D3Smartie

I take it by your reply, that you believe by "raising prices" of our fish licensees that we will be able to achieve "better fishing". Can you please explain to us how that works? Do you believe that more "money" going into a "general fund" will produce a "better fishery" for us?

I am all ears, so tell us how this will work!

Cowlitzfisherman

how can it hurt?, and its worth it. If your fishing license isnt worth it, dont buy it.

Our governments ( feds and states) are incredibly wasteful. giving them more money never solves anything. I am opposed to all new taxes, user fees and any think no matter what the service it affects. The state takes in more than enough money to accimplish everything it needs to do it needs to cut waste before they ask for another dime and i don't mean by cutting services... They need to do a better job with what they already have!

We have trusted them with a lot and they have failed. They need to earn our trust before asking for more! no more for fire depts, no more for police, no more for schools or roads or anything else until they prove themselves to be responsible leaders.

It's high time we become what we say we already are. " a government of the people, by the people, for the people!!"


Oh there is one exception.. I'd pay more for a license if the money went to hireing about a thousand extremely aggressive game wardens. Everyone should be getting checked ever time they go out!! I personally haven't been checked in Washington in about 15 years..

First, I need to say to AuntyM that you surely are not a politician, since you say things that make simple, common sense and also speak it with eloquence..... Now that I have that out of the way I will (as I always do) speak my peace.
1) Have any of you seen the salary of the biologists, etc. that work for the WDFW? You would be disappointed I am sure that these folks getting very nice salary/comp packages that have these fancy degrees cannot figure out how to shoot fish in a barrel (so to speak).
The last thing I want to do is hand them more money so they can hire more of these educated idiots to further screw things up with their "studies". I know they all mean well, and some probably even help, but for the most part they are their to justify a larger, costlier gov't.
I do think that fishing license fee's are not out of line, but I guarentee that giving them more will not stop the cutbacks (8.2 crabbing, etc??).
I say, start taxing the hell out of those that really do the most to deplete the resource, i.e., commercials and tribes. Now, getting again to the Tribes.... I know I am a broken record on this subject, but it is a bone stuck in my craw. Out of their 50% of the resource, how much do they pay in excise taxes and/or license fees.... Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it is ZIP..... Being an "Soveriegn Nation" and all, they are not responsible for the taxes that ordinary citizens are, yet they take 50% of the resource, use the boat ramps and public facilities, well, you get the point. This is pure total BS as far as I am concerned. We are ALL AMERICANS, and we should all be bound to the same rules. They want the soveriegn thing? So be it, you are on your own. No more Gov't subsidies, no more federal (BIA) dollars, no more fishing outside of your "country's" boundaries, etc.... Let's see how it goes then....

I for one believe that if anyone thinks we should pay the real cost for our fisheries dept... then fine, the tribes owe 50% of that bill.... Fair is fair.....

MC

Oh.... now that I have taken a deep breath.....

WHAT IN THE WORLD IS UP WITH THAT $10.00 LAUNCH FEE NOW AT MUKILTEO????!!!!!!!!

I didn't pay it and acually wished I had gotten a ticket so I could really raise some hell. That is NOT justified whatsoever. Anyone know why they have done that? $5.00 is expensive enough, but acceptable. $10.00 to launch? No new docks, no fish cleaning station, etc....

Just have to shake my head.......

MC

I am all for user fees and if raising the price of lic. and putting a sur tax on gear etc. would put more $ into a fund that would enhance the spotfishing opportunity I would be all for it!

The thing that has me more than a little concerned is who or what does the figuring in this state?

While one report supposedly can tell us down to the dollar the price of each salmon raised in a hatchery, how many fish the sportsman catches, how many he releases etc. etc. etc.

NOBODY can tell you how many people work for the state!

I don't know what the answer is, but at my business, untill I know who cost me what for what, I don't have a clue where the money goes or comes from!

If WDFW could tell us how many people, vehicles, gear, office expense etc. we(the tax-payers) might be able to make some sort of an informed deduction if we need more money or if we need to cut expenses.

Does every boat need to be an Almar or a Seasport? How much is spent on administration. Do we need more enforcement?

I think WDFW is trying to do a good job.

I would gladly spend more to fund them,....IF...somebody could tell me where the money is gonna be spent, or at least how many people work for them and their salaries.

Should be a simple thing to do!



herm

Are not these expensive hatcheries there more to mitigte the tribes and comercial fishermen more than the sporty.Seems to me that on the columbia the tribes and comercials get first whack at the fish then us sporties get in there to clean up,that is if the state is still confident that they are going to reach there escapement.If not then oh so sorry sporty.

I think I am right in thinking that the bulk of the budget set every two years goes to hatchery production.

Thinking along these lines I Would think that the comercial and tribs should be shouldering the bulk of the costs.

After all what part do they play in the trickle down effect being touted around recently.Like this is something new.Sportsmen do great things for the economy.

I would also be afraid of paying anymore bios state money to study common sence.It is reel hard to get decisions made out of those positions because once the decision is made then the position goes away.Better to keep asking for funds then look for a job.Polititions want the study to follow there agenda anyways not speak the truth and require them to make a decision putting there heads on the chopping block per say.

Last year I spent about $3500 for a 7 day float trip to the Ayakulik river on Kodiak. The fishing was good, quality of experience better. If I spent that much for one trip, (and I assume that there are others that do this annually) I would certainly support an increase in fees IF fishing improved as well as quality of experience. I really dont like how we are "funneled" into an area but short, infrequent seasons. I'll use the Sekiu king fishery for an example.... It is a mad house. Way too many people, small place, short season (generally days long), scores very few points for quality of experience. There are many, many others.... lake washington sockeye, halibut in general, hood canal shrimping, etc... I would support annual limits with more liberal seasons similar to what Alaska does for Kings. At least we wouldn't have to all drive from opener to opener like were circus rodies.... We could get our fish without the crowds. I'd pay more for that.

Another thought... A substantial increase in fees would weed out the chum killers I see on the dungeness! You might of met him somewhere like the Quilcene? The guy who saw the river was full of salmon on the news, grabbed his trout rod, some big treble hooks, "I already caught 3, see" as he points to the three chums hanging from a tree branch, and continues to fish....