because according to the best available science and laws that are on the books surounding them, they can be operated with minimal impact on wild fish, the problem today may 19th. 2003 is that they are not legal, so lets make them legal and everyone will be happy

Huh?

I think wht boater is trying to say is that hatcheries around here are not in compliance with ESA mandates and what not....

the way i see it is hatcheries are for sportfisherman like my self to harvest a few fish a year. hatcheries are pointless if you cant take the fish home with you.

We pay plenty to get things taken care of. The problem is anytime more money hits the system some politician creates a job for his sister-in-laws cousin who go fired from walmart.

AuntyM:
In most of this WT stuff I agree totally with your views, but we DON’T need to raise license fees.
We need the fishing and hunting fees, taken out of the general fund.
And used for what it is meant for fish and game management
Gov. gridlock Just raised the shell fish license 2-3.00 in July for supposedly some study in the PS.
but its going in the wrong place to start with, to get spread out into other places.
. Just my .02

I agree that the "general fund" money mixing is one of the biggest threat to our fisheries. The number of fishermen/women in this state is staggering. The fact that the dollars we spend to fish go into fixing Potholes on I-5 is frustrating to say the least. The money is there to do some substantial improvements, if directed where it belongs. On the other hand, I hate to see more funds available ot settle frivolus (sp?) lawsuits. I must be tired because I'm not sure I'm making sense here. to sum up, Money spent TO fish should be spent FOR fish. Somebody call Tim Iyman (sp?)... Lets get him on this!

The increase in shellfish license cost is to pay for monitoring psp and domoic acid algal blooms on the coast and in Puget Sound so we might be able to have razor clam seasons and safe shellfishing in Pugert Sound. Hmmmm $10? Anyone priced crab, shrimp, razor clams, steamers or oysters in the the grocery store lately? $10 might buy you a single shellfish meal from the local store....but it's cheap eats if you harvest it yourself. Seems pretty reasonable if you think about it?

Goose:
Reasonable yes, but not all of that money is going to go for that study.
we don’t need more studies with out reaction, what’s the point in paying for something
that’s probably not going to do no good for the people paying for it let alone the animals.

Aunty M if you want habitat taken care of then donate money to Washington trout!!!!!! Not try to destroy them.. Or are you not aware of their habitat acquisitions and restorations???

If you are anti WT then you are anti wild fish and anti habitat. you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

you want habitat restored washington trout restores habitat therefore if you really want habitat restored you should support Wasington Trout.. It's an absolute no brainer..

That is a bunch of crap. Are you serious? So it is not possible to support wild fish without supporting WT? There are plenty of other organizations that do great work on both restoration of habitat and working to save wild fish. it is that kind of narrow-focused"statement that makes WT so unappealing to a lot of people. Sort of a "think like me or your an idiot" mentality. I am for saving wild fish, who isn't? I just dont believe that closing hatcheries will get it done. Its much more complex an issue than that. Life isn't so black and white.... there's lots of grey.

Aix sponsa & elkrun,

There was a thread on fishing license fees and the state general fund a few days ago. You may have missed it. The upshot is that WDFW receives vastly more money from the state general fund than is received from fishing and hunting license revenue and permit fees. If WDFW had to get by on "user fees" alone, I would expect the department to be slashed by over 50%. So how, exactly, would our fishing be improved if all the license fees were being "properly" expended?

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Salmo g
Witch thread was this and dose it have facts Or opins Thanks AIX

Salmo g
Witch thread was this and dose it have facts Or opins Thanks AIX

Aix the extra bucks are for monitoring and testing not another study. The dollars spent to test the razor clams the last 2 years came out of money that was scratched up out of other sources is a temporary fix. Plus the Dept of Health which is responsible for testing Puget Sound waters for red tide has had to gut that program due to budget cuts. The only other choice is not to test and close the seasons to protect human life. Regardless $10 for a shellfish license is cheap when you consider that with it you can go out and harvest 6 crab per day which will cost you about $45 if you want to buy them from the grocer.

If 1 million residents bought combo fishing licenses that would generate around 38 million......that doesn't even come close to what it costs to run the show. And the actual number is probably half that.

Elkrun,

I agree with both statements, very well said. I too believe that there can be a happy balance between the restoration of wild fish and the supply of hatchery fish for the sportsman. Too much of our tax dollars never reach the destanation of our choosing.