Originally Posted By: RowVsWade
Originally Posted By: RowVsWade

Sometimes not giving into bullchit is the best way to go......capitulating to a bunch politicos doesn't make one look strong.
I just don't think that bad is a better outcome than worse...


+1


It would have been a no win situation. Politician asks if youll approve an increase and you say yes, they already have justification to come back for a bump in the fee and put you on the spot. Any increase, like the 750 for the Columbia would still be met with critics. I talked to Blake at the sportsmens show at the cca booth. I wont go into the details of the discussion publicly, I'll just say, he was in no mood to do cca any favors. 1717 was just filed that week and if he checked the filings that week he knew about it.

Parks had a 60 million dollar hole to fill. This state and King County in particular spend money for the acquisition of land for parks and then as soon as money is tight, they abandon them like a stray dog. They made them free for so long, that everyone thinks that cutting grass and clean up garbage and toilets is cheap. It was only a couple years ago the five dollar entry at flaming Geyser and other parks FAILED and were retracted, so they come back and raise it by six times.

I think the sticker shock will put a lot of people off and I think the legislature will have to reinstate general fund money to parks in the future, lower the fee of the card and stop buying more land for parks. 60 million didnt disappear overnight, so the legislature itself is to blame for the funding of this dept.

In 2009 when the Senate and the house had hearings on eliminating the commission, they did so under the guise that Hunting clubs wanted to get rid of the commission. Angler groups went to oppose it, but at one meeting CCA was not allowed to testify. It passed out of committee and passed the floor of the senate quickly. It failed in the house Ag and NR committee by one vote. A person might conclude that reaching out to opponents is done when you have the chance to make them look bad.

Anyone who went to the house Ag hearing on 2266 to legalize selective gear in Washington in 2010, will remember, the bill was not heard. What was heard was a shot across the bow by the chairman, who brought forth his own bill for a new commercial fishery in the columbia. The territory is clearly hostile, but support is growing. It makes it tough with elections every two years. I was specifically told by a former Senator that they look to other politicians with some experience and thus they are often lead down the wrong path in issues like ours. That is why folks like Jacobsen were so influential, sports did not have enough presence to counter the misinformation.



Edited by Lead Bouncer (06/23/11 03:38 AM)