Originally Posted By: Larry B
Originally Posted By: FleaFlickr02
In principle, I think license fees should be periodically increased, not only to account for inflation, but also to cover some of the costs we have now that didn't exist when licenses were cheap (things like habitat improvement and hatchery reform).


Edited to focus on my question - should habitat restoration be a user fee expense? Or should it be paid for out of the State's General Fund insofar as the damage was (arguably) caused by the general public for its benefit? My opinion is for the latter perspective although monies could be run through (which to some extent may be occurring).


I agree. All citizens (and corporations) should pay for habitat restoration. Of course, that means taxes, so we pay either way, but if the burden were appropriately shared, it would cost less per person.