00:00:09 Speaker 1: This is the me eat your podcast, coming at you shirtless, severely bug bitten in my case underwear, listening me to eat the podcast. You can't predict anything. Oh all right, before before we get two started. Uh, Jimmy Dorn you're freshman the wheat fields of Montana. Yeah, I'm just back, just just the other day. You go out every year and cut wheat every year and my friends wheat farm. Yeah two Uh, a couple of weeks of harvests and just had a little break, came back to the bar for a couple of days, take care for the business, the restaurant. Uh, end of the month stuff, and then right back to go. We just switched over from cutting winter wheat. Now we're moving on to spring wheet, which is still a little bit high moisture. So it's worked out perfect. Like how why did you? Why? And how how many years have been caught in wheat? Poor? This is my four or third year and it was one of my best friends his family. I met him actually we worked at a restaurant together here in Seattle, and um, his his family runs a big wheat operation north of Great Falls Danner. There's really fantastic people in the Gas botas and uh, we just went through a deal and and he had his father actually unfortunately passed away at a pretty young age, and kind of, you know, it was kind of a it's like just kind of all hands on deck kind of things. So I went back and helped out. And I just love it. I mean, driving a big kind of raccoons and a yeah, yeah, definitely the raccoons skit the way occasionally, but yeah, they trust me driving really huge, cool, super expensive piece of equipment, and I just love it. So tell me how like give me the both of even getting like how much we cut? How quick? Well, I couldn't really break it down how much? How quick? I mean we feel a lot of semis. It's it's we can fill up like a seven fifty bushel hopper in minutes. I mean it's forty five um header moving it like three and you're swat at a time. Yeah, did mow lawn so fast? It'd be quick. We can we cut six acres and you know, just under a couple of hours. It was. It was pretty amazing. When it's humming, we have three machines going, three combines and the grain cart and uh, we can just flat out knock it out. Is it getting hauld to a silo or is it going right to so much? We have two different things. You'll haul to grain silos, yeah, commercial operations and or we'll ben it and uh, they speculate on prices and stuff like that. We can weak stores for quite a while. So and uh, it just depends on where it's going what it is you said, I think we talked about it before it You kind of do it for therapeutic reasons. Man. It gets me out of the city. And uh, wait for the eats the business away from the pizza business instead of like yoga and surf camp. Some of these wheat farmers might want to look into sell them like gold retreats. Yeah, they should go cut wheat week. It is very therapeutic. I mean you spend it. It's it's I don't want to sell it short. It's a grind. I mean we cut from you know, you wake up at six and your servicing machines by seven thirty and then you're generally cutting by around nine. And he worked all day and they the cool thing is dinner in the field. And also you get these you know, the cooler shows up and around you with your face up in that faced off. That would not that kind of cool lunch cool lunch cooler. Getting ship house might not go over too well. There's really expensive gear, but uh, I don't know. Uh yeah, and you know, dinner comes around and he cut until dark and then generally the rule is once the you know, these machines all have fantastic light arrage. You could work all night if you wanted to, and uh, generally we just fill up all the machines at once it gets dark dark, that's when we're just like, all right, just fill up the semis and then we tarp them off overnight and uh that's generally the end of the day. But you'll generally cut from nine am two generally around ten thirty eleven pm. So it's it gets things start moving kind of wavy after you know, twelve hours or so. But you do, like later on you have to do like a memoir about wheat coding. I love it, I really do. And then you know, the scenery is pretty cool, and I mean, uh, you know it's it's a climate controlled, you know environment. You're sitting in air conditioning with the air chair and you have XM radio and I download you know, I've listened to forty podcasts and but it still doesn't you know, we did. We cut for a hundred and thirty plus hours in ten days. I mean, it's it's definitely grind. You close your eyes when you hit the sheets, you opened them and it's time to go again. It's just like you don't even feel like he had a break for real. So at the end of the year, they just cut you big badass check and you walk up. Well, we'll see about the badass part, but yeah, I definitely get drive off in a brand new truck. Gold Team. I wish, I wish. No, it's good. They're super nice people and they've been you know, I was a total greenhorn and it's like I'm the city guy showing up playing farmer and so they're you know, they're nice enough to a trust me and be I take instruction. I can learn pretty much anything pretty quick, and you know, they're like, hey, do this, do that, and they literally just kind of threw two the wolves. Man. They're like, all right, here you go. Don't wreck it because it's really expensive, and then I take it from there. It's great, it's been it's been really fantastic learning experience, and I've met a lot of fantastic people and farmers I think are some of the best people we got. It's been. It's been fantastic. I really enjoy it. And then Tuesday you head back cup more week. Tuesday I go back. Yeah, I got my trucks after likes and my trucks at the Great Falls Airport right now, just gonna go and get right back after it. And I think it's probably another ten days of two weeks, and then we'll probably drinks some beer and eat mistakes when it's all said and done. So it's been great. I just like I said, I love it. Just the nicest people and amazingly resilience and just something breaks. You don't just you're sixty miles from anything, so it's not like you can just I mean, guys know how to well thinking. You know this guy that I work with, you know, Josh and and his brother in law Brandon, they can literally fix anything, like on the fly, Like this crazy bracket broke on the combine I was driving, and this guy Brandon, uh had a new one fabbed up installed in like an hour and a half, Like just oh yeah, I got that. They're just they're that kind of people. And when stuff goes south. We had a big fire um on the farm adjacent to ours, which is like just a disaster, right. You know, you're watching your whole year's work go up and smoke wheat fire and it's degrees and there's a fifteen mile our wind. I mean, it is astonishing how fast or fire will move and how dangerous it is. But like every wheat that's still standing, still standing wheat, and there's actually some cut. There's this lay down it's like swath. I'm not exactly sure the technique for harvesting, but so basically it's just like it's laid down in these long rows, just tinder dry, and it's this massive amount of fuel for the fire. And uh, I mean everybody drops everything from like a three mile radius and everybody you have to have you know, we have these big we drag a disc or behind a tractor, and we have a fire rake set up with you know, a massive container water with a pump like a legit fire set up, and everybody just drops what they're doing and it's like all hands on deck. Everybody shows up and puts out their neighbor's fire. It's really, it's really astonishing to see how everybody comes together. It's pretty cool. That is nice. Yeah, that's solid that people are. They're just good salt of the earth, just awesome folks. Year no no, no, no. But here in Seattle, if a if a competitor down the road, if another pizza guy down the road's place burning down, like I'd lend a hand. We're all in it together, like I like to think. So yeah, our only guests Mike rule, Mike tell tell everybody what what what? What? Your story is, what you do for a living. So I'm the native Fish program manager for the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, and people are thinking New Mexico has fish. They do when I when I when I moved into that job, I thought, man, this is probably gonna be easy. I don't think there's really any water in New Mexico. But it turns out that's not true. There's there's water and quite a few places and a whole lot of data fish that are are pretty unique to that part of the world. But if you were to weigh up like tonnages, Okay, let's say let's say you had a giant pile they had all of the non native fish in New Mexico, and the next to it was a giant pile with all the native fish of New Mexico. Which pile is bigger? Wow, this is a tough one. That is I probably probably non native fish the bigger pile. Yeah, based based mostly on on the reservoirs that we have. Yeah. Yeah, Why why do reservoirs tend to suck so bad for native fish? Well, I mean, it's certainly not always true that there bad for native fish, but but it's like, you know, it just seems like everywhere you go, when you go to a reservoir, oftentimes you're fishing fish that aren't from the area. Yeah. So, I mean, definitely a couple of things that play. One. It's not it's not the historic habitat that's there. You know, those native fish evolved in those in rivers mostly, and then you put a dam on the river and you create a lake, and so that's that's just not what they're adapted to. And then, of course the other thing is you know, the introduction of of non native fish, both intentionally and accidentally over the years, and including you know, non native fish that we that we like to fish for yeah, because it's probably a big thing with you deal with the non natives that that you want, and there's the non natives you don't want. I think it's like where I grew up in the Great Lakes, the non natives you don't want are getting almost as numerous as the non natives people did want. Yeah, I mean, I like all these like all the car gobies, right, all these things to completely rewrite the landscape, the deleterious non natives. At the same time, they're also trying to like establish more and more the ones day, you know, five species of four species of Pacific salmon in the Great Lakes. That's a tremendous amount of money that goes into putting those fish in there. Yeah, you know, i'd I'd like to think anyway, we're mostly done in most places trying to establish new populations and non native fish. Um. But of course you're right, you know, salmon and other fish to support him that got established in the Great Lakes our thing. Um, you're saying that most like we as a culture are mostly done trying to establish non native fisheries. Yeah, I think, I mean, I think here in the United States for sure, that's true. I don't know about else in the world. I think for the most part. I mean that doesn't mean that we don't continue to support some non native fisheries. But but as far as uh, you know, bringing in a lot of new non native fish at least in the public waters, UM, that's lower, that's lower priority. Yeah, you know, I'm not familiar, certainly not in New Mexico with you know, with efforts to do that. Yeah, to like get more walleye go on or more whatever going. You know. I think we want to talk about is UM. Like I think I think a lot of a lot of people that hunt fish don't realize is how wildlife management gets funded. UM. And I'm gonna set this up real quick. Then you after I get done set it up, you take you go with or don't go with. You can you can like say where I was wrong or right. But in so, if you're gonna look at American history, UM, in a in a wildlife perspective, we came in it must say like euro American culture, European culture came to the US. What's not the US, And we spent a couple of hundred years almost systematically but not quite intentionally depopulating wildlife in the country to the point where we got to around the turn of the century, the early and we'd kind of uh almost wiped out virtually everything. And then at that time there was a big push to try to find a way to recover game animals. And one of the biggest things that happened that there's two stages and recovering wild wildlife in America. There's like two stages that happened to it. Well, let's for our perposonal stagre's three stages. One of the stages was setting aside land and habitat okay, and Theodore Roosevelt kind of ran point on that idea is just like establishing landscapes where there could where there you would have if they're where you're creating land that if there were animals, that's where the animals would be. Setting aside a habitat um. Another stage in this was time to stop the bleeding, which was basically a war against market hunters, so trying to de incentivize or otherwise make illegal the raping and pillaging of the land and water by people who were collecting animals to sell be it for the feather trade, wild meat, wild fish, so that was another step that we had to take was to stop market hunters, and the third step was to build stuff back up again. Eventually, the question comes up, right, how are we gonna pay for wildlife recovery in this country? And one of the first things were kind of like one of the big things that happened in wildlife recovery happened in nineties, right, and it was originally called the Wildlife Restoration Act. Yeah, I mean, they the two acts that you're going to talk about. I think you know that we commonly refer to as Pittman Robertson and Dingle Johnson are actually Pittman Robertson is the Wildlife Restoration Act and Dingle Johnson is the Sport Fish Restoration Act. We we often put those two things together and call them the Wildlife and sport Fish Restoration Acts. In fact, the US Fish and Wildlife Service has offices that we shortn't even further and call them the whisper Offices, UH short for Wildlife and sport Fish Restoration, and those are the offices that administer those those federal excise taxes. But the portion of that that became pitt and Robbers and happened much earlier. That's a good question. You're you're probably actually more familiar with the the intimate history of the accident than i am. You know, my knowledge kind of starts with they came into existence in nineteen thirty seven and then have been