish Department, addressed the Committee regarding alternative funding for the Department. His written testimony is attached as appendix 10. In his view alternative funding is a means to the end of wildlife conservation. He noted the Department's mandate is to manage for all Wyoming wildlife.
Funding for wildlife conservation in Wyoming has come almost exclusively from hunters and anglers. About 70% of the Department's funding comes from licenses, stamps, application fees, etc. Most of that comes from nonresident deer and antelope hunters. About 20% comes from federal excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment. Much of the remainder comes from interest on the Department's fund balances. This funding structure did not envision the expanded duties of the Department, such as oversight of endangered species recovery. To date, efforts to use other funding sources to shoulder some of this responsibility have been mostly unsuccessful.
Mr. Cleveland recommended that the Committee consider general funding for two items currently funded by Game and Fish Funds:
§ Insurance benefits for employees, totaling approximately $3.0 million annually, and
§ Retirement benefits for employees, totaling approximately $2.2 million annually.
He proposed an eight year sunset clause that includes a detailed review and report by LSO, and annual reporting requirements to the Legislature.
Second, he proposed that Game and Fish capital facilities needs be addressed through general funding. The Department has identified over $32 million in capital facility needs.
Third, he proposed that the Department begin to develop a long-term, comprehensive approach to funding the conservation of all wildlife in Wyoming, while preserving the statutory role and authority of the Game and Fish Commission. Potential options to consider were a portion of the state sales tax to be dedicated to wildlife conservation. This approach has been very successful in Arkansas and Missouri.
Committee members questioned whether general funding of certain items might lead to the loss of autonomy of the Department. Mr. Cleveland noted that is a concern, but a new funding source must be found to address the mandate of the Department. The best possible solution in his view is funding without strings, but that has not been acceptable in the past. He stated that the items suggested need not be taken up this year, but at some point the alternative funding sources will need to be addressed. Cochairman Roberts stated that unless the issue is addressed now, it will only be discussed next year and subsequently.
The Committee took public testimony on the issue. Representative Jim Allen, questioned why there had been no discussion of cutting costs nor accountability. He questioned how much of the voice of the sportsmen will be diluted with general funding of the Department. He also suggested that predation should be addressed as it impacts availability of big game. Bob Wharf, executive director of Wyoming Sportsman and Fisherman Association, testified that his association would be sensitive to losing its voice in wildlife management if the Department were funded by general funds. He suggested that there needs to be a means of requiring nonconsumptive wildlife users to pay a portion of the Department's management costs. Harold Schultz, Wyoming Wildlife Federation, expressed concern regarding the Department losing its autonomy. He agreed there needs to be some attention to managing wildlife and adequately funding that management.
Bryce Reece, Wyoming Woolgrower's Association, recognized the need for funding, but suggested that the funding request should be bifurcated. Funding capital construction needs could be done general fund dollars. The lodging tax also seemed to be a logical source of funding for wildlife management since many tourists do travel to Wyoming for wildlife. Roger Bredehoft, Game Warden's Association, stated that the sportsmen voice is really heard at public meetings setting seasons, etc., and is not really connected with the revenue streams. Craig Sax, game warden, addressed the Committee as a private citizen. He supported using a portion of the existing state sales tax for wildlife management funding, following the Missouri model. He provided written materials on the issue. (Appendix 17) Patricia Dowd, Wyoming Wildlife Association, suggested funding from the general fund, lodging tax or other source where nonconsumptive users can contribute.
Hale Kreycik, Game and Fish Commissioner, expressed his personal opinion that there is a need for additional funding for the Department. He supported using a portion of the sales tax rather than general funds; so there is a known, steady source of income. It also falls in line with keeping the autonomy of the Commission. The Commission has not taken a position on the issue.
Recreational opportunities-increasing game populations
Mark Fowden, assistant chief of the fish division, addressed the Committee. He provided a list of potential projects for consideration. (Appendix 11) The projects proposed do not involve additional acquisition of private lands. Mr. Fowden addressed the three types of projects presented; those dealing strictly with habitat, those dealing with access and those dealing with a mix of the two. He then briefly explained the projects involved which are all listed and described in appendix 11. The items identified would not be accomplished immediately without additional funding.
Dave Bragonier, Wyoming Wildlife Federation, supported the projects presented. He thanked the Committee for passage of Senate File 88 last session, which will help with access issues.
Governor's proposal for wildlife funding
The Committee discussed the Governor's proposal for wildlife funding. Jim Magagna, Wyoming Stock Grower's Association, addressed the proposal drafted by a working group for implementing a natural resources enhancement fund. (Appendix 3) He noted the proposals were very similar, but did address deviations from the Governor's proposal. Those included a preference for 100% up front funding; no invasion of the corpus; inflation proofing of the corpus; no increase in state ownership of fee titled land; and greater oversight by the Legislature of proposed project funding. He stated that the vision and the goal of the working group's proposal and the Governor appear to be the same. The Committee asked the working group to consider some of the alternatives for the administrative entity suggested earlier in the morning in discussion on the Governor's proposal.
Representatives of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming, Rocky Mountain Farmer's Union, Woolgrower's Association, Wyoming Chapter of the Sierra Club, Wyoming Wildlife Federation, Sportsmen Association, Wyoming Conservation Voters, and others noted the general support for the proposals although there were statements in disagreement with some of the specifics.