amended various times. Look that up beyond history, regardless of it as a gap. Let me quickly they real quick layout, just the background on it. So Franklin Roosevelt, he goes around like he had a big conservation bent, like Theodore did. And Franklin Roosevelt goes around and he in the thirties, he's going around and this is like the you know, during the Great Depression. He's going around explaining does this rod and gun clubs around the country? People who are interested in in hunting and fishing. He's going around and explaining to them, if some if this is gonna happen, if we're going to recover American wildlife, you guys are gonna have to do it. And they come up with this idea that we're gonna put an excise tax on guns and ammunition and hunting equipment, to the tune of like Tenor and the sportsmen who are going to be paying the tax. It's a very targeted tax just on people to hunt, and there overwhelmingly enthusiastic about it. The industry people, the people who are producing guns and ammunition, who are gonna theoretically lose sales due to the fact that their goods are not going to be ten or eleven percent more expensive, are enthusiastic supporters of this Wildlife Restoration Act idea. And the thing goes from introduction to the president president's signature in ninety days. Now the Affordable Care Act took over a year. To give you a sense of like how quickly this thing went through with overwhelming support, and it wound up that they're just taking when when you buy guns enamel, you get taxed on it. That tax we're in top about how this works. That money is the money that went into we're covering American wildlife. Yeah right, it's it's what's called a user pay system, So you know, it's it's in sports AND's best interests to have healthy wildlife and fish populations in the landscape. And in order to to foster that, the idea was that the users would help to pay for it, meaning that it's gonna favor well, we'll get into that, the criticism that it just favors game animals. Yeah, and we can we can talk about that at any point you want to. Um. The reality is the the acts are a little bit different in uh in how they specifically focused. I mean, yeah, let yeah, let me let me clarify the one I'm talking about became Pittman Robertson and follow following that or not what you find out? Oh sorry, I didn't. You didn't clarify the question, So I didn't. We're talking about you're supposed to look up is Dingle john What year did Dingle Johnson happened? Okay, Now, Dingle Johnson is a real strange name, like Pittman Robertson. You know, you kind of like, right, it's like an austerity to it, right, But Dingle Johnson is just like, uh so I would have picked a different name. Well, I think it's personally it's you know, just like Pittman Robertson named after the two sponsors of the bill. No, no, and God bless him. But I just would have said, like, you know, considering that it's Dingle and Johnson, we're gonna go. We're gonna go with different names. I don't expect you to have it to have a stated opinion on that, but can you lay out what so like, take it from the perspective the dude likes the hunting fish, what stuff is he buying that is going into these funds? So specifically, what kinds of products, like when you buy sporting goods, what exact stuff are you buying that your pants? Such a humongous tax that's that then goes into wildlife funding? Like what's on the list? Yeah, so there's I mean, there's a there's a huge list of things. It It really largely comes down for for Pittman Robertson, A lot of it is guns and ammunition. Um, it's archery equipment, reloading supplies. I believe archery equipment is in there, yep. Um, some gunsmith thing, I believe if gunsmiths are actually building guns, um, muzzle loaders. So it's it's really, you know, most of the common things that we think not and stuff. No, that's getting more it's super specific. Yeah, that's right. And then what is it in the fishing end of things? So, um, you know, fishing is is pretty similar in that it's it's the things that you would think of. It's it's rods and reels and and lures. Um. So the very specific stuff, right. The one that's pretty important to sport fish that most folks don't know about is that that there's an excise tax on boat fuel. So you have a boat fuel is just I mean unlettered gas. Yeah, that's correct, But it depends on where it's sold exactly. And I'm not I'm not entirely sure how they calculate what counts as boat fuel. You know, if there's some small percentage of all the fuel that's sold that's considered to be boat fuel, or if it's just what's sold on marina docks for instance, or or close to reservoirs. But but there's a substantial portion of of what comes through the Sport Fish Restoration Act is is coming from boat game. Yeah, I mean it's an important component. Yeah. So the I know that the Pittman Robertson funds right now. So again, right now, when you go out by guns, ammunition, all this kind of stuff, reloading stuff, archery equipment is loading stuff. You're paying a heavy as tacks on those goods and right now, I think on average now it raises about a billion dollars a year go into that fund. Yeah, I think the I'm gonna gonna go into government speak here the fiscal year, Um, I believe seven hundred and eighty million dollars is the number that I got in front of me coming through just through Pittan Robertson, just through the Wildlife restaurant, from from one fiscal year. And does that stay pretty steady every year? Um? You know, I don't have the history in front of me. It it went up. I think you know almost everybody knows the story of of what happened during the Obama administration. Yeah, go ahead, all right, So there's different ways to spin is. I'm gonna try to find a way that that rolls into different spins on it. So okay, Um, now this is me talking, not Mike ah Obama. People know it's not like a the gun. The firearms industry did not find a kindred spirit in Obama. And uh, there there was a lot of fear throughout the eight years of his pregnant as presidency that we would be having some like draconian anti gun measures and acted and it prompted a lot of people to go out and buy firearms and buy AMMO for fear that their right to do so might be infringed upon in the very near future, and it caused a like a legit gun rush. I think the handgun sales went up under his administration some people, and so all that gun buying. Some people called him um jokingly called you know, America's best gun salesman, and other people talked about his conservation legacy because it blew up Pittman Robertson funding. Because every time someone goes out and buys a handgun for home defense, by the way this law has written, ten or eleven percent of that purchase price price goes into funding wildlife. So it was like the good old days for eight years and then gun purchases. With the the new administration coming in, gun purchases plummeted almost instantaneously. So I think now there's some austere times coming. Yeah, that's entirely possible. I mean we haven't it'll be it'll be fiscal year eighteen when when when we see those new numbers. But whether yeah, because the real big drive around that is guns and ammunition. I mean as far as like the percentages go. So yeah, because because because Obama fuelled such a gun buy and frenzy he fueled like some major conservation spending. I even saw her one magazine, like a very pro Obama magazine had it be like um as sort of building in it as part of his concert, like I said, his conservation legacy, even though it's completely like the Department of Unintended Consequences, right, it was like not the goal. And if that was the goal, and you are that shrewd of a poker player, I have to like hand it to you. If you're like, well, how could I get more money to fund wildlife? I don't all do. I'll act like I'm gonna get rid of guns, but not really, that's shrewd. No one plays that kind of poker. Yeah, I got no. I mean I wouldn't think so. I would just say that it's been a good thing for for conservation funding. Okay, so there's seven hund eighty million. Now how much comes up from the taxes on fishing gear? You got that? Yeah, so it's it's about three and fifty millions. Yeah, but there's twice as many fishermen. Yeah, you know, because they like fishermen are like uh, I was sending his conversation your day, Um, twice as many people buy fishing licenses, but they're not they're not as obsessive. Right, There's there's more weekend folks that that don't don't fish year around, like you know, like people who are real dedicated with hunting. Yeah, like when you talk when you talk about hunting and fishing, like hunter numbers in American fisher numbers in America. While they're looking at is uh, they're just looking at who bought a license? What happens after the guy buys a license? You have no idea, so you kind of and be like, I can't remember what it is. Just thirty million, I don't know. Some years I think like around thirty million Americans buy a fishing license, but they could be buying three day licenses in order to go out, you know, one time. So they're like twice as many fishermen are only paying half as much excise taxes on stuff. Yeah, fishing rounds like a hundred bucks, on our rifles a thousand bucks. Right, So maybe it's just a question of price. Could be maybe so there so that money, Um, so we got like what you're buying, it pays the stuff. This is something everybody has to do where does that, like, what's the path that money takes in order to then go into like actual fish and wildlife spending. Yeah, so, um, I guess you know. One thing to note there is is that that the the excise tax is in the price that you see, you know, Yeah, you don't get like an itemized bill that shows that part of it. Yeah. If you walk up to the counter and they charge a tax, that's not the tax that we're talking about. It's already built into the price of the item. Um. So that money essentially goes into uh pot of money that is administered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. And then from there did the pots get blended to the pots stay separate. They stay separate. The hunting pot and the fishing pot go to US Fish and Wildlife Service, but they stay hunting fishing. That's correct. Yeah, I mean there you know, there are different there are different rules for both pots of money, um in terms of how things get old out to the states and and territories and the District of Columbia. Um. So they stay separate. And then ah, essentially what happens is the Fish and Wildlife Service runs their formula for how much each state is going to get from each program every years that I want to talk about that. But what'd you find out? Do you find it out? Dingle Johnson? So quite like some idy here twelve years thirteen years later, here's nothing to look up. Do you remember when a guy told us how much uh, Federal and Savage when they have to cut their check, they're Pittman Robertson check. Uh, there's a ridiculous amount of money. Yeah. I don't know if I was there for that conversation, though you were on the email. I'll find it. Um. Okay, Yeah, some guy was telling us, like what a company like that Federal Ammunition, how many how much animal they sell? It's gotta be a lot. Oh yeah, at the end of the year, you're right, and check for tens and tens of millions of dollars. Just think about how much Federal is shoot every year? All right? So so how do the what is the goal? Like, how do you how do you calculate that out? Like what are they looking at to say, like, okay, here's what states get? What is it? How many dudes hunting fish there? Yeah, that's part of it. Um, Like I said, they're they're a little bit different at at their heart, they are both about two things. One is land area, so how big the state is, and the other is how many license buyers there are. Um, you know, there there's a little bit of complexity and nuance, and we could we could spend a week talking about that. But for Wildlife Restoration Act, um, it's fifty percent land area and it's fifty number of paid licensed hunters. Now, so who are the big winners there? Well, I you know, I got to imagine I could, I could look at the list, but you know, I have to imagine a state like Texas, which has a huge land area and a huge number of hunters, would would really come out high. But there is an additional rule in there, which is that no state can receive more than five percent of the total or less than one Oh, I got you. So it keeps it from from, you know, having one state really dominate. I grew up in Pennsylvania. That Pennsylvania would probably be another one that if if you base anything off the number of of licensed hunters in the state, you know, would would really get a big share. Oh yeah, because they are Pennsylvania often vised for like the hunting the state. Yeah, I have per capital, but just total numbers of licenses, right, you always hear like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Texas. Yeah, they they used to say when when I was a kid, you know, they said there were a million people in the woods on the first day of rifle deer season every year. So I had I had looked it up recently. Um, I believe in the last couple of years they fell below a million licenses sold. But but that million number is a threshold that that not many places. I think Texas. I think for a couple of years ago, five to ten years ago, maybe Pennsylvania was was number one right there, and now it's fallen behind to Texas, a long behind Texas. So did you say, again, just to back up, did you say it winds up being how many people buy a hunting license, how many people live in the state. No, it's how many people buy a license. It is number of paid licensed hunters. So it's land area, fift land area and fifty number of licensed hunters. So then they take the big giant pool of money the US Fish and Wildlife Service does or there three quarters of a billion dollars million whatever? Does they take that and then they run their calculation and they wind up saying, let's use New Mexico. They wind up saying, Okay, here's New Mexico's chunk, and what is New Mexico's chunk? This is all public information? Oh yeah, yeah you can. Uh. I mean if you if you do a web search for sport, fish and Wildlife Restoration Acts, you'll you'll end up at at the Fish and Wildlife Service UM website and and all of this is is readily available. Yea. So New Mexico UM, make sure I'm on the right line in the table here. It looks like fifteen million dollars fifteen and a half million dollars in fiscal year seventeen four from the Wildlife Restoration Act, So from Pittman Robertson and and what for them fishing, I think it's about it's six six point one, so twenty one and a half million combined. And so the FEDS then they don't just like turn around and write you at check for twenty one and a half million and say go for it. Yeah. And so this this was really one of the things that I wanted to talk about. You know, we talked a little bit about the history of the Act and and like I mentioned, I'm you know, I'm not the greatest student of that history. I'm I come at this more from a pragmatic standpoint of of how we do this and how the money really works and how it flows and where it goes, and so what happens is the state's right grants. I mean, we know how much money is is going to be granted to us or how much money is available for those grants. But we write grants too. But you know, like, but you know you're gonna get it. We know, we know we're gonna get it. I mean, the Fishing Wildlife Service, you know, reviews the grants to ensure that the projects meet the rules that the acts put in place. You know, so there's a process step there that has to be done. But we, you know, we still have to write the grants and then we report to the US Fish and Wildlife Service at the end on what we did with the money. Um. But you know, one of the real interesting nuances of how this works is that both programs, as well as some other federal grant programs, are reimbursement programs. So the state, while while we do write a grant and the Fish and Wildlife Service does come back hopefully and say yes, you know, go ahead, you can spend money on that. The state spends the money first, and then once we've spent it, we apply for reimbursements. But where do you get in the first place. So almost all of that money, in especially in a state like New Mexico, comes from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses, So the license buyer pays for the projects up front and then gets reimbursed for a portion of the money that has already been spent. Can you real quick name, like, can you put give people sense of what these projects are? Well, I mean that's it's tough because they're they're really broad in in uh scope and scale. UM. We use the money to do all kinds of things. Habitat restoration is is one thing, um, you know, both for for fish and wildlife. UM. You know, we do surveys, We monitor populations of fish and wildlife statewide. UM. On the fishery side of things, we do things like operate our state fish hatcheries using this money. UH. Specifically in the program that I work in, we do. We we work with our native fish are particularly our native trout, both helo trout and real ground the cutler trout are considered sport fish. So even though helo trouts listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, we're still able to use Dingle Johnson money to work on it. So it is to do research and habitat improvement, try to recover the fish. Yeah, and so to a large degree, it covers most of the breadth of the biology stuff that the agency does. And so you know, I do wanna. I don't want to move on before I mentioned one thing, which is that most states work like New Mexico, where almost all of our revenue comes through license sales. They're are not like You're like, you're not getting money just from the general taxpayer in New Mexico. That's right, and and most states work that way. There there are exceptions. I believe Missouri and Arkansas are two exceptions that that while of course they still get money through license sales, they also get other money's tax sales, tax revenue or general fund moneies. But most states um are like us. And you know, we we say that we're an enterprise agency, which essentially means that we generate our own revenue. Yeah. I had read somewhere that so the country has fifties state fish and game agencies obviously, and I read somewhere that their budgets so all of the work that goes into wildlife at a state level, which basically all states. Every state manages virtually all the wildlife in their state. Was some exceptions when you get into like things that are listed as in dangered species, but states manage their own wildlife and across the boarding, all states just all the money they use for wildlife, game and non games. So just like all wildlife in the state is paid for sixty six depending on which state, is paid for by people buying hunting and fishing licenses or by people paying taxes on hunting and fishing gear. Like the hunters and anglers foot the whole thing. Virtually, the hunters and anglers through buying licenses certainly foot a big proportion of it. You know, I don't I don't have an agency wide number like that. I mean, there there are things that you can pay for using Sport, Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act moneies. We call those reimbursable expenses, and other things that you can't. So you can't reimburse for law enforcement expenses, and obviously that's a substantial component of a lot of you know, agencies do um, so actually paying the game wardens. You can't use federal funds for that, right, that's correct. That's got to come out of your license sales. It does. And so one of the other things that the acts prohibit are really anything that generates revenue. So we can't use the money to sell licenses. So the staff and the infrastructure and everything else that's actually selling licenses not reimbursable expenses. And I want to I want to get back to the to just to to the to the part you're talking about where you're doing paying out a pocket and then applying for grants. But just real quick, a thing, a problem that used to happen that this is correct, it is. It used to be that states would some states would the state Fish and Game agency would make money. They would raise funds by selling hunting and fishing licenses, but then the states would pilfer those accounts. And if you if a state removes hunting fishing license revenue from its state Fishing Game agency, doesn't the state then become ineligible for the federal money. Like there's rules that come with the federal money. There there are and and uh, you know, we call it the anti diversion portion of the bill. So, um, the Acts basically say what you just said, which is that if a state is to be eligible to receive the money, they cannot transfer that license sale money outside of the agency to do other unrelated things. So they can't divert the money for other purposes. They can't take it and put it, you know, in their general fund to be spent on roads or something. Yeah. So your so your licen's money stays on mission, right, which is really I mean, that was a absolutely brilliant thing to build into the Acts. That's what I was just thinking. It's like, man, they really like nailed the like the game plan this one. Yeah. And then Greg blast it's his favorite part of it is is if the money doesn't get used in two years, it just gets rolled into migratory birds. I think, Yeah, he likes that little final button on it. Yeah. I actually just listen to that episode again, and you know, I was I was thinking about that when this morning. Actually that that if if folks wanted to, that would be a great one to to listen to before this to kind of, you know, start thinking about why that revenue is important, you know, before you sort of get into the mechanics of how it all works. So how crippling is it that you guys got to pay up front and then get reimbursed later. Well, why can't it this give you the money up front? Well, you know, I don't like, how do they expect you have the money? I think that agencies, I mean, I think this has been going on. I don't know the early history with agencies, but I think this has been going on so long at this point that agencies are you know, have just learned to plan for this um as it as it currently stands. Uh, you know, I think New Mexico Department of Game and Fishes is doing just fine with that. But just like moving the money around, Yeah, yeah, like taking money that everything would go for doing a project where it you're gonna get it back later and you can use when you get it back, you can use it for things that the federal funds aren't eligible for. Yeah, you know, I'm not I'm not a hundred percent sure that that, but that that's a exactly right that it's it's not necessarily that we wait to get it back and then use it for things that it's not eligible for. I think it just all comes back into you know, our our big fund when it comes back. So while't me through the process of like I like, how while me through the like follow a dollar? Right, So there's a dollar in this pool? How does it come to that dollar winds up going to to to Fish and Wildlife in a case scenario like something you've been involve So once it gets to the agency, Yeah, like I'm saying, like, like, like, walk me through the process of a state identifying something they'd like to do. Right. So so we say, hey, we have a real grande Cutler trout project that we want to work on. Um, here's what it is. We right up to grant, We send the grant to Fish and Wildlife Service. They come back and say, okay, you're approved, and um how long does that take? You know? It depends, Um, usually a couple of months. I Mean, there's there's kind of grand cycles that are that are tied with these things that you know, most most folks understand what they are and and when things need to be turned into to fit in the both the state and the federal fiscal year. Um. So they they usually turn them around pretty fast. Uh. And so then Once we get approval, you know, there's grant code set up, and uh, if you go work on that Rio Grande cut or trout restoration project, UM, you come back and you report that time that you worked or if you buy stuff for the project or whatever it is, UM, you report it that way. And then we have a federal aid office. So New Mexico Department of Game and Fish employees who who work on this stuff full time financial specialists. UM, they gather all that information up. They send it to the Fishing Wildlife Service, you know, to document that the agency spent the money, and then the Fishing Wildlife Service sends back the reimbursement portion UM, which for both sport fishing wildlife is is sev. So we get reimbursed. They don't pay. Now we get reimbursed for seventy excuse me, sevent the cost? Is it competitive or the like? Does this Is there some bigger hand at the state level that says like, okay, we have fifteen million dollars to work with here, let's figure out how we're going to spread this around. Are you competing? Are your grants competing against other people within the state in that sense? Um, it's it's all, it's all within our agency. So you know, you could you could view it as there is some competition in that way where you know, upper level management, like the chiefs from Fisheries and Wildlife and the other divisions, you know, would would talk about the projects that that are on the docket and how they're gonna spend that money. Now, of course, because the acts are separate, because ones for sport fish and ones for wildlife. Generally, the Wildlife division is gonna decide how to spend their portion of it, and they do that in consultation with with you know, our our administration are director. Um. So, so by that, I mean like, let's say, you know, there's fifteen million available. They're not sending over twenty million grant requests to official wildlife there, They're sending over fifteen million grants. We work that out internally. Yeah, that's okay, that's all right. So you're never like fighting against the guy down the hall, all right now if you got to go make your case right at the for the state level. Yes, that's correct. Yeah. So what was the next part of that? Now, because I interrupted you about that, I don't know where we were reimbursed. Oh yeah, why like, how's that come up? They're just like, won't do one? Well, I mean I think that that the idea is that the state is vested in its own projects, you know. I mean we ultimately are still I mean, we're accountable right up front and spending the money. But you know, I think it's also right. It's also a mechanism, you know, by which we own a portion of of what's been spent. And you know, we have a lot of pride in the projects that that we do. So what is it with I noticed when you're talking about this, you're saying wildlife, but then sport fish. So Pittman Rock again, like it just in lingo, just for the listener and lingo we've come to talk about. The Wildlife Restoration Act is known Pittman Robertsons. That's like two people that whose name replied to the bill, Like two people pushed for the bill. That's game and non game animals. Yeah, so wildlife is defined by the Act as birds and mammals. So why is the fishing one sport fish? That's a good question. I mean, um, so if there's like a chub that people don't regard, a native chub that people don't regard as a sport fish. You can't use that money on it. It has to be a sport fish. Yeah, that's right. And so they're that seems kind of like, um, it seems like, uh, not quite cynical, but it seems like a little bit where you're you're opening yourself up for um, some pretty heavy criticism. Well, you know, they're I mean, there's even there. There's a couple of nuances. One is that that the state has some role in defining a sport fish. So you know, there are places where a roundtail chub are considered sport fish. Not in New Mexico, but but there are places, Um, I believe, I believe Arizona. Um. The other thing is when when we go out and do work for sport fish, and some sport fish are native. You know, I mentioned, I mentioned the two trout species and and actually you know down in in southeast New Mexico there's there's a lot of native fish. There's large about bass and other things down there. Um. But when we go out and do surveys, even if they're sport fish surveys, we're almost always learning something about the fish community as a whole. So even though the work may be focused on sport fish, there are ancillary benefits to other native fish, non game fish. And then it's not totally discriminatory against non game No, not totally. But and I would think if you're studying habitat, then you know, whatever you learn habitat, it's gonna be beneficial to all exactly. Or or doing habitat improvement projects are you know, often good for everything. And and so a big chunk of what what happens with my team and my program is is is done through other federal aid grant programs that are similar, have similar mechanics, uh, but different sources of of funding give me for instance, so there's really two programs that we use all the time. UM. There is some funding that comes through the Fish and Wildlife Service to work on endangered species Endangered Species Section six funding UM. And so you know, one of the hot button issues that we're working on right now. We also in my program work on aquatic invertebrates. UM, we're working with a native muscle called the Texas hornshell. There's a lot of uh things swirling around right now with listing for that animal, like did it'll getting threatened or endanger Yeah, it's actually they're about to publish the final rule, and so we've been we've been working on on one, getting the best understanding that we can of what's going on with it. We've also been trying out some some new conservation approaches to try to repatriate it to some his or habitat UH places where it's not currently found. And then we've also been working with the Fish and Wildlife Service and and UH private landowner and and business folks to UH to work on what's called a candidate conservation agreement with assurances UM. It's essentially a conservation agreement that folks can enter into before an animal gets listed, so that to try to head off getting listed. Well, it's not it's not that particular agreements not necessarily so much about the animal not getting listed as it is about laying out what will happen if it does. So that muscle lives in the Permian Basin, and if you google search the Permian Basin, the thing that you'll see pop up is probably about oil and gas development. And so you know, those businesses are interested in understanding what will happen and and and so through this process they get assurances about what's going to happen if the animal gets listed, and they probably get real interested in having it not get listed. Well you know what I mean, Like as far as like supporting the paying for biology, Yeah, well they I mean through through this program they support conservation by paying into a fund to to ultimately help recover the animal if it gets listed, or continued to work on it as it goes through the process. What what it tell me about the animal? The one you're talking about right now, Texas hornshell. Um, you know, it's a it's a it's I believe it's the only remaining freshwater muscle in New Mexico. It it lives in the Black River, which is a tributary to the to the Pacos River in southeastern New Mexico. Uh, it's got an interesting life history and that it it lives up under these mud banks that overhang the river and under rock ledges and stuff. So, um, it's actually kind of fun to go a sample for it, jump in the river and and swim around the banks and and feel up under the banks trying to trying to find a thing. And how big are they they get up to I don't know, I'd i'd say maybe five inches long way across the shell. It looks like a like a kind of mossy getting a restaurant. It looks kind of like that. I mean, it's you know, it's a bi valve muscle, you know, similar to what folks would be familiar with their and why are they suffering? Are the intolerant of pollution? Um? You know, water quality is an issue, and of course water quantity is an issue as well. So drawing water off lowers water levels and that screws them. Yeah. If if water levels dropped below where they where they live up under the banks, they don't they don't fare so well. So let's say you identify um, I mean you specifically, but kind of like addresses as you as in just people that work at State Fish and Game a state fishing game agencies you identify. I think let's say, with with this muscle, you're like, man, if I had you know, a couple hundred thousand dollars, I could there's this idea, how to really should try it? What is it like when you go and present? How competitive is it when you go within agency to present your plan? Like do you have to have your ship dialed in when you're going to present your idea because it's a competitive environment. It's more of a negotiation, I would say, than a competition. We we talk about all the priorities that the agency may have for using that funding, and you know, I mean I would know we're we're really we're talking about when we talk about Sport Fish Restoration Act money, you know, millions of dollars. It's bounced up and down a little bit. But the E s A Section six funding is has been around two hundred thousand dollars in federal money a year, so much smaller pot of money. UM. And the other program that I wanted to mention is the state Wildlife Grant program. UH. If you look, most states have what's called the State Wildlife Action Plan, which is a plan that they developed in concert with the Fish and Wildlife Service UM and that's tied to another grant program that that is more UM. I I believe it's currently in the like eight hundred thousand dollar a year neighborhood, so four non game fish and invertebrates. Those are too pots of money that we drawn what funds those were, like, where does that money come from? There? There money from Congress tax revenue money such a general pool money. Yeah, so when you have an idea, you're not in there like fighting the guy down the aisle. No, I'm obsessed with this idea, Like I just just got you a lot of people that want the money. There, I mean there, there is there, you know to some degree, there's there's longstanding programs that money goes to, like some guys kissed because he's got some glamorous thing that draws in all the money. That doesn't happen. Well, I mean like oh, those sheep, those desert big horn sheep guys sure gobble up a lot of money, but see those those folks can use Pittman robertson money, so they're not you know, and these more limited people. Is it that those trout guys gobble up a lot of money? Well, I mean again that that would be that would be DJ money eligible. So it's it's really a smaller group of folks in the agency that work on things that are not reimbursable um against PR and DJ money and and I guess I've honestly never thought much about this. Maybe it's in partment because my team gets a lot of that a lot of that funding, you know, on the wildlife side, UM, the herpetology stuff, reptiles and amphibians, you know, they they use that money as well. And then you know, with so particularly for that's particularly true for the ESA funding. For the State Wildlife Grand funding, we have another division called UH Ecological and Environmental Planning UM, and that division also works with a lot of State Wildlife Grand money. But you know, I feel like those lines are relatively clearly drawn and and you know, there is conversation and negotiation every year about how that money is going to be spent, but it's you know, it's not it's not gladiatorial. Yeah. So do you feel like you're well funded all in all? I do. Yeah. So here's a government guy and it's not going to complain to me about he doesn't get an of money. No. I you know what, you're able to do what you need to do. I think that that we currently absolutely have as many projects going UM, as many fully funded projects going as as we could do. You know, if if we had more folks in the program, we could take on more stuff. But but right now we're we're very busy doing a number of projects across the state. Jimmy Dornany got any questions up to this point. None, just everything's been What's the part you thought was the most interesting? Um, basically the breakdown between the amount of money that's gleaned off of sales of firearms. I mean, I was just had kind of a not a really strong knowledge of background. I just I'm just amazed that there's that kind of revenue, seven hundred fifty million. I was wondering if they put it. I was going to ask if money gets put away, if it's not all spent. He said, it's got to be spent on mission, got to be spent instead of having a nice big chest somewhere where we got it. Uh, well, that's good. It seems like it's going to get use And I like the idea of our fund and our own deal. You know, we can't say how do I say it equently? Um, you know we're paying for what we're getting. You know that that strikes home. That's good. But that so, but that becomes controversial to some people because here's the like, here's a criticism that you here floated around, Mike, you might speak to this or not. Um. The criticism being that they'll even you like like a fish and game agency. What you'll hear their language of like our customers. Okay, so someone who just let's say, you have a person doesn't hunting fish and they live in a state and they enjoy wildlife. There is some resentment in some with some people that the agency that's responsible for managing and handling all wildlife in that state views it as though they're doing it to service a customer base who's actually paying for it. Now, I would argue that makes sense to me. These are the people who are funding it, so they should have a bigger say or have their interests served as a higher priority than people who aren't funding it. But some people feel like a state shouldn't be in that situation. They shouldn't be looking at If your job is to manage wildlife, you shouldn't be doing it through the lens of servicing your customers, meaning of emphasizing or paying special attention to the things that they like to go out and shoot and catch. That they would point to, there's inordinance spending on elk, turkeys, trout, wal eyes, and a lack of attention and a lack of funding and a lack of management brought to horn knows chubbed muscles right because the customers don't care or don't care as much. I like that it's broad that it's not just specific the stuff that we hunt, but it's also the money is just distributed all around. But they but but it's not like like a lot of attention is paid to the things that the customers are interested in. Mm hmm, I'm putting Devil's advocate. I'm just saying that that makes people uneasy when they view it. Being their customers, it would be like, okay, they'd be like this. Imagine the governor state. You would never say, well, you know, rich people pay a lot more taxes. I'm more interested in doing the kind of stuff that helps rich people out. Now, that would not fly well as a campaign rally, No, it would not. But fishing game agencies, some people feel that efficient game agency's basically saying that by managing wildlife, Mike, you care to speak to this well, I mean, you know, not your own opinion, but just like would you care to add any flavor texture? Well? No, I mean, you know, I I think I think that to some degree that's a misinterpretation what we do. And you know, me being the guy complaining like I'm not doing like you take you don't agree with that complaint, that that that that that's not a valid complaint. I think, you know, I think I understand where folks are coming from when when they they believe that what we do is manage sport fish and wildlife, um, you know, and that we just do that for a customer, and and all that we're doing is trying to increase populations of things that you can hunt and fish for. I empathize with that, you know, I think I can see why people might see that, but I think that the reality is a lot different, and you know that. I mean, that's really why I wanted to come on today, was, you know, to to talk about, you know, how it is that we pay for conservation and and why why we manage non game fishing wildlife. Can you answer that? Can you just answer that in a sentence? Why is it a mandate? Well, I don't. I don't know that I can answer in a sentence. Um. I think there's you know, there's a big long bunch of sentences together. So there's about half a dozen reasons why we do it. I mean one, New Mexico, like most states, you know, has in law in statute that they're fishing. Game agencies are supposed to manage fishing wildlife, and there may be nuances and how they define those things, but they often include lots of stuff that's not you know, game or sport fish, animals. So that's sort of you know, first reason, there's there's this legal reason, right, um the second reason we do it, and I stock I want to talk with legal reasons. So you're saying a state, um has that knowing that the money is going to come from, knowing that the money is coming from hunters and fishermen, they still like with that bit of knowledge, they still have it written in that you have to manage all wildlife. I mean, I don't know what the consideration originally was when it went into statute and in terms of where the funding would come from, but yes, it is. You know, we have a statutory obligation to manage fisher wildline. It could be sued for not doing it. I suppose we could. Okay, so there's a legal reason, right, so you know, there's there's the ethical reason. And I genuinely believe that this one is important to a lot of people in our agency that you know, managing ecosystems as a whole is the right thing to do. Trying to pass on our natural history as intact as possible is the right thing to do. So that's that's an ethical argument for for why we do it. And you feel that that that sentiment is is held. That's like a widespread belief within agencies. I do, yeah, because you guys didn't just all get into it because a huge paycheck. It's a great it's a great way to make a living, it really is, but it is it is h not one that necessarily comes with lots of zeros. So you know. The third reason is the ecological argument. Right, So if we want healthy populations of the kind of things that we like to hunt and fish for out in the landscape, they're part of an ecosystem. You you never know what's going to happen when one thing or another disappears. You you never know, you know what might cause things to fall apart from ecosystem level. It's you know, it's it's the Aldo Leopold intelligent tinkering quote, right, you know. Um, so we want to preserve all the cogs and wheels from an ecological standpoint. So that's you know, reason number three. The the ecological argument that it's it's good overall to have healthy functioning ecosystems