Enforcement of off-road vehicle limitations
Bill Wichers and Scott Talbott, Game and Fish Department addressed the Committee. Mr. Wichers stated that the issue of persons using ORV's on public lands has become of much concern to the public. Mr. Talbott noted the issue is complicated. The federal regulatory authority for off road vehicle use derives from the code of federal regulations. He explained there are numerous federal land use plans and variations of those plans which restrict the use of vehicles . Wyoming game wardens have only limited authority as peace officers and it does not include general authority to enforce off-road vehicle restrictions. Currently the game and fish wardens have no authority to enforce off road restrictions on state, federal or private lands, other than lands owned or leased by the game and fish commission. The commission does not have authority to enter into memorandums of understanding with federal authorities to enforce federal restrictions on off-road vehicle use.
There are two approaches the Committee might consider. The first would be to allow enforcement by game wardens of federal off road restrictions. But that would be incorporating a complex set of regulations which the state had very little input into. The other alternative would be for the state to adopt a state law such as Montana which generally prohibits the use of off-road vehicles while hunting. There is an exception in the Montana law for travel off-road to retrieve game. (See appendix 12) In response to Committee questions, Mr. Talbott noted that Idaho has entered into an agreement with the forest service to enforce forest service restrictions.
Kent Kleman, BLM, addressed the issue of BLM law enforcement authority and jurisdiction. He provided written materials regarding BLM regulations and other state's handling of the issue. (Appendix 13) The definition of "established road" is handled by each land management plan according to Mr. Kleman. Enforcement is handled by officer discretion. Committee members noted it would be very confusing to have different definitions of established roads by varying entities. Committee members discussed additional training required and whether the officers could effectively enforce varying restrictions. Mr. Kleman stated that he has only written 6 or 7 citations for off road use, but has had contact regarding off road vehicle use on a daily basis. Any help in enforcement and education would be appreciated.
Senator Boggs asked about an Attorney General opinion cited in an LSO memo of the subject of state law enforcement officers enforcing federal laws and requested a copy of the opinion.
Rick Schuler, Forest Service and the state trails program, stated that the Forest Service has attempted to identify all roads on forest service lands. He noted that it is difficult to identify in every situation what a road consists of. He stated that any law enforcement help that can be provided including educating the public as to what can be traveled on would be useful. There is a problem in his view regarding the use of ORVs on forest service lands.
Lynn Boomgaarden, Director of the Office of State lands and Investments, addressed the Committee. She provided two documents, Board of Land Commissioners rules on off-road travel and a listing of activities prohibited on state lands by statute. (Appendices 14 and 15). It has been difficult for her agency to enforce the Board's restrictions on off-road travel. The rules confine motor vehicles to established roads, which are defined as graded roads or well defined tracks. That latter language causes problems. As to enforcement she noted that it is a problem with the board relying on local law enforcement officers. There is also a problem with no penalty attached to the rule prohibiting off-road travel, i.e., the activity would need to meet the elements of other existing criminal provisions. Alternatives suggested by Ms. Boomgaarden, were to seek additional personnel to mark and block closed roads. Another is to adopt legislation attaching a criminal bond schedule to the board's rules. A final alternative is to use the resources of other agencies such as the Game and Fish Department. Currently a memorandum of understanding has not bee able to resolve the issue, but she suggested that a statute authorizing game and fish wardens law enforcement authority over state lands for this purpose would be an alternative. It was clarified that the point was to allow game and fish wardens authority to the enforce the state land board rules. Committee members asked how the game wardens could enforce the restrictions any better than currently being done by other law enforcement officials. Senator Roberts suggested that the Game and Fish and federal officials develop legislation more clearly defining what an established road is.
Brad Hill, State Parks Trails system, recognized the need for more education and better enforcement restrictions. The Department will be funding one full time position to educate the public regarding the trails program. If people are aware there is enforcement capability they believe behavior patterns will change. Pat Green asked the Committee to recognize that the program is young and as time goes by more people will be educated to proper use of the trails.
Wyoming Wildlife Federation spokesman, Dave Bragonier, provided a written statement and read the statement into the record. (Appendix 16) The federation supports restricting motor vehicle travel to designated roads and aggressive enforcement of those laws.
Craig Sax, Wyoming Game Wardens association, stated that wardens devote about one-third of work time to law enforcement duties. In a limited survey most wardens contacted supported being involved in enforcement of the off-road restrictions if that enforcement were connected to their normal course of duties. But if new enforcement duties are added, necessary personnel should be included with the additional duties. The primary duty of this enforcement should be with the local law enforcement agency or if federal land is involved it should be federal agencies. For state lands it should also be the county sheriff.
Roy Swander, President of the Wyoming off highway vehicle conservation council testified that the State has only signed trails within the last two years. With the implementation of the trails program there has been a reduction of riding in inappropriate areas. There are also off road vehicle ethics education programs being undertaken. He advocated the legislature consider off-road vehicle education program for young persons using motor vehicles without a license.
Committee members stated that education was a first step. Other Committee members noted that game wardens had enough assignments. Cochairman Baker noted there appeared to be no consensus of the Committee and no motions were made regarding the issue. Representative Iekel volunteered to work with LSO on an individually sponsored bill developing a state statute patterned on the Montana law.
The Committee reviewed its position on the other agenda items. The executive branch was to develop its wildlife funding proposal. There was no request for bill drafts from LSO regarding that issue. The working group was requested to provide input as to the type of Committee which was acceptable. On alternative funding for the Game and Fish there was no Committee request for legislation. The Committee did request the Game and Fish to develop requests for additional funding needed for facility development and ongoing funding requests. Senator Burns asked for a bifurcated request on the funding. The Committee members were to review the habitat development requests and narrow down those requests for the next meeting. There was no need to address the OHV issue further.
The cochairmen were to meet and discuss the next meeting date and place.
There being no further business, Cochairman Baker adjourned the meeting at4:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Mike Baker, Cochairman