and all the things that go with them because of the interconnectedness of it all. Yeah, that that's that's what I think about a lot. I think a lot of people that hunt fish and look at wildlife through that lens of just like are there a lot of deer around right now or not? Like was it a good deer season or not? Because I sat in my dear blind two days and I want to know if I saw more deer last year than the year before, Like if you have like that limited of a view of wildlife, I think that often times you can kind of miss some bigger pictures about things, and we're at some time talk about it's not long ago. Where like in the in the nineties, in the eighties and nineties, like we were kind of change aging in this country. In the middle of the country, we were changing some practices of how we are growing grain okay, and putting tilling up more land and growing more grain and experimenting with new fertilizers did allow us to grow much more grain in places that we hadn't traditionally grown grain. And this went on in the eighties and nineties and kind of rewrote the map on grain production in the US, and that caused a massive explosion of snow geese to the point where snow geese populations quadruple and then went beyond that. All of those snow geese spend their time they summer and nest in the Arctic, and they started to decimate grasslands on the Arctic slope. And another thing that happened from this explosion of snow geese decimating grasslands leading to the incursion of salt water into because as they destroy the grass and the rhizomal systems, salt water would come up and entirely change plant communities on the Arctic slope. And meanwhile, polar bears. We're figuring out this new resource, and Hudson's Bay had polar bears that are eating hundreds of pounds of snow geese eggs and not eating things that they used to eat before, changing their whole diet around to accommodate or to account for this new resource. So you realize that like some dude killing ground in North Dakota to grow barley, has such wide reaching effects on wildlife that, yeah, like the elder Leopold idea that when you pull a lever, it's not happening in a vacuum, like you're changing many things along with it, right, And I think a lot of people fail to realize that when they talk about species that are you know that we pay attention to or don't pay attention to. Like, you can't just have this sort of really nearly idea that you're just gonna let things vanish or trash certain things and not have it be felt in strange, weird ways elsewhere. You know. Yeah, ecosystems are are complex things, and they are much bigger than you think. They are much much bigger and generally much more complex because you can't anticipate yeah, like things that and you have to get over the idea too. I think people have to get over the idea that we're like done making mistakes. There's sort of a cockiness that comes where we laugh about ship we used to do, but right now we're doing, um we just haven't found out yet, yeah, you know, making big mistakes right now that we'll later realize we're laughably stupid. Well, you know, and I I mean I as a as a fisheries manager, right, you know, I hope that we continue to get better. I mean, you know, we have a lot more science than we did when a lot of things were happening, and you know, the introduction of non native species has been such a big thing in the fisheries world for native fish, and you know, we talked about it earlier that that those kind of things really are not happening on on the scale. If they're happening at all there, they're not happening on the scale that they were. So it's it's true. A hundred years ago, fisheries management was largely about you know, getting fish out in the landscape for people to catch, and that meant, you know, anywhere that you could get a trout from and go stock it that that was a good thing, particularly if you could establish new populations. You know, people people wanted to go to Yellowstone for instance, and catch Eastern brook trout and German brown troute, you know, along with the native fish. But for quite a long time now, you know, we've had a sense that that maybe on the best idea, and you know we've been working, you know, for the last couple of decades on on doing the small things that we can to remedy that in in limited places. Um. So you know, it's entirely possible that we'll look back in a hundred years and and find things that that we did wrong or that we wish we hadn't done. Um. You know, But but I really, I mean, I really hope that we're you know, that this idea that we want to manage native species and that we want to manage intact ecosystems. I would be surprised if those concepts have changed dramatically in the future. I think the landscape will change to some degree, but I think that we'll still be trying to preserve native species and trying to do the best that we can to two manage ecosystems. You know that. The other thing I guess that I would say about that is is that you know, Teddy Roosevelter's a quote that I that I love. Um. He said that in any moment of decision, the best thing that you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing is nothing at all. Yeah, I don't know about that. He said that, but I don't know if I entirely agree with that. Well, but so you know, it's I guess what I would say about that is he he's talking about the decision making process, right, So when when I am not saying, and I want to be clear, is that sometimes doing nothing is the right thing to do, and sometimes we make decisions to do nothing, you know, because we think that's the best thing for the resource. My my point is that you know, we are really often faced with problems that are relatively clear. A species that is in decline, right, something that is is going away, and we want to work to stop that. We want to keep that species on the landscape. So the solutions are not usually nearly as clear as the problem, right. Yeah, it's often very hard to understand what can I do to make this situation better? But we we have to make a decision. I mean, we have, you know, if we want to stop the decline, we have to try to do something. And so I think it's important to consider that the standard can't be that we always get it right of the time. The standard has got to be that we do the best we can with the information that we have when we come to a point that we have to make a decision, and that we're brave in making that decision and trying to do something understanding that in a hundred years somebody might look back and go, man, those people were way off the mark. How much of the stuff you do, how much of it comes down to like emergencies or is it more like these like general kind of long term trends. It's more Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting way to look at it. I would say that it's it's, uh, it's more slow burning emergencies. You know, it's slow burning emergency. It's it's things that you know that you know are probably headed in a bad direction, and you know, but it also takes a long time to implement solutions. Yeah. Well, when I say, like what I would classif as emergency, we recently had a conversation with someone working on Mexican gray wolves, okay, and they had you know, there was a point when there was seven in existence. Okay. I feel like at that point you're sort of in emergency land. Yeah. I mean I think any time that if your goal is to have them not go away, that's an emergency, right. Other things are these like I would say, like salmon in the lower forty eight so Pacific North like it's emergency status right now, I would argue, Okay, other things are like man, you know, like like, for instance, there's we've seen some declines of turkeys in some states, and it's kind of mysterious, like what's going on with turkeys? I like, not quite emergency yet, but definitely something that warrants watching for. Well, yeah, and I mean, ultimately our hope would be that that we don't get surprised by things like that nearly as often anymore. Right, So you know, I'm I don't know, I know, I like the hunt turkeys. I don't know, you know a whole lot about turkey biology or or the turkey science world. But you know, I would suspect that we know in part that turkeys are in decline because there's monitoring data out there about turkeys that state fish and wildlife agencies are collecting, probably harvest data, you know, as as well as on the ground things like you know, nest success and and had success in those kinds of metrics, and you know, all of that is aimed at understanding what's going on, so that instead of something getting all the way to the emergency stage, you know that that we're able to try to start implementing solutions before before we get to the last seven in captivity. Just yeah, it's a prevent emergencies. Right. What do you when you when you take like the long the long view on wildlife and wildlife funding, what what are some of your feelings? Well, I mean, what are some of the things that you're like optimistic about. What are some things you're pessimistic about? You know, that's I'm not sure that there's a whole lot that that I am really personally pessimistic about on the funding side of things. Um. You know you're familiar with the argument right that Thursday that if Americans um were too you know, become increasingly urbanized and they and they dissociate from hunting and fishing. Okay, we have less people out doing these activities, um, less people buying firearms that you're gonna see a diminishment in dollars to go to wildlife. That doesn't keep you up at like you like you're not like that's just too hard to think about? Are too much unknown? Yeah, I mean it's that would certainly be be one of those things that for me right now and in my role with the agency, you know, um, I've got plenty of on the ground immediate kind of problems. Yeah, I think I think it's you know, it's it's a great question. Where do you know, where do non consumptive users for for lack of a better term, fit in the picture of wildlife management? And you know, how how do we how do we bring them in and and make room for for that viewpoint in the big picture? Um, you know, And and then I think that sort of gets to how how can they contribute? I mean, you know, is there a similar model to what we currently do with the money that is all tied back to the sail hunting and fishing licenses with other folks simulate looking forward? Is there a way that non consumptive wildlife users? Is there a way we would find that they would start funding some stuff with wildlife? Well, I know it's not your department, but it's like a thing that you've here discussed. Well, you just as a guy that likes to spend time outdoors, you know, yeah, right, And I mean I think, you know, I guess I think to some degree it is the department that I work in, and you know, in the sense that that I work with lots of threatened and endangered and imperiled fish, and you know that that would be the kind of funding that you know, that could really boost budgets for those things. Um, you know, we we talk about this sometimes at work, you know what I mean, one thing and it almost it almost sounds funny, but one thing that people can do to support fish and wildlife conservation in the states that they live in is to buy a hunting or fishing license, whether they go out or not. And you know, I mean again, you know, I suppose some folks might chuckle at that, but you know, when you look at the fact that that we spend a lot of state money, you know, on non game fish and wildlife, and that the formulas for money coming to the states through the excise programs through PR and DJ are based on how many licenses. It's like matching dollars. It's like when you listen to NPR fundraise and they talk about matching dollars. Yeah, you're basically getting three to one back. Yeah they should just why don't this Why don't the state the states just start selling Um, I guess they do, like duck stamp, that's federal, But why does the state just like have a thing that they just put out there. Well, and then they who likes to look at and have no license plates. No, no, no, they have like uh they're like what like recreation cards they call them or things like that. I don't I'm not a tax stamps. Yeah. So we we have a habitat stamp program, which would be another thing. You know, somebody could just buy a habitat stamp um. I believe all of that money gets matched again, and you can also make a donation on your license plate motor vehicle stuff to go to state. Yeah. So, so like most states, ours is called Share with Wildlife m and a lot of that Year with Wildlife funding actually gets matched against state wildlife grant money, you know. So that's that's almost exclusively spent on on non game. Does that bring any money in? Uh? You know, I don't know the numbers for for what's there. It's it's not you know, it's not millions of dollars. So so, you know, but I think the path that you were going down earlier is like the Holy grail right for this kind of funding, which would be an excise tax on other outdoor equipment, every damn backpack that gets sold in the country. Well and right, you know that I think that I think we should pay that ship. I would just I would draw like I would come in and I'd go down to r I and I'd be like, yep, all this ship right, and just do that across the board. Yeah, you know, you're at skis anything if you're doing a thing, if you're doing a thing in the out of doors. If I was just like the the emperor of the world, okay, just the emperor of the country, I would say that if you're doing an outdoor activity, I'm going to tax your ship ten percent. Yeah, have a tat and wildlife, right, I mean then unless you can convince me that when you see it elk, you don't look at it, then I'd give you like some kind of exemption. If I'm the emperor, that's how I'm gonna run it. That's how I'm gonna run the program. Yeah, you know obviously, like you're really telling me honestly you don't look at wildlife, like really don't look at it. Then if that's the case, if you look out your windows like holy ship out, you pay for all your ship. That's what I would do. Yeah, and I can't you know, I would never advocate a legislative position, but you know, I mean, I know, but here's the thing you could be buying. You could be buying a little like pocket pistol, okay, for home defense. You're paying for wildlife. How does that have How does they have more to do with wildlife than a pair of hiking boots. It's an imperfect system right now. I'm not saying we should excuse those people. I just think that. Yeah, and again you're like, you know, I know you don't want to, you can't like you don't want to give an opinion about this because of the capacity in which you hear. But I just feel like if that person is paying or do with hiking boots, should damn should be paying at least a DJ. They sort of did that with the boat fuel. I didn't know that because it's not like only fishermen or Yeah, yesterday I saw a lot of people out there that obviously are chipping in and they weren't doing any fishing. Yeah, so that you're right, some dude pulling wakeboards is like a is like an urban person who has a concealed carry and every time they buy AMMO or whatever they're kicking in. Yeah, the dude pulling weakeboards is paying for fish. Yeah, we've heard reasons why this actor or these things happen gone through. What's interesting to me is that we out often ask like a lot of people we work with aren't necessarily hunters and fishermen, but they are rock climbers and skiers and whatever. And everybody we ask are like, yeah, sure, I pay what I've heard, and I've only been like, I've had some conversations around us, and I heard. An argument they make is that so many people who make like, for instance, apparel okay, sown goods, right, sown goods. It's imported, and they're already under such a tax burden from importing their materials or importing manufactured goods that they're saying, we're tax too much already. We can't afford to add yet another tax. And I don't know if you went and asked the gun industry like can you afford more taxes and not gonna be like, oh, yeah, no problem. Anybody's gonna say that. But that's the argument you hear. And they resisted because people go to like outdoor retailers and push them on this idea and they don't want it. They don't want it. But meanwhile, the hunting, the hunting and fishing industries were like, please do it, let's do it. But Roosevelt put Roosevelt put it to and Franklin Roselt put to. He's like, no one will pay for this except you. If you want this to happen, you will have to pay for it because no one else is going to do it. And they did it. M Advocating for any taxes on a political level two is like political different world suicide. It's a different world now than it was. But I think it's like it would solve so many of our problems. Maybe it doesn't need to be ten to eleven. We're getting a light yeah, because they're like, we'll give them like a lightweight user break. Mhm. I mean, ultimately, the revenue needs to be generated somehow, so it's got to come from somewhere. Didn't the state that the state somewhere to add a little bit on a sales tax for wild Yeah? Um, I believe. I believe it may have been Missouri, but I think you should confirm that one dude down there. Um, so you know, I would mention that please that if if in in the mythical world that that were ever to happen, my emperor idea, right, that. You know, if they were going to be similar programs to PR and DJ, they would have to come with matching state funds. There would have to be a matching source of state revenue. If it was exactly the same model. You don't want to all go into the federal kittie. Well, you know, I mean because just to say that right now we have we have license sale dollars that we match against, you know, to do the whole reimbursement things we talked about her. So I'll think of a remedy to that. Then I would say that that all states are gonna have to add a one percent sales tax to fun fishing wildlife to give matching dollars a draw off. My backpacker tacks, that's fine. How do you start a movement like a like a movement, I don't know, you to be hard pressed to get people to pay more. Man, No, that's what I'm saying. Though, every time we ask the people, we've yet to have everything. I know that every backpacker I knows, like dude, that would totally pat if I knew that that's how it work. If I knew that that's how it worked, And that's where I went out happily packed. I think there's a gray when it's voluntary or mandated. When she started getting told what to do, because some people just like the relief of being told what to do. I don't know, I'll go along, all right, Mike, what else? Man? What else? What else? You got? Yeah? So you know, we we covered We covered a couple of those. Why do we manage non game fishing, wildlife, species arguments, and legal, ethical, ecological right. So those those are the three that we talked about. But you know, there are three really pragmatic reasons why if you say, you know, I'm not personally concerned about non game animals, you know that there are still some reasons why it's in your best interests that your state is managing those things. So the first one, and you know you guys have talked a lot about it in the past, is um it. We think as a state agency that it's a good thing for us to maintain as much management control over species as as we can. It's generally in the state's interest to manage its own fishing wildlife, so we want to as opposed to what as opposed to federal manager. So we want to do what we can in part because it's the right thing to do, in part because it's our interests from a management perspective to keep animals from getting listed under the endangered species to maintain your jurisdiction, right, So we want to know what's going on with those animals out in the landscape, you know, and we want to work towards conserving those animals in the cases when we can, particularly if we think that they're in decline, that helps keep them off the list. And then animals once they do get on the list, or if they do get on the list, we want to work towards recovery to bring more management authority back to the state. And you know, I want to be clear, we work with lots of federal partners very closely in very productive ways. You know. It is it is not that, you know, we're not interested in working with our federal partners. It's just that, you know, from the state's perspective, keeping things off the list and recovering animals once they're on helps us maintain more more management authority. Yeah, it's like doing your You're doing your job, right, So you know, that's that's one pragmatic reason is to head off listing and work towards recovery in the cases where things are listed, because if it gets listed and the FEDS assumed control of it, there might be things that would happen that would have negative implications for people in your state. Well yeah, and so that that really ties to to the second part of that, which is that because the Fish and Wildlife Service administers these federal aid programs, that's what you know, call them federal aid programs. Um, we to get that money, we have to ensure that we are complying with all the federal laws. So getting the money creates this next us to the federal govern an which means that you know, we have to consult on almost everything we do or every project that we use money on, we have to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service to make sure that everybody understands what the potential impacts two animals that are listed under ESA will be. And there's other federal laws like the National Environmental Policy Act NIPA, you know, and other things that we have to comply with. And and so a really good give I need to back up on that one. So you're saying, like, let's say you wanted to do a project, Um, you're gonna do a thing to help out trout, okay, trout habitat you're saying that you also need to make sure that that work isn't going to impact an endangered speed an endanger threatened species. That's yeah, that's exactly right. And so you know, a really good example that that kind of ties these two things together is that there's currently action to list to partial in the lift Rio grande chub. Rio grande chub exists in a lot of places in New Mexico. Some of those places are recreational rainbow trout fisheries that we stocked with rainbow trout. Right, so we use Dingle Johnson money at our hatcheries, you know, to raise the fish and to drive him out there to stock them. And there's you know, there's a there's a fair number of high use fisheries in New Mexico that you know wouldn't sustain wild trout populations at the kind of harvest, and those rainbow trout aren't good for the chubbs. Well, you know, I don't I don't know that I would say that out of hand. Um, I don't know that we have great data on on good or not. There are a lot of places that we There are places that we stock Rio grande chub or I'm sorry that we stock rainbow trout that also have Rio grande chub. So it it's not a completely exclusive thing, you know. But like again, you know, from a pragmatic perspective, if real ground a chub were to be listed, there would be a consultation that would have to happen about the potential impacts of rainbow trout on chub and that would have an effect to you know, the average trout fisherman out there who utilizes those. Yeah that, if that, it could spell bad ship for rainbow trout in some place. Not that I'm a fan of rainbow trout, but it could spell bad ship for rainbow trout if that, if the chub got listed as an endangered species, yeah, I mean it it had, it would have the potential to to change that landscape. And have you ever read the book arguing that that lays out a really lucid argument that the rainbow of describing the rainbow trout as a synthetic fish and entirely synthetic fish. And there's Tealverston. I think the man made fish. It's it's it's when you start reading the history of that fish and how it's been spread around and how it all came to be. Yeah, it's like a make believe fish. Yeah, and again, you know, very popular make belief fish. But the path of that people look at and associate it somehow with wildness or pristineness is laughable. Yeah, except for very few watersheds. I don't want to make a value judgment about rainbow trout. We certainly have a lot of folks. People love them, people love them, but it's it's like it's kind of Jimmy Dorn you raise in your hand, but you live in actual rainbow trout country, so you don't county the Pacific rim you could, you could. Yeah, it's okay to like rainbow trout on the Pacific route. It's all the other people. If you, if you when you flush your toilet, if that water flows into the Pacific, you can like rainbow trout. You flush your toilet and it doesn't. You should not like them. Okay. That's coming from me, alright, not our guests rule. And you know I would provide one perspective on that. I mean, I you know, I grew up in Pennsylvania, right, and that they stock a lot of trout in Pennsylvania. And I grew up fishing rainbows. Oh, we did was fishing non natives in Michigan. I'm not saying like I'm not holier than thou. I'm just saying it's like we've created a weird situation all over the country. When I was growing up, we we did fish something. We fished native fish. We spend a ton of time fishing a lot of things that had been introduced into our ecosystem to the detriment of native species, right. And I think that we're gonna have if we're looking long ways, I think that we're going to continue that there's gonna be a forced reckoning with that going forward. And you've kind of alluded it to yourself a little bit. I mean, I you know, I think to a degree, we're we're in the reckoning. We're we're at least constantly looking for a balance. I mean for you know, how and where we manage water specifically for native fish, you know, in other places where we manage water for recreational opportunities, and you know, we recently published a statewide fisheries management plan. If you know, if anybody's interested in a particular water in New Mexico, you can go in there and it will outline, you know, what are our main management objective is. And and that is not to say, you know, just because it says the water is going to be managed for native fish that they're absolutely won't be any sport fish there, but you know, it does provide some insight into what the state's thinking. Yeah, because a lot but because a lot of the relationships are totally harmonious, Like it's really hard. People try, but people don't have a lot of luck. And there are exceptions to this, but like generally people look and be like, it's hard to find rock solid evidence that turkeys are delaterious in all the places they've been introduced, right, It's like there's some suspicions here and there, but it's just generally like when you put turkeys on the ground, we haven't yet identified away in which that's a major screw up, quite like we had when you put common carp into a waterway. There's a tremendous amount of evidence that suggests we shouldn't have dumped carp everywhere, right, you know, you know, and I mean, to my point, even I worked in the Elsta National Park before I worked for New Mexico UM, and even there, in their current Native fish Conservation plan, you know, they identify a portion of the park it's uh the Firehole River, the Given River below the falls, and the Madison where you know, they are essentially saying, this is an area that is a high value recreational trout fishery, and we, at least in the I believe the twenty year time frame of that plan, don't intend to do native fish work in that reach. That's the balance. So they're saying, like, we're gonna have room for non native trout, brown trout, rainbow trout. We're making room for those fisheries because people value it. Well, they're not necessarily saying they're not making room in the sense that they're expanding them in any way. They're they're just not actively working to control non native trout in those places. Yeah. So so go back to talk about the thing you guys published the where you can look up your waterway. Yeah, it's it's the it's the statewide UH Fisheries Management Plan. It's available through the New Mexico Department. It lays out like what long term goals are. Yeah. It it lays out what are what our management objectives are in uh in the waters of the state. Is there anything in there that's real like introversial? Um? You know, I suppose that that would that would depend who you ask it. Uh. It has largely been supported by by the public, and of course it was approved by by our commissions. So UM, you know, there may be folks that are unhappy with with the direction some specific waters are going. But of course it's a quite a hard thing to do to make everybody happy all the time. So does that exhaust your list of why? Your list of things about why we should I want to hear the long list, not want more? I got you know. The last one is is that UM, when we work on on projects that benefit non game animals, they almost always have ancillary benefits for things that we more generally associate with hunting or angling. UM. I've been working on a project for Chihuahua chub in the Members River, which is in southwestern New Mexico, kind of south of the HeLa. How big is this chub? Up to ten or twelve inches? It's it is in the essay listed species. UM. So we've been working to do habitat improvement, which includes work in the Riparian Corridor for the chub and for cherich how leopard frog also a listed species of frog. Um, you know. But but overall we're doing habitat improvement work both in the river and in the Riparian corridor. And that Reparian corridor has havelina, it has mule, deer, quail. Uh. The last time I was down there, I saw bear tracks along the river. It's not the kind of place that a guy from Pennsylvania would expect to encounter bear tracks. But but they're there, um, you know, as well as bats and uh rio grande sucker and other nine game um fish and wildlife. So you know that you will have a benefit for that system on the whole. So even though somebody could look at it and say you're spending money on chubb, while that's true, there's also ancillary benefits for other fish and wildlife. Yeah. Um, do you do anybody fish with those chubs? Uh? Not that I know of. I've I've seen them rise to uh two, you know, may flies on the surface of the river. In theory, you could do you feel that there cases where you get do you ever feel blowback from people saying like, why are we spending money? Like do you hear it? We're people within government, like even elected people, um will kind of lampoon yeah, you know, mock the idea of spending money on things that no one like cares, like quote cares about. I mean, like you know, probably like you I hear about it. It's not been a personal experience that I've that I've had were where I had a project that got lampooned in that way and shutdown. I mean, there was a fellow running for president last fall that was mocking a smelt in the He was mocking like actually mocking the fish, mocking a smelt in California as being too small to care about. I mean, it does happen, Yeah, I mean there's there is politics and involved in everything, and you know, some consideration of politics is is probably always prudent, Like why would anyone care about that? Yeah? And that's you know, let me count the weights, right, And that's in part what I hope to provide people is you know, if you get into those conversations about why should I care about that, you know there's a couple of reasons. I mean, you know, some some pragmatic reasons about you know, why, particularly as hunters and anglers, we should care about working with non game fish and wildlife. The thing that that I returned to again and again and thinking about this and talking about it with other hunters and fishermen is um, it's just kind of like a sickening kind of audacity that we would somehow come to the idea that's that certain species don't warrant existing, like you want to talk about sort of human hubris and arrogance would be that. And I don't care what your understanding of the world is if you have this a completely secular view, if you have a religious view of the world, Like, there's no worldview that I think could really support the idea that we could sit back and let species that exist on this earth vanish because we in this particular moment in time don't really care about it. It's just like it just strikes me as being like absolutely immoral. Yeah, And I don't throw that stuff around, Like I don't weigh in on a lot of like social morality issues. I'm kind of like a you know, when it comes like general terms of morality, I'm kind of like a um. Privacy of your own home kind of guy. Right, Like, I don't really believe in getting in there and legislating activities between consenting adults and stuff. Uh, but when it comes to like moral issues, I feel that wiping things off of the face of the earth gone forever, you are playing with some ship that you should not be playing with. Yeah, I think that's the you know, that's the ethical argument, right, is that that's the right thing to do to to preserve our natural history as intact as we can. The idea that some people find it acceptable that we would have less species on earth, you know, but then some people get swept up in the some people get slept up in the idea that like things go extinct all the time. So it's okay, right, we used to have these big as huge dinosaurs and they're gone now, so I guess doesn't matter. It's kind of like people argue that, but I find it's such like a flawed way of thinking that because extinctions do happen, that we would just open it up and allow them to happen, especially from human caused activities. Yeah, I mean, you know, because you can't argue that's not natural. Even the genesis that we spoke with a right, She's like, extinction. Extinction is natural. Yeah, far more things have gone extinct than here in existence right now. But that's not but but our activities exactly, So I think on our watch, we can't let it happen on our watch. And there's a matter of time scale at play there too, I mean, you know, get in a geological time, you know. Uh. And John John McFee has a have you ever read Annals of the Former World? So John McFee wrote three books about geology, and when they were they were eventually published together as Annals of the Former World. And in this book there's there's a couple of things. One he says that if he was gonna, if he had to sum up his his trilogy in one sentence, it would be that the peak of Mount Everest is marine limestone. So the top of Mount Everest is rock that was laid out on the bottom of an ocean. But another point he makes is that if you imagine life on Earth, so not just like the form, but life on Earth. If you imagines being a man's outstretched arms, his life on Earth from one fingertip to the other fingertip as a timeline, you could remove human history with one stroke of a nail file. Right, It's a powerful image. And when you imagine the amount of extinctions that have occurred under our watch, and that one's the amount of extinctions that we have conducted in that one stroke of a nail file, that we're not living at a sustainable rate as far as letting ship slide, you know, and a lot of that ship would have been good hunting fish in the passenger pitch, right, So it is it does impact hunters and fishermen. Man, there's a lot of ship that had been a good to hunt you can't hunt anymore. What else, Mike, you know, other things you want to talk about? No, I mean, you know, I think I think we we we covered most of it there. I think there are a couple interesting points when, you know, when we sort of come at at things from the perspective of of you know, what what our agencies doing with the money and and what does what do those things mean not just to hunters and anglers but to other folks? Right? So, um, you know, we mentioned that law enforcement is not reimbursable under Wildlife Sports fish restoration. Next, that's a little surprising because they're doing enforcement on too for the betterment of wildlife. But okay, I'll tell you, like, at face value, I I like, I except what you're saying. But it is a little bit surprising to me, right, And I mean I think it is a little bit surprising because you know, I mean, we essentially police our own ranks in that way, right, I mean we're completely paying for, uh, you know, a law enforcement system to protect the resource. That's ultimately what it's about, right, is to protect those resources. Yeah, and poachers a lot of probably aren't buying licenses, so they're not even paying into this. They're not even paying for the guy that's going to arrest them. That's right there. I mean, you know, they're they're they're doing it for us so that you know, the license buyers have a resource to recreate through. But you know, obviously game wardens do um lots of things that aren't just checking fishing licenses. Um. You know, for instance, when when there's a call about a black bear in somebody's garage, it's often you know that that call ends up with with the game warden and they show up to try to resolve the situation, and generally, you know, their approaches obviously to keep people safe first, but hopefully have the most positive outcome for the for the bear, for whatever wildlife it is when they show up, and you know, they're also not asking the homeowner to see their hunting license when they show up. It's a it's a service that's provided to the public, you know, by the hunting and angland community, by the license buyers in those states. Dude, you should say that round their truck brought to you by all due to lie the hunting fish, you know. And and I'm I mean obviously for me, I'm I'm I couldn't be more happy that we do that, because you know, the goal is to have positive outcomes for those animals. But you know, it is it is something that that is being provided, you know. And then the other thing is in a state like New Mexico, most of the western states, and really you know, all across the country, there's there's game wardens who's districts are in remote and you know, rural places and they just overall help to provide a law enforcement presence in those places. You know. We I mean, we hear all the time about game warden's you know, being involved in in things that aren't wildlife related. They're just you know, they're there to help. They show up at the scene of an accident to help folks. I was out in California doing a story about livestock guys that investigate livestock staft and they have a rural crime task Force, and I was I met with game Wardans who'd gone in on drug rates at the time. I think it might have changed after that, but they were called into all kinds of ship sure, and you know, I mean they contact all kinds of folks, and you know when they make those contacts, they do the normal checks that you know law enforcement officers do, and you know, so they just helped keep things safer in general. Um. You know. Another one is uh so we talked a little bit about habitat you know, I I uh, I got an estimate in New Mexico over a ten year span, it will be about twenty five million dollars that's either already been spent or or we have earmarked to spend on habitat protection. And and that is all just PR connected, not the fish stuff that we're doing. And you know, when Jim and robertson not PR public relations, but wildlife Restoration act UM. You know, those projects do lots of things that like are for forest health and watershed health, you know, thinning, controlled burning, things that helped to prevent catastrophe wildfires that would have serious impacts on things like people's water supplies. Right, you don't when when you get catastrophic wildfire. If the town that you live in has a water supply reservoir that's downstream of that and you get some post fire flooding, you can get a lot of you know, negative consequences from from that. And you know, I there's there's at least one example if I can think of where you know, a water supply reservoir you know more or less filled up with sediment than you know, I have to drain it and dredge it to get it back so that it can come back on wildfire. So you know again that the money is is coming through and being matched by license dollars and ultimately being paid for in part, you know, by those license dollars. But and it's good for wildlife and that's the focus of it. But everybody reaps of benefit, you know, from doing things that benefit ecosystem health, farce health, watershed health UM. You know, so I think that that's a great thing that you know, that we helped to do out there in the landscape. The last really interesting example I'll give you is, you know, aquatic invasive species. Of course are are always a big thing, and we do a lot of work with aquatic invasive species um New Mexico. You know, we are fortunate that you know that through the work that we've done. You know, we don't have either of the two really common Asian muscles, so we don't have zebrew or quagga muscles, and you know, we we work hard to do um inspections on watercraft coming into the state, you know, and educate people about those species. And yes, those species getting into systems that would have ecological impacts you know, both to sport fish and to non game fish and probably other well life as well. But they would also have substantial impacts of water infrastructure. So if you have water infrastructure for irrigation that's drawing out of a reservoir and you get zebra muscles in the reservoir, you're gonna have to spend some money, you know, basically keeping those pipes open, keeping zebra muscles from actually growing to a point where it plugs up that water and it's cost it costs in the Great Lakes, they cost hundreds of millions of dollars of infrastructure problems. And I mean to mentioned like the implications for fisheries and so I you know that's that's also I mean we as you know, hunters and anglers are making an investment to keep those things out. And you know there there is a benefit to the general public to do that too. People should be kissing our asses more than they do, man. People should be that you should walk down the road and people should be yelling out their their carbondals. Thank you hunter and fisherman. Well, and I mean, you know, thank you all you do for us. Really, why you know I wanted to come on is is not not you know, not that people or you're not getting the credit you deserve. No, not that, but but so that when we have conversations with people who don't do this, who aren't involved in the recreational side of wildlife. You know, I think and I think you've talked about it like we're a pretty small percentage, right, like something like in in two thousand and six, five percent of man over sixteen years old bought or hunted for deer right and and women, you know, about one percent of of women, so we're not like a huge majority. And it varies greatly by state state right from from less than one to you know upwards higher. But yeah, nationally about five. But you know, so this this thought that it's going to be like some logical argument that we will win or lose, I don't think it's really probably how it's gonna work. But I think if we can take the information about all the things you know that we do, that our benefit not just to fishing wildlife that we can harvest, you know, but also to non game fishing wildlife and also just to the public at large. You know, if we can internalize that and again not approach it like you know, I'm gonna hammer somebody with this argument. But when we engage people and when we talk to folks and when we hear things, you know that we only care about elk, you know that we have a standpoint and informed standpoint to come at that from and say, well, you know, you know, there there are some other things that your state fishing wildlife agency is doing, and you know they're doing them. Revenue that's generated through the sale of hunting and fishing licenses, and you know it does benefit you know, and by the way, it does help protect that watershed above your cities, you know, drinking water supply. I think that that can be meaningful. Yeah, And as we learn from Greg Blaskovitch, you need to throw out the argument of I'm controlling the deer populations for you. People don't care. People don't give a ship. And as we know, as you know, you kind of sort of are, and you kind of sort of are recognized, like your average Joe Blow doesn't recognize the problem. No, that's what you're saying. I'm saying that the average I don't even know how true this is. But I feel like a lot of hunters like that. That is like they're like, go to It's like, oh no, this is why you should like us hunter and fisherman, because we're controlling the wildlife population for it, keep the deer numbers down, otherwise they're all going to die of disease. And as we learn from Greg, that argument does of work. People don't care. And I think you in the last ten minutes of given given the people a lot of like great arguments and points to make you know. Yeah, but the great conservationist Jim Pozwits when questioned about why, uh, why does the American public like know the story? And he's like, hunters don't even know the story because you gotta go teach it to them their own story. They don't even know their own story. You gotta teach their own story to them before you have any chance of the broader public understanding it. The guy engaged in it doesn't even know. He just pissed his license fees went up last year. It was three dollars um. Do you want to hear about a couple of state funding successes that are outside of the stuff that we've talked about. Yeah, man, that we're talking about the the some says that added sales taxes, So it's Missouri and Arkansas conservation sales taxes. Virginia and Texas have dedicating tax revenues from outdoor gear, so there are two days are actually taxing tents and backpacks. Uh, dedicate lottery revenues for Colorado, Arizona, Maine, and then Florida and South Carolina have real estate transfer taxes that go directly to Gama fish agencies. More taxes that's not gonna run on no, I'm not joking. But what I do like, I don't like. I don't like gonna run on more taxes, but I am gonna. I am gonna the idea of UM of identifying other user groups who who benefit from wildlife and who tend to want to have a say in wildlife, that you need to earn your seat at the table, right, Yeah, I mean, you know, I certainly think that that when you know, folks look at that and wanting to see at the table, like, you know, I think it's fair to ask, you know, how they're going to contribute. I mean, we have, for as hunters and anglers, we have for a long time now contributed a lot of resources to conserving, fishing, wildlife. Here's the devil advocate argument that I can already hear brewin um somewhere out there. Yeah, is that do we want that? Do we want these people to have a say at the table? I just want him to pay, Yeah, and I wanted to pay, but have no input. I don't I don't care what they think, all right, thanks, No, I don't want to hear about it. You don't want to hear about it because I know where you're going with this. Right, yeah, because they're gonna say, well, yeah, it's gonna be the New Jersey cat ladies all a sudden are going to actually start paying, and they're gonna say, well, no, I don't think you should be hunting those animals anymore. I had someone recently bring up that I had talked about New Jersey. But here's the thing I want to terrify. I don't know any New Jersey cat ladies. But when I closed my eyes and imagine the exactly when imagine, like, like my perspective on wildlife in America, okay, and my upbringing, the things that shape my perspective wildlife in America, and I try to visualize the opposite of my perspective on wildlife. I feel that it's embodied by what I imagine A old lady in New Jersey who owns a shipload of cats might think. I just pictured like that would be the antithesis of my own perspective, would be like a cat lady, yes, because she's rescued all those cats. Just somehow, I don't really I need to spend more time picturing her, because I might come up with a different thing or a picture in New Jersey in different way. Yeah, I just picture like a New Jersey cat lady being like my arch rival when it comes to my perspectives on wild management. So you know, I just stop saying it. Actually, I would lay out there that you know, we we live in a representative democracy, so the concept that that we can keep folks from having a seat at the table maybe isn't the most sustainable approach to this in the long term anyway. I mean, we we have to learn to engage other folks and you know, and come at some of these questions from a point of empathy. Yeah, because you I think you're the one that brought up the idea that the five percent of the population, like, we live in a democracy, so um, we live like as hunters and fishermen and just a lot of horners of fishermen that really want to act like this isn't true. But as hunters and fishermen, we live at the pleasure of the voting public. Who you're like, Your ability to live the lifestyle you live is because cause people who do not engage in the activities you engage in have a generally favorable impression of those activities. If they did not, you would be done. You're not gonna win the You're not gonna win a popular vote by just having the guys that hunting fish going out and casting their ballots. It doesn't work that way, right, You're gonna get smoked. You would lose all elections to five. And things in this country generally fall around a split is a landslide. Ship is tight now, right, So you need to have al You need a lot of what I said, I was joking because it's true, like you need to have very strong allies that lie outside of your the activities you engage in. Yeah, you need to live an exemplary lifestyle. Yeah, And and you know, we need to engage those people in in ways that are meaningful to them. And you know, that's why I really liked the episode with Greg. I mean, it's really what inspired me to reach out to you guys, you know about this topic because it's sort of seemed like a natural segue from you know, how how do we how do we talk to people? You know, what are those quote unquote arguments or conversations that we can have with people that do influence the way they view hunting, you know, and and then the next step is, you know, how how do we be more informed about some of these things, particularly that you know, he laid out five or six arguments, right and funding was one of them, or the revenue side of things was was one of those arguments. And you know, how do we how do we take that the next step? How do we be informed when some when we say yeah, the revenue and somebody comes back and says, yeah, but the revenue all gets spent on things that you can catch and shoot. You know, what might refer into is what number is. But if you go back. We had a podcast episode some time ago where we interviewed a guy, Greg Blaskovitch, who's a social sciences researcher at Stanford, and what he was doing is he was testing UM. He was he was working with people who had a general like anti like an identifiable anti hunting bent and he would test ideas. UM would test justifications of hunting with these individuals Episode fifty three where they would go to people and here's the person who's like identifies as an anti hunter and then they would test ideas and say like, okay, well what about if you knew this, how does this change your perception of honey? And to look at what are the the realities and rhetorics that hunters use and which of those are effective, which of those moves the needle. Um, So we've been referring to that a lot. You can you can go back and check that out. Jum Dorney got anything want to wrap up with? Man? Um? What sports teams on your hat there? It's the Mariners Mariners baseball Club. Yeah, we got any reluding thoughts? Well, Um, it's been good to learn to sum out how our tax dollars are utilized. And I appreciate the knowledge and guys like Mike that are making it happen on the ground. It's it's it's interesting, it's good to hear, and and now I walk away feeling good about it. As opposed to generally with my tax money, I feel like most of the time it's being flushed on the shitter, and I don't get that oppression put a fine point on it. I don't get that feeling. Um. And I appreciate that, I really do. And I appreciate the hard work that people put in to make sure that we do have these opportunities in our future and hopefully down the road kids features and maybe try and leave the place better than we found it, and guys like you, I think are making that happen, and I'm grateful. Um. Other than that, I'm gonna try and get you to stop harping on New Jersey because let me come up with a new I would come up with a new new arch nemesis right on, right on. It's going to be again. I'm glad to be here. So good listen. I generally learned something when I sit around this table. So good stuff. Thanks for joining us, man, thanks for having me. I appreciate it. Did you finish with all the reasons you had to manage for non game species? Do you feel like you wrapped up that point? Yeah? I think I think about six reasons there. You know, he didn't got to all of them. That was good interruptions in there, but we got there. That's par for the course. And might any last oh sorry you got no, that was it? Um, the last final thing you forgot to mention? Well? Yeah, you know, I just in in this line of of of thinking about engaging people who aren't hunters and anglers, I came across a Wallace Stegner quote. And I love Stegner, you know, just as far as being somebody who talked a lot about arid land and and managing arid land. You know, Stegner Stigner said in this a little bit of a paraphrase that wild places, and I think I would add to that wild things are part of the geography of hope. And you know, when I think about that, I think Steigna really had something there. You know that that we really as people draw hope from wild things and wild places. And you know, my personal history is that my experience with wild things and wild places come from a perspective, you know, of of hunting and fishing. That's how I grew up, That's how I got engaged. But you know, there are other people out there that came to wild things and wild places in different ways, but that I believe probably experience a really similar emotional connection to And I think it's good to think about, you know, how pep will perceive us and we perceive them. You know, I generally tend to have an emotional response when I hear anything that I believe to sound threatening to hunting. Yeah, but I bet you there are people who don't hunt, you know who when they hear about hunting, they perceive that as taking something out of the wild and that that is a threat to how you know, they have come to the experience and and you know, coming back to that, you know that it's that there's hope in you know that we we place hope and wild things in wild places, and so anything that we feel like diminishes that for us really draws an emotional response. And so you know, I think that really trying to work to be more inclusive about you know, how we talk about this stuff, having engaging conversations sometimes that are uncomfortable with people that don't agree with us, is you know, is uh is really an important thing. And you know again that Stegner quote, wild places you know are part of the geography of hope. A lesser known author added to that. And what inspires hope from person to person is a similar as views from neighboring ridges, but also it's different. And I think that you know, really speaks to thinking about, you know, how we experienced wild places and how others experienced it and trying to find common ground. Yeah, I'll work on that joker that that that means they're buddy there at the top of the hill, the horse, the horse cut would you call him? Are the um, timber buck hunter. He shouldn't get so mad at the hippies when they're out there hiking. No, he hates the hippies. Yeah, we're gonna eat hippies, the backpack hunters, the horror. Yeah, weather was nice, so there's a lot of people in the woods during his haunts. This is a horseman who did not have pleasant feelings for the other people on the mountain, you know. But yeah, all right, there are allies, right, I'm open to it. I'm open to it. Um, Mike, thanks for coming on, man, thanks for having me. You come back sometime, I hope. So all right, Um, let's talk about big horn sheep now in New Mexico next time you come. Yeah, my wife's a big horn sheep by allies, understand, and also an avid hunter. So that right, Yeah, you guys should talk to her big horns. She's got all the information about big horn sheep. I was down in your state. I was down in New Mexico, um, where they were doing the governor's tag auctions, and a guy from the Desert Sheep of Desert Sheep Foundation or some kind or someone having to do a sheep uh ngo that does sheep work he was saying that h in New Mexico, wildlife work comes down to water and money. But with desert big horns, you don't need the water, so I thought was an interesting take on that. All right, thanks for tuning